Minutes ago, Senator-elect Al Franken walked down the steps of his downtown Minneapolis townhouse and made the final, and very brief, victory speech of the 2008 Senate campaign. With his wife Franni standing behind him, Franken noted that he had gotten a “very gracious call” from Norm Coleman. “We agreed that it is time to bring this state together.”
“It was a very gracious call. He said it was a very hard fought campaign. I said, ‘Norm, it couldn’t have been closer.’”
What he was thinking during Coleman’s call: “This is nice. This is a nice way to end this.”
Emotions:”Thrilled and honored by the faith Minnesotans have placed in me” but also “humbled” by the closeness of the election and the “enormity” of the tasks ahead of him.
Lesson learned: “I won by 312 votes, so I really have to earn the trust of the people who didn’t vote for me.”
Next stop: up to the Iron Range for some parades
Priorities: health care, education, energy, to “restore” the nation’s standing in the world and “put people to work at home.”
Committee assignments: 1) Health, Education, Labor and Pension, 2) Judiciary, 3) Indian Affairs, 4) Aging.
What’s he been doing the past eight months:”We’ve been doing a lot. I’ve been going back and forth to Washington. I have a staff in place. I can hit the ground, if not running, trotting.”
What else he’s been doing: raising money, having people over to dinner who can help him get things done in Washington
After 15 minutes, the new senator and his wife trotted back up the steps and through the green door of the townhouse.
Here’s Franken’s prepared statement:
We have a lot of work to do in Washington, but that’s why I signed up for the job in the first place. When we started this campaign way back in February 2007, I said that Americans have never backed away from tough challenges, and Minnesotans have always led the way.
Working with our fantastic senior Senator, Amy Klobuchar, I’m going to fight hard to put people to work, improve education, make Minnesota the epicenter of a new renewable energy economy, and make quality health care accessible and affordable for all Minnesotans.
No matter whether you voted for me, or for Senator Coleman, or for Senator Barkley, or whether you voted at all, I want the people of Minnesota to know that I’m ready to work for all of you, and that I’m committed to being a voice for all Minnesotans in the U.S. Senate.
“very gracious call” from Norm Coleman. That’s nice — too bad the MN GOP couldn’t follow suit.
I guess the same joke that elected Jesse has now elected this bone head. This state really needs to wake up and realize how terrible this guy is.
Thanks for that completely unremarkable drive-by tubers. You can go back to surfing porn now.
Well, tubers, bitter right wingers will have 6 long, long years to watch him be “terrible”.
It’ll seem like a lifetime!
“Too bad MN GOoP couldn’t follow suit”
Exactly. Graciousness and responsibilty is not in their play book.
Thanks for that completely unremarkable drive-by tubers. You can go back to surfing porn now.
I am looking forward to Al Franken earning my trust. In the meantime, we have the most unpopular freshman senator to handcuff every state dem running in 2010. I can’t wait for the ads.
It should be a fun 5.5 years here on the BQ.
S.A. Miller, The Washington Times states:
“House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. has backed off his plan to investigate purported wrongdoing by the liberal activist group ACORN, saying “powers that be” put the kibosh on the idea.
Mr. Conyers, Michigan Democrat, earlier bucked his party leaders by calling for hearings on accusations the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now (ACORN) has committed crimes ranging from voter fraud to a mob-style “protection” racket.
“The powers that be decided against it,” Mr. Conyers told The Washington Times as he left the House chambers Wednesday.
The chairman declined to elaborate, shrugging off questions about who told him how to run his committee and give the Democrat-allied group a pass. “
U.S. consumer confidence took an unexpectedly steep slide in June, showing once again Obamanomics’ failure.
And even lib George Soros stated that rising borrowing costs posed a threat to any eventual economic recovery.
“As markets revive, fear of inflation will drive up interest rates, which will choke off recovery.”.
Even the libs agree, Obamanomics isn’t working.
What Soros isn’t saying, Cash, is that we aren’t choosing inflation over non-inflation…..we are being forced to choose inflation over the massive global deflation that we have seen. Given the choice, inflation is a better option at this point in the economic cycle than continued deflation. It will result in a modest rise in energy and food prices over the next 12-18 months, higher interest rates (not due to the Fed raising rates but by the financial system properly managing borrowing risk), and the individuals/businesses who cannot afford to borrow more capital aren’t the ones that should be doing it in the first place…..remember how we got here?
Instead, the recovery will hinge on teh ability of the well-fincned individuals and cash/assett rich companies to drive the spending patterns that hoist the economy into a more stable place. That is- if the government doesn’t opt to take that extra capital in the form of higher tax rates targeting those entities instead.
This will drive radicals like parthian nuts because they will be forced to recognize the value of the well-capitalized balance sheet to our economic system. To fail to do so will result in a terrible stretch of economic woes…with “their guy” on the clock. Won’t happen. Obama and his people are too smart to allow that in his first term.
parthian: “bitter right wingers will have 6 long, long years to watch him be “terrible”
True enough. Personally, I don’t think Franken will be terrible, I just think he will be useless- like Dayton was. I’m content to allow the Franken-ites to have theie glorious moment in teh sun here. They’ll swarm the blogosphere, hoot and hollar while they masturbate in a pile of their own feces, possibly take a brief break to shoot off some fireworks this weekend, and that’ll pretty much be it.
Al Franken will be a novelty toy for the MN DFL to proudly stock in the gift shop for the next 6 years and then will disappear, probably to be replaced by a politican who might be just as worthless.
I can’t wait for the bobblehead to come out. Maybe a Frannie one too. Collect the whole set.
me: “the financial system properly managing borrowing risk”
obviously s/b lending risk. sorry.
Ha-ha, anything but the topic of the thread, eh, Pollwatcher Cash? Gather your little acorns while you may…..
As for Norm “agreeing” it’s time to “bring the state together”, I guess he doesn’t have much sway with the MN GOoP, with its absurd fulminations about “thousands wrongly disenfranchised” and MN’s “deeply flawed election system”. Classy!
Yessir, bring this state together….that’s what the GOoP is all about.
Well, it’s off to some form of wingnut welfare for Norm. It’s difficult to imagine him running for guv’nor again, but one never knows the mind of the GOoP and their unthinking cogs. He’s been a gub’mint employee his whole career.
Coleman was MN’s one serious misstep in the Bushco Era, where the state as a whole generally rejected the lies, lunacy and illogic of the “conservative” sewage salesmen. Obviously Wellstone dying a week before the election gave the election to Norm, and made him the classic accidental senator.
He was a creature of Bushco, and he couldn’t survive its death and catastrophic failure. Just too much mindless and craven obedience to Cheney on almost every issue from Bush’s War to the endless tax cuts for the rich, Norm did a terrible job of actually representing the views of most Minnesotans. Hence a sitting senator receiving 41% of the vote—man, that’s as bad as it gets.
His one moment in the sun was heroically bashing the UN, that fire hydrant of the conservative movement for decades now. Something to really be proud of, Norm, you betcha!
As to his convenient “conversion” to conservatism, who can ever know what was really in his mind? The anti-war pot-smoking hippie Dem cozying up to Cheney’s oil war, deregulation of everything and more tax cuts for the rich. Okay……
Hopefully Norm actually came to believe in that conservative sh*tpile of policies for the sake of his own conscience. Perhaps this is why he keeps assuring us all that he’s “at peace”. I think you need to convince yourself, Norm.
“Exactly. Graciousness and responsibilty is not in their play book.”
I guess that book isnt comprehensive.
“Franken speaks: “Its time to bring this state together.”"
What a pile of partisan dog sh:t. Am I supposed to believe that Parthian and Franken and the other progressives give a crap about bringing MN together? No this is code for open wide while I shouvle the partisan rhetoric and collective bull sh:t down Minnesotan’s throats for the next five years and so many months.
And Norm Coleman needs to go far far away. Its really nice and gracious to say sweet things like lets bring the state together after you’ve done your best to rip it to shreds.
And for all you inflationists, you might want to check out the speech of SF Fed Prez Yellen yesterday at the Commerce Club—it’s up at the SF Fed site.
Great overview of the Great Recession, the infantile nature of braindead conservative “response” to it (opposing TARP and stimulus measures, etc, etc) and pretty much throwing cold water all over the new inflationists.
It’s long and detailed, Pollwatcher Cash, but try reading it—maybe your Mom can help with some of the words.
“Great overview of the Great Recession, the infantile nature of braindead conservative “response” to it (opposing TARP and stimulus measures, etc, etc) and pretty much throwing cold water all over the new inflationists.”
How short sighted of you Parthian. No big shock. You must have more faith in the Fed to contract the money supply than I do. Unless you thin unemployment will stay this high forever and the recession is never ending and people will never spend again, Inflation is a real threat. But dont bother looking further out than 18 months. Go beat off some more to Al’s graciousness.
That’s not partistan rhetoric DB, that’s just good old fashioned bu11sh1t. Everyone says that after they win an election.
But now Norm’s going to have a chance to attain the office he was originally shooting for back in 2002. Let’s not forget that he was drafted for the senate seat by Karl Rove, and that TPaw originally wanted to be senator.
I wonder what would have happened had Coleman become governor instead of Pawlenty?
I’d say with your intense Franken hatred, DB, you’re just about as “partisan” as any Colemanite.
I think this rhetoric about “bringing the state together” is overblown. But one way that the state has been divided is through the MN GOoP’s deeply dishonest 8 month long argument that our election system is “deepy flawed”, that thousands were “disenfranchised”, with the clear intent of causing those who didn’t vote for Franken to conclude he’s not the legitimate winner, despite what the canvassing board, Election Court and Supreme Court ALL unanimously concluded.
Now THAT’s divisive and generates long term rancor and suspicion, and I don’t see any GOoP efforts to tone that rhetoric down. Quite the opposite.
“I’d say with your intense Franken hatred, DB, you’re just about as “partisan” as any Colemanite.”
I despise Norm Coleman. I dont contribute to candidates and I dont slap bumper stickers to my car or gush over politicians and their gracious speeches.
Well, I’m sure a mid-level banking cog like you knows best, DB.
“Now THAT’s divisive and generates long term rancor and suspicion, and I don’t see any GOoP efforts to tone that rhetoric down. Quite the opposite.”
Absolutely correct. And Im sure the DEMS will use it to their advantage to further drive a wedge into the two party system and split the state even further.
Your love of your progressive hero Franken is a joke. Another fine example of the DFLs inability to promote a qualified candidate. He’s a snake like any other politician and will do what he can to take care of himself and his office above “bringing the state together”. Or will this time be different? Think so Parthian, think this guy is different?
Deacon, you’d have more credibility if you went after Coleman’s concession BS with as much fervor. Both through out enough crap that waders were necessary.
parth: “Now THAT’s divisive and generates long term rancor and suspicion”
Given the vote totals and closness of this election, and the nastiness of the ad campaigns, I’d say the vast majority of whatever divisiveness took place happened prior to election day, not since. Nice spin tactic though.
“Well, I’m sure a mid-level banking cog like you knows best, DB.”
I know enough to have my suspicians that while deflation is the short term threat, inflation is a very real long term threat. Your blind faith in the deflationists is really cute. You must have read their theories in a book. But its not hard to understand why you buy into their side of the argument, its obviously partisan induced.
2008: The year 82% of voters threw their votes away in MN senate race….
“Deacon, you’d have more credibility if you went after Coleman’s concession BS with as much fervor.”
Ill say it again and add some mustard:
” And Norm Coleman needs to go far far away. Its really nice and gracious to say sweet things like lets bring the state together after you’ve done your best to rip it to shreds.”
Norm Coleman is a self serving snake and is also not interested AT ALL in the good of the state. His ego and legacy are what he’s concerned with. A politicians politician if there ever was one.
Your intense bug-eyed anger is always good for a laugh, DB. As filled with rage as any right wing white male extremist.
Since you’ve got some time on your hands this morning, why don’t you explain the apparently massive differences in politics between Franken (whom you loath) and Ellison (whom you claim to strongly support).
I’m with Parth on the divisive post communications from the Coleman camp. In its over eagarness to slam the DFL, the MN GOP made a strategic error by parroting the same arguments Coleman’s lawyers had made during the case, and then making their statement BEFORE Coleman even had a chance to comment! That’s highly unprofessional and strategically stupid. They should have let Coleman set the tone, but they just couldn’t resist getting that little shot in there about the DFL while the whole world was watching.
THAT is divisive and petty — even more so than the normally divisive and petty DFL.
“As filled with rage as any right wing white male extremist.”
I dont own a gun and never will. Im a pascifist.
“why don’t you explain the apparently massive differences in politics between Franken (whom you loath) and Ellison (whom you claim to strongly support).”
I voted for Ellison sure, but how does that mean ’strongly suppport’? Id like to see my quote where I said I strongly support him. I like Ellison’s style of communication more than Franken’s. Its not the policies these guys have (I share policy opinions with both coleman and franken as a matter of fact) so much as its their desire to drive a wedge between the people to get what they want. I dont see Ellison doing that.
So Parth, there isnt much difference in their policies as there appears to be to me in their rhetoric and tactics at getting elected.
while the whole world was watching?????
Doubtful. Minnesotans think way too much of ourselves if we are under the impression that this was of interest to anyone outside of our little sandbox (and political junkies as well). “The world” watched for about 5 minutes, and then had already changed the channel by the time the GOP speech was made.
It was petty. It was divisive. But mostly it was a complete waste of time because not many actually heard it.
DB, maybe you can explain who was primarily responsible for ending deflation the last time we experienced it, and the mechanism that was used to end it?
I’ll give you a hint: shock therapy.
“I dont own a gun and never will. Im a pascifist.”
Just out of curiosity…….what do pacifists use to shoot empty beer cans off the fence?
Deacon writes:
“He’s a snake like any other politician and will do what he can to take care of himself and his office above “bringing the state together”.”
Huh? A little early for the “any other politician” line, isn’t it? I mean, the man has never held an elective office before, unlike the rest of the Senate. Now you may disagree with his humor or his radio persona, but I think you’re a bit premature lumping him with all politicians - unless, of course, your one of those “they’re all snakes” pigeonholers. Which is on a par with any other stereotyper……
“Just out of curiosity…….what do pacifists use to shoot empty beer cans off the fence?”
Semen.
“That’s not partistan rhetoric DB, that’s just good old fashioned bu11sh1t. Everyone says that after they win an election. ”
You know what else is BS that I’ve heard every politicain say after winning? “I’m humbled”.
They all say that. They win and they say they’re humbled. What they’re really thinking inwardly is, “Woooooo! I’m the MAN!”
I think it’s awesome that Stuart Smalley is our senator. Remember when he did that schtick in Trading Places as a baggage handler with the gorilla…comic genius.
It’ll be almost as cool as when The Body was gov.
Well, thanks for your answer DB, although I can’t really make much sense of it.
Voting for someone (like Ellison) is “suporting” them, whatever the “strength” of the support. And you acknowledge “there isn’t much difference in their [Franken’s and Ellison’s] policies”.
So your vehement hatred of Franken boils down to not liking Franken’s “style of communication” and perceived “desire to drive a wedge between people”? This before the guy has ever served in elective office? Methinks you doth protest too much, DB. The question is why.
Add in the fact that you “despise Coleman” and that the principal complaint against Franken’s campaign was that he was “too negative” in his attacks on Coleman. But why exactly that style of communication should bother an avowed Coleman “despiser” like you is unclear.
Finally, Franken aggressively attacked the incumbent’s record, his votes and his mindless support of Bushco. Coleman responded (in typical GOoP fashion) largely by attacking Franken’s character. And from this you work yourself into an apoplexy of hatred against Franken “style of communication” which strongly challenged the record of someone you despise.
Seems incoherent to me, but I guess it makes sense to you.
DB’s looking up the answer to my question on Wikipedia — not sure you’re going to find the answer there pal.
I personally don’t know what to expect from Franken. It’s the great unknown, we could get absolutely anything…a clown, a partyliner, anything. I have my hopes and fears like everyone else, but I think I’ll withhold judgement until I have something to judge.
Oops. My non-economist, non-banker is showing. I meant stagflation, not deflation.
Sorry to send you on a wild goose chase DB.
I voted for Ellison but not Franken too.
The main thing for me was the attack ads. Coleman and Franken both turned me off with the relentless attack ads.
Got so I didn’t want to turn on the TV.
So I voted for Barkley. He had already been a Senator briefly and I couldn’t recall him doing anything aberrant, so better him than someone from the two major McParties.
“what do pacifists use to shoot empty beer cans off the fence?”
They launch granola clusters from a slingshot.
“their rhetoric and tactics at getting elected”.
One final point—do you see some differences in the race Franken was faced with and the one Ellison was faced with?
Ellison ran for an open seat in a heavily Dem district, one of the most lib’rul in the nation. There was no incumbent and after the primary he was in a pretty strong position.
Franken ran to unseat a well financed incumbent senator, one of the most difficult tasks in politics. He HAD to attack Coleman’s record, and offer alternative policies to a closely divided statewide electorate. It couldn’t be a kumbaya campaign, it wasn’t, and Team Coleman threw plenty of personal slime at Franken.
And you respond by hating Franken as much as Coleman for his “style of communication” and act like if it had somehow been more like Ellison’s you would have voted for him. Sorry, can’t buy it.
“Now you may disagree with his humor or his radio persona, but I think you’re a bit premature lumping him with all politicians - unless, of course, your one of those “they’re all snakes” pigeonholers.”
Oh yeah, he is a real saint that Franken. I call it like I see it and Franken acted like a jackass during his campaign if you ask me. Franken doenst appear to me to be any different than any other person running for office who is willing to jump into the mud to get elected.
I think it’s awesome that Stuart Smalley is our senator.
If there’s one thing Minnesota has, it’s an abundance of Stuart Smalley types. Ask them how they’re doing, and you’ll get twenty minutes of psychobabble with the word issues
included more times than Parthian has used the word GOop since 2001.
DB: “Franken doesn’t appear to me to be any different than any other person running for office who is willing to jump into the mud to get elected”
he appeared different to me in that he actually looked like he relished teh opportunity to jump into the mud. Coleman made a fatal error my initiating that kind of contest, because that’s right in Franken’s wheelhouse. What else was he to do? Go after Franken’s record (????). That would have made for a pretty short ad.
“McParties”
Yeah, they both pretty much support and advocate for the exact same policies in DC. No real policy disagreements. (sarcasm)
So you support one progressive candidate, but not another because of “attack ads” (that both parties ran)?
Do you want progressive policies enacted or not?
“Oh yeah, he is a real saint that Franken. I call it like I see it and Franken acted like a jackass during his campaign if you ask me.”
Never said he was a saint, DB, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I thought the whole campaign stunk too - on all sides. Attack politics is the flavor of the month these days, I guess.
“Voting for someone (like Ellison) is “suporting” them, whatever the “strength” of the support. And you acknowledge “there isn’t much difference in their [Franken’s and Ellison’s] policies”.”
You said strongly. All I did was fill in an oval and feed my ballot into the machine. Is that strongly?
“So your vehement hatred of Franken boils down to not liking Franken’s “style of communication” and perceived “desire to drive a wedge between people”? This before the guy has ever served in elective office?”
Give me a break Parthian. Were you in a coma during the campaign from hell?
“But why exactly that style of communication should bother an avowed Coleman “despiser” like you is unclear.”
Coleman is a liar and thats why I dont like him. I dont like Franken for the same reason most dont, he is a guy who cares about his party and his side of the spectrum and gets his power from people hating the “other” guy. He feeds on it.
“Ellison ran for an open seat in a heavily Dem district, one of the most lib’rul in the nation. There was no incumbent and after the primary he was in a pretty strong position.”
I dont know Ellison personally so I go on what I see in my district. When he acts like a clown Ill consider him a clown. So far he has been acting like an adult. He had an easier time so thats his luxury.
“And you respond by hating Franken as much as Coleman for his “style of communication” and act like if it had somehow been more like Ellison’s you would have voted for him. Sorry, can’t buy it.”
You dont have to. Its my vote and Im not voting for clowns who play on peoples hatred of the other side to get elected. I dont need to convince you of antyhing Parthian and Im not trying. The coleman franken campaigns were disgusting to me. You can look past it because you hate coleman, congratulations.
“Oops. My non-economist, non-banker is showing. I meant stagflation, not deflation.
Sorry to send you on a wild goose chase DB.”
I love this kind of thing on a blog. AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! WILD GOOSE CHASE???? AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
You think today and the coming decades might be a different scenario than we’ve seen before? Ignore the threat of inflation, I dont care.
“Parthian has used GOop”
Dammit, vomit, it’s GOoP!
What parthian doesn’t understand is that MN voters generally seek some degree of class from their candidates, regardless of policy beliefs and party affiliation. I hated Paul Wellstone. Many of the people who voted for him didn’t really like a lot of his politics but they credited him with the integrity to stand by his convictions- and that was enough to base their vote on.
parthian, methinks you best be careful when advocating that all voters only vote for candidates whos politics/policies they find favorable…..the uninformed, “at least he’s not the other guy” vote is what helped put your guy Franken over the top at college campuses across the state. Careful what you wish for.
I didn’t mean to imply there are no policy differences between the Democrats and the Republicans. Just like there are differences between Burger King and McDonald’s. But like Burger King and McDonald’s, I see in the major parties these monopolistic huge entities with huge advertising budgets that are feeding the public a bunch of crap without too much regard for what’s actually good for them. But
I can see why you’d want to pick one of those monopolistic entities and stick with them because it’s your only hope for getting something done that’s you think is important.
However I just got so sick of the crap on my TV that I voted for neither in that Senate election.
The Franken ad that offended me the most was not even one of the attack ads. It was the one where he trotted out Fannie and she was talking about what a swell guy he was for sticking with her when she had to go to rehab for being a drunk. Can’t believe a guy would do that to his wife, even if she was willing.
“because you hate Coleman”
I didn’t say I hated Coleman. YOU said you despised him.
Try to keep things straight.
“Dammit, vomit, it’s GOoP!”
Sorry,
***you’ll get twenty minutes of psychobabble with the word issues
included more times than D2 has used the word soci@list since 2001.***
There, it’s fixed.
“I didn’t say I hated Coleman”
Parthian, be serious.
“Franken over the top at college campuses…”
Yeah, college students are definitely some of the most uninformed voters out there. (sarcasm)
Another one of your “facts”, because you met a clueless college student once….
Point of fact, I met thousands of clueless college students……while I was there. Don’t completely marginalize yourself by trying to mount the argument that Franken didn’t garner a high percentage of the under 22 vote at campuses due to his celebrity, not his politics. That would be a waste of your time.
As far as meeting a single clueless college student once….no, I’ve never met you.
“Yeah, college students are definitely some of the most uninformed voters out there. (sarcasm)”
Im not reading this right now. Its simply not possible.
“Another one of your “facts”, because you met a clueless college student once….”
Once???? Once???? Okay, YOU HAVE to be a college kid. No wonder you love books and wont say what you do or where youre from.
I remember hanging out one time at the campus watering hole and hearing all the well informed college students debating the coming social security and medicare funding crisis between kamakazi shots.
(sarcasm)
Here’s my current viewpoint:
I now have NO representation on my local school board or my city council.
I have NO representation on my county board.
I have NO representation at the state house or senate.
I have NO representation in the US house or senate.
I have NO representation in the US presidential chair.
Only the state governor thinks as I do.
As for TAXATION, however, I and and will be subject to any and all taxes these entities can gleefully impose, save those that the governor can stop. At the city, state, and national levels all representatives have been making it clear they cannot wait to increase the already heavy burdens on those of us to whom they will not listen — even to the point of not returning a letter, e-mail, or phone call — claims of representing “all of us” notwithstanding.
In view of this ominous situation, it will be a while before Franken — or anyone — can “bring us together.”
Regretfully, of such situations in the past revolutions have been born.
“I AM and will”
sorry
When I was in college one of the most important things I learned was the relationship between wholesale and retail.
You buy a large quantity of a commodity at wholesale prices and sell it off in smaller quantities to multiple individuals at retail prices… if you work your margins right you wind up not being out of pocket for that part of the commodity you consume yourself. If you’re really clever, you’ve made the retail sales before you even have to pay the wholesaler. It’s a model for doing business that permeates the whole economy.
But I wasn’t more informed about politics during those four years than I am now. I did read the paper, though and I did get out and vote.
“But I wasn’t more informed about politics during those four years than I am now. I did read the paper, though and I did get out and vote.”
Even if college students were well informed, which many are, the majority are not, it would stand to reason that those well infomred ones went on to become even more informed latter in life due to additional time and experience with more of the issues at hand that comes with age. Heck, more age means you’ve had more time to read more books Parthian, think of the posibilities.
Parthian, which book were you reading when you came across the “fact” that college stundents are generally informed? Some political satire written by Franken?
“Only the state governor thinks as I do.”
Yes, that was obvious from all the NOs.
“Parthian, which book were you reading when you came across the “fact” that college stundents are generally informed?”
And which book have you been reading that tells you college students are generally uninformed, Deacon? I went to Tommie Tech(now known as UST) and I found the students I ran into in the 5 college system generally on top of it as far as politics went. Not everyone, mind you, but more than you and Jay seem to want to give credit for(except for the Mac students, of course, they were far too cool for mere politics). I wonder if anyone out there has any statistical idea of how well informed college students are compared to the rest of society.
Anyone?
“Anyone?”
I think we need some metrics. I walked out of local school with the opinion that the majority of my classmates had little idea of what was going on that wasnt coming directly from the professors filter. They claim to teach kids to think critically and I saw a lot of people taking things purely at face value without question.
If we are going to hold up the college campuses of america as the destination to go to find the well informed citizens, then you havent been on a college campus lately. You have a dedicated vocal minority involved in politics. The majority seem to me to be totally clueless.
“And which book have you been reading that tells you college students are generally uninformed, Deacon”
Just my own personal experience as a person who graduated from a local college.
“Not everyone, mind you, but more than you and Jay seem to want to give credit for(except for the Mac students, of course, they were far too cool for mere politics).”
Id say 35%. 65% are busy trying to get laid or changing majors.
“I was so much older then, Im younger than that now.”
- B. Dylan
The point Im driving at Monty is that not everything that is true or can be learned is written in a fact filled comprehensive book. Some things you can learn and pick up from experience and observation if you keep an open mind.
“Not everyone, mind you, but more than you and Jay seem to want to give credit for(except for the Mac students, of course, they were far too cool for mere politics).”
Have you ever considered the old adage, birds of a feather….
Maybe your interest in politics puts you into contact with other politically active people?
“You buy a large quantity of a commodity at wholesale prices and sell it off in smaller quantities to multiple individuals at retail prices… if you work your margins right you wind up not being out of pocket for that part of the commodity you consume yourself. If you’re really clever, you’ve made the retail sales before you even have to pay the wholesaler. It’s a model for doing business that permeates the whole economy.
But I wasn’t more informed about politics during those four years than I am now. I did read the paper, though and I did get out and vote. ”
…my God…did I know you?
“If we are going to hold up the college campuses of america as the destination to go to find the well informed citizens, then you havent been on a college campus lately.”
Easy, lad. I didn’t make any claims one way or the other on the subject. I’d just be curious to see if there has been any kind of survey on the how college students compare to the rest of society as far as political awareness is concerned. I don’t discount your experience(and the Mac jab was just that, a jab, all in fun, I know you went there), but mine was obviously different from yours.
“Id say 35%. 65% are busy trying to get laid or changing majors.”
It is possible to be politically aware and to try to get laid at te same time. In fact, depending on the circumstances, one can facilitate the other.
DB, your comments about higher ed are sounding an awful lot like Mao.
What was your major? Finance? Business? The best conversationalists about politics and world events were always with the philosophy majors and the pot dealers.
“Have you ever considered the old adage, birds of a feather…”
Good point. Works both ways, you know, but that is something to consider concerning my college experience.
“The best conversationalists about politics and world events were always with the philosophy majors and the pot dealers.”
Amen.
What was your major? Finance? Business? The best conversationalists about politics and world events were always with the philosophy majors and the pot dealers.”
I was a poli/sci spanish double and minored in intl studies.
“DB, your comments about higher ed are sounding an awful lot like Mao.”
You love comparing me to fascists dont you? The things you dont know about me just might fit into the grand canyon.
“Not everyone, mind you, but more than you and Jay seem to want to give credit for”
my initial statement on this matter simply reflected the comments of MN DFL’er Roger Moe after the election in which Ventura used that same demographic to beat him for the governorship. Feel free to ask Moe what book he got that from, parth. He was a “progressive” so I just took him at his word…..so either I am right, or liberals fabricate ‘facts.’ Pick you poison.
“my initial statement on this matter simply reflected the comments of MN DFL’er Roger Moe after the election in which Ventura used that same demographic to beat him for the governorship.”
Was that Moe or Skip?
“my initial statement on this matter simply reflected the comments of MN DFL’er Roger Moe after the election in which Ventura used that same demographic to beat him for the governorship.”
Which was sour grapes and scapegoating on Moe’s part, as Deacon will no doubt tell you, because if Moe had run a good campaign he would have overcome the “name recognition” vote. Right DB?
By the way, your initial qoute was from me, not parthian. Wasn’t meant as a shot, but if you want to take it that way, so be it.
And if you think liberals(and independents and conservatives and neocons and…) don’t fabricate “facts” to suit the occasion you clearly never participated in the debate team in high school.
Moe….was Skippy’s #2 on that ticket. I mispoke when I said Venture beat ‘him’…s/b ‘them.’
“Was that Moe or Skip?”
Moe. Skip was in TPaw 1.
You love comparing me to fascists dont you? The things you dont know about me just might fit into the grand canyon.
Well, as a Pol/Sci major, I’m sure you know that Mao also dismissed the value of a college education in creating well informed, worldly individual.
And also as a Pol/Sci major, I’m sure that you also know that Mao was not a fascist, but a Stalinist.
“Right DB?”
Right. Be better than the other guy.
monty- the quote I used was yours, but the initial stink to my comment was made by parthian so the comments were more directed that way. You seem to be much more level-headed in your observations so I don’t see much of a reason to take jabs. Parthian needs a steady diet of incoming/outgoing jabs or he will die. Its like his oxygen.
Ventura beat Skip and Norm.
TPaw beat Moe first term, Hatch second.
That’s three ineffective DFL Gubernatorial Candidates in as many election cycles that I can remember off the topp of my head. I can’t remember who Carlson beat. They go by seniority in the DFL or something when they pick their candidates?
“Mao was not a fascist, but a Stalinist.”
Po-tay-toh, po-tah-to.
“Well, as a Pol/Sci major, I’m sure you know that Mao also dismissed the value of a college education in creating well informed, worldly individual.”
Really? Well thats not at all what I said or ment. I said most college students dont have a clue. Thats why they are in college, to learn. College is essential to CREATING and informed electorate and you dont learn everything you’ll ever know the moment you graduate. You also dont automatically become well informed the first moment of setting foot on campus. Its a process. A process most kids on campus havent completed yet.
Sgt: “Mao also dismissed the value of a college education in creating well informed, worldly individual.”
I’m with Mao. I don’t think college has much to do with it. It is a matter of the individual in question. If you desire to be a well informed, worldly individual, you probably will be- with or without college. If you have no desire to be such, you won’t be- with or without college.
Its likely that a disproportionately high % of those who do seek that, make the decision to continue their education at the next level. But the college experience is not the determining factor there, in my opinion.
“I can’t remember who Carlson beat.”
I thought it was Rudy. I could be wrong about that. That was the Grunseth Dirty Pool election, if memory serves.
“Skip was in TPaw 1.”
I thought T Paw beat Moe in T Paw 1, not Skip?
“Ventura beat Skip and Norm.
TPaw beat Moe first term, Hatch second.”
You are correct.
Skip and Moe were vs Ventura….if that helps clear things up. Moe got the nod for the lead role in DFL Asskicking III the following cycle.
“If you desire to be a well informed, worldly individual, you probably will be- with or without college. If you have no desire to be such, you won’t be- with or without college.”
True, but if you wish to be a worldly indidvidual, college makes it alot easier. Liberal arts education and all that. It’s certainly not the ONLY way to grow your awareness, though.
“college makes it alot easier.”
Fair enough statement. College certainly gives one the playground to make daring, exciting, or even foolish decisions, see where they go, and try again with little downside other than cost. If you try to gain that experience outside of the collegiate fishbowl, the world is a lot less forgiving of such. But ultimately it still is a function of the individual at the wheel, not the vehicle they happen to be in.
I had to consult the internet going further back.
Arne Carlson unseated incumbent Rudy Perpich (the year he was on the cover of (was it Newsweek?) labeled “Governor Goofy”) in 1990 and won re-election against John Marty in 1994.
I can remember the 1990 election pretty well because I was 18 and that was the first time I voted. It was also kind of a colorful election for MN.
Carlson came late to the race as the IR candidate… the previously endorsed IR candidate was a right-winger named Grunseth who flamed out of the election when he was caught playing grab-@ss with teenage girls.
More significantly than the Gubernatorial race, that was the year Wellstone was elected in an unlikely come-from-behind. So, while 1990 marked a triumph for the DFL in the form of unseating an incumbent Senator (Boschwitz) with a grass-roots campaign, it also marked the beginning of a 16-year streak of the DFL running total duds for Governor.
I voted a split ticket in 1990 myself:
Ramstad for Congress
Wellstone for Senate
Carlson for Gov
Dukakis for Pres
3 out of 4 ain’t bad.
hang on there wasn’t a presidential election in 1990. Never mind about that part.
I remember a radio spoof of Me So Horney by 2 live crew that replaced the chorus, “Oh Me So Horney” w “Oh Mr. Grunseth”
like you said……3 of 4 not bad.
Dukakis was ‘88, you didnt vote that year.
I forgot about the Marty v Carlson election. That would make Moe v Pawlenty DFL Asskicking IV, not III as i previously indicated.
Sequals always seem the same to me anyway.
I never could have voeted for Dukakis but I remember being sorry Bush won in 1988. And thinking the Dems shoulda run somebody with more pizazz.
The first Presidential election I voted in was when Clinton won in 92.
I can remember on Election Day in 1996 I was standing in line at Falafel King and Wellstone went by outside on Lake Street, waving from the back of that old school bus. That’s the only time I ever saw him in person.
“I voted a split ticket in 1990 myself”
Hopefully parthian won’t see that. He’ll come unglued again and anoint you the latest anti-Christ. I applaud your willingness to split tickets though. We need much more of that.
If Coleman tries for Gov again this is the DFL’s golden opportunity. They blow that one, they don’t deserve to run the great State of MN.
“Yeah, college students are definitely some of the most uninformed voters out there. (sarcasm)”
Well informed for someone with zero years of experience living as an adult.
Well informed, but too naive to understand the difference between the world as they think it should be, and how it really is.
“And thinking the Dems shoulda run somebody with more pizazz.”
They probably would have had a better shot running Bentsen at the head of that ticket, but I assume they were afraid of his age. I too was not quite old enough to actually cast a ballot in 88.
It is possible to be politically aware and to try to get laid at te same time
Those well informed guys volunteered for the Franken campaign.
You knock up a Franken girl, and you need not worry about paying for someone else’s tuition eighteen years down the road.
I can remember on Election Day in 1996..
I can remember in 1972, seeing the Nixon motorcade go by, with Nixon standing out of the sunroof, in his classic victory sign pose.
Gawd, I’m getting old.
I was a month old when Nixon got elected in 1972.
The first President I remember being aware of was Carter.
Does anyone really think Franken got more REAL votes than Coleman? Franken couldn’t have taken it without the help of ACORN to get close in the first place, then a corrupt and severely flawed “recount” did Coleman in.
D2:
Nope, only the dem diehards think he really won, knowing how the voting went down.
But in the world of politics, where power and the seeking of it rule all, Iran like situations are more common that not.
Here, both dems and repubs have their favorite ways to swing elections, neither keeping to the rules.
I’ve been around too long, and seen too many hijinks with my own eyes to live with the myth that our elections are fair and honest.
Still, I do still believe that our laws keep some of the worst abuses at bay, and generally keep the people’s choice in place except in a close election.
I tend to go with the SC that there will always be some stuff going on, but it has to get to a certain level to “count” for an election appeal.
So, by my views, this time the crooks on the dem side won one. Next time it may be the crooks on the repub side.
As for who voted for whom and when,
it makes me chuckle to have folks trying to remember who they voted for and when:
I remember every national vote I ever cast (and most of the state-wide state votes), starting long before any one of the commenters here apparently got old enough.
I think it may be a matter of how important one believed each vote to be.
Jay states:
“What Soros isn’t saying, Cash, is that we aren’t choosing inflation over non-inflation…..we are being forced to choose inflation over the massive global deflation that we have seen. Given the choice, inflation is a better option at this point in the economic cycle than continued deflation. It will result in a modest rise in energy and food prices over the next 12-18 months, higher interest rates (not due to the Fed raising rates but by the financial system properly managing borrowing risk), and the individuals/businesses who cannot afford to borrow more capital aren’t the ones that should be doing it in the first place…..remember how we got here?”
Thanks for a very well reasoned response Jay.
I do remember how we got here. Out main issue was a system that artificially encouraged indebtnedness and excess leverage. There was no real risk to manage since the government will come to the rescue. Whether it be our policies to increase home ownership to folks who couldn’t afford them or our policies of bailing out those companies that are “too big to fail”, our government is an enabler if not the root cause.
It is not clear whether any of the measures of the federal bailout where needed. Businesses were still running. Lending was continuing to take place. The amount of lending remained high according to the Feds own figures.
One only has to look at the depression of 1920 to see the difference in government actions and the markets reaction as compared to the depression of 1930’s. The federal govenment rebounded quickly in the 20s, so fast that it is rarely mentioned. But leading up to the great crash of 1929, the money supply increased over 50%. And compare this to today: http://tinyurl.com/ccg565
There is nothing wrong with deflation by itself. In fact that is how we raise our living standards.
The best thing we can do is get rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The second is stop the manipulation of our monetary supply by the feds. Stop the Keyn Finally, stop the bailouts and allow the business failures to fail.
John, about 75% of Minnesotans believe Franken won the race legitimately. Obviously neither you nor D2 followed the story that much in the news. The main issue Coleman had with the election is that a number of absentee ballots were improperly rejected. On election day, it’s up to people in each county to take care of that - and they did it in a somewhat inconsisent manner. Coleman’s people had their chance to prove their case, and they lost. So stop complaining.
I’d also like to point out that if you disagreed with the court’s decision in this election, then you’d also have to disagree with the results of the 2000 presidential election — the legal issues were similar.
CNC, congratulations on writing a moderately coherent post. Unfortunately, it wasn’t “the system” of government bailouts that caused this mess. Institutions took on those levels of debt and risk because there was ZERO oversight and mininal regulation — they could get away with it.
The bailouts didn’t happen until our entire financial system was about to collapse. But I suppose you and your ilk will probably find a way to blame in on Obama in another 20 years.
About 1988 — I followed that one pretty closely. I was a College Republican back in those days, and I remember being quite discouraged that summer because Dukakis had a strong lead. He was up 20 points by the end of the Dem convention, and it looked like it was going to be a landslide.
Bush got a little bit of a lift after the GOP convention, but what put him up and over the top was his media blitz in September and October of 1988. That’s when the Willie Horton ads came out - Bush won in a landslide.
We tend to see the past in more general terms, which we then attribute to specific events (e.g. John’s post above). The summer of 1988 was discouraging for most of us Bush supporters.
BQ now won’t accept my posts or wants to censor my reply to Cash.
It’s the conspiracy!
CNC writes:
“I do remember how we got here. Out main issue was a system that artificially encouraged indebtnedness and excess leverage. There was no real risk to manage since the government will come to the rescue. Whether it be our policies to increase home ownership to folks who couldn’t afford them or our policies of bailing out those companies that are “too big to fail”, our government is an enabler if not the root cause.”
I remember how we got here too, and I guess it’s not surprising that I seem to remember things a bit differently than brother Cash. In this post we see several of the myths currently being promoted from the right, the first being that “the government” promoted the idea that it’s ok to for the commercial banking community to leverage themselves out to a ratio of 33 to 1 and that banks and mortgage lenders can and should lend to absolutely anybody without regard to ability to pay. What really was going on, as Sarge pointed out, was a lack of oversight rather than a governmental policy encouraging foolhardy fiscal management. Independent mortgage brokers marketed inappropriate mortgage plans to the general public to make a buck, because the market was booming, not because “the government” said they should. And while there are government policies in place to encourage mortgage lending to lower income segments of society, these policies certainly do not make up a significant portion of the mortgage failures that caused the collapse. Here’s a link on that particular myth from Newsweek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/162789
As for the “too big to fail” concept, I personally believe that emminates from the business community, not the government. While saying out of one side of their mouth that “government isn’t the answer, it’s the problem”, many in the financial community took these outrageous risks because they knew, deep down, that the government would not allow the financial system to totally melt down. The political consequences would force govermnment to do something.
And it did….
Does the BQ filter the word “soci@lism” like the TA blog does?
How about “analysis?”
Does the BQ spam filter the word “soci@lism” like the TA blog does?
How about “an@lysis?”
Yep and yep.
parth, I bet you’re just using one of the forbidden words. Look at the words within your words if you’re wondering why posts don’t post
Oh hey I was wrong. You can say anal on BQ.
anal anal anal.
You sure can’t say that on Think Again. Maybe that’s Katherine’s influence.
SgtPendleton says:
“John, about 75% of Minnesotans believe Franken won the race legitimately.”
>I doubt that. Source, please?
“Obviously neither you nor D2 followed the story that much in the news.”
>On the contrary, I followed the story very closely, including (as you seem not to have) the actual rulings by the courts, and not just in the shallow sound bites in the new
“The main issue Coleman had with the election is that a number of absentee ballots were improperly rejected.”
>If you read the court rulings, you would know that his main issue dealt with DISPARATE TREATEMENT by various jurisdictions, and whether it was right to retroactively — and selectively — apply strict application of the existing absentee voting regulations, as the three judge panel did, thus allowing numerous ballots from the dem cities which did NOT meet the strict interpretation, while rejecting others that had been disallowed in Coleman districts. If you read the actual SC decision they do allow this question, and in a well reasoned opinion (in which, if you read it, you will see they point out how the Florida case was very greatly DISSIMILAR to the current case) they explain why precedent, current law, and even federal precedent support the three judge handling of the issue.
>You will also note that this case points out the need to make changes to current state election procedures to prevent a recurrence of what they admit is a problem, but which they state does not RISE TO THE LEVEL OF a disparate treatment that would effectively disenfrancise some voters based on deliberate actions at the precincts.
>I believe that one important change that needs to be made is to specify that if a registration form is included in the absentee packet sent out there must be a SEPARATE envelope for sending in that registration.
“On election day, it’s up to people in each county to take care of that - and they did it in a somewhat inconsisent manner. Coleman’s people had their chance to prove their case, and they lost. So stop complaining.”
>They lost, many believe, BECAUSE OF the disparate treatment of ballots, where numerous strictly non-allowable ballots were passed in dem counties.
>Which does not mean Coleman did not have the votes (though he may not have), but that the chance to count those votes was not allowed.
>Following the case closely, it does appear that Coleman’s lawyers missed the boat on a number of occasions, while Franken’s lawyers did an excellent job.
>I suppose one could therefore argue that one can’t afford to hire any but the best when it comes to lawyers, and that for the want of proper representation the case was lost. But if you read the actual decisions, it does appear that Coleman might still have lost the case.
>Close elections highlight the flaws in any set of election laws, and this election in my opinion has done exactly that. If prescribed procedure are not altered, this “loophole” will surely be used over and over again by those who used it this time.
“I’d also like to point out that if you disagreed with the court’s decision in this election, then you’d also have to disagree with the results of the 2000 presidential election — the legal issues were similar.”
>See the actual SC decision (34 pages) and my comment above about this claim.
Reagan gave us hope and pride when inflation, interest rates, a worsening economy, and the recent Vietnam fiasco had us down in the dumps.
McGovern? I campaigned for him until he dumped his running mate because of a history of psychological treatment.
Anyone remember Stevenson (twice)? I campaigned for him both times.
Ike? We all LOVED Ike. He was a nice guy, unlike that Nixon, who even LOOKED like a crook (like Schumer today).
Truman? He “gave them hell” from the back of a train, all across the country. We loved it. Besides, Dewey was kind of an eastern prig.
Roosevelt? Sitting on the living room stairs, listening to the fireside chats. After what he did for the working folks, no-one in our family would consider voting for anyone else (except my grandfather, from a New England republican family since before the Civil War.
There. Now you know how far back I go.
monty: “What really was going on, as Sarge pointed out, was a lack of oversight rather than a governmental policy encouraging foolhardy fiscal management.”
In reality, it was a degreeof both, but I would also need to side with sarge that the greater of the two issues was lack of oversight and regulation by the agencies that were supposed to be doing that. This is not a Republican vs Democrat issue, or a Bush vs teh World issue. This is a Greenspan, SEC, Fed issue…..and there were plenty of people turning a deaf ear because there was too much money being made by playing a financial shell game of risk exposure. As I have said before, there were just as many high-profile Democrats lining their pockets with tehse games as there were Republicans doing the same. Its stupid to try and assign blame to a president or politcal party. It started under Clinton, continued under Bush, and unfortunately much of the gains were pocketed by the investors at the beginning who were able to cash in their chips and walk away clean before it melted down on all the Johnnie-come-lately’s, which included several huge companies.
John writes:
“So, by my views, this time the crooks on the dem side won one”
And, a little later he writes:
“You will also note that this case points out the need to make changes to current state election procedures to prevent a recurrence of what they admit is a problem, but which they state does not RISE TO THE LEVEL OF a disparate treatment that would effectively disenfrancise some voters based on deliberate actions at the precincts”
And just a little later:
“But if you read the actual decisions, it does appear that Coleman might still have lost the case”
So which is it, John? Did those crooked dems steal one, or did Coleman just plain old lose?
Cash: “There is nothing wrong with deflation by itself. In fact that is how we raise our living standards.”
I have no clue how you are drawing that conclusion. Massive global deflation like we saw Q3/Q4 of last year is economically devastating. If by “raise your standard of living” you mean that you have the opportunity to buy cheap gas for a couple of months before you lose your job….then I guess so.
Small, managable levels of inflation are healthy and normal. Runaway inflation is obviously an issue, but massive deflation is bad too.
Jay writes:
“This is not a Republican vs Democrat issue, or a Bush vs teh World issue. This is a Greenspan, SEC, Fed issue”
Agreed. You put it better than I did, Jay.
Here ya go John - this was in April, so I think it’s probaby even more so now:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/43699772.html
I don’t disagree with your post — I just don’t like how you’re suggesting that things weren’t on the up and up…like some shady forces in the Democrats are what forced Coleman’s loss. That’s quite a departure from what you posted at 10:27am.
Both Coleman and Franken had the opportunity to contest all the ballots they wanted to in the recount. Only when it was apparent that Coleman didn’t have the votes did his lawyers request the additional ballots get looked at. That’s the fishy part of this whole deal — is that bad lawyering, or just a desperate, last-minute act establishing the basis for an appeal?
“This is not a Republican vs Democrat issue, or a Bush vs teh World issue. This is a Greenspan, SEC, Fed issue”
Agreed. You put it better than I did, Jay.
[sarcasm]
But that’s government! It was their lack of oversight that caused the problem. SEE - government is the problem!
[/sarcasm]
Monty says:
“So which is it, John? Did those crooked dems steal one, or did Coleman just plain old lose?”
Both.
The dems in urban dem counties allowed absentee ballots that they knew — or should have known — did not conform to the strict rules regarding absentee ballots, rules with the three judge panel later recognized. Given the venue, they certainly would expect that more of those ballots would go to Franken. And they did.
Then the question about missing recount ballots. Anyone who has been an election judge knows that the machine does know know when a ballot is put through twice. All that needs to happen is for — when the box is opened (say to empty it as it gets full)– a group of ballots to be REMOVED and then fed through again. The presence of judges from opposing parties is supposed to prevent this. But what do you do when no opposing parties judges are available for a precinct? You have all judges of one party watching.
And sometimes, as I have seen, even when opposing party judges are present they are prevented from witnessing the screening of absentee ballots.
And as for Coleman losing, we do not, and probably will not, know whether if the same absentee ballot standards had been used statewide he would have had more votes.
But, following the legal procedures laid out in statute, and considering the less than stellar job his attornies did during the process, he did lose.
This in no way discounts the influence of the mishandling of ballots in dem counties.
“Both.”
Right. You bring up lotsa issues-votes counted twice, absentee ballot standards, etc. You honestly believe tese issues wern’t covered in court(IF they could be substantiated)?
No, it was the crooked dems….
SgtPendleton says:
“Here ya go John - this was in April, so I think it’s probaby even more so now:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/43699772.html”
>I was and am aware of that poll. Note the headline. Note the number of persons polled. Note the 64% in April. Note also that often media conduct polls to see how effectively their positions are being accepted by the public.
“I don’t disagree with your post — I just don’t like how you’re suggesting that things weren’t on the up and up…like some shady forces in the Democrats are what forced Coleman’s loss. That’s quite a departure from what you posted at 10:27am.
> Sorry, I don’t see where a departure is found. I have posted before my problems with how the election was handled, and have restated some of them in my post to Monty at 11:45. Please note that, while stating I believe shady “dem” forces have been at work in this election, I have also stated that shady “repub” forces use their preferred methods to swing elections their way. I believe BOTH parties use “shady” tactics to their advantage. I also believe that anyone who claims such tactics are NOT used is either disingenuous or naive.
“Both Coleman and Franken had the opportunity to contest all the ballots they wanted to in the recount.”
>Not exactly correct. No opportunity to contest absentee ballots before they were cast at the precincts was available when boards prescreened them. Coleman’s lawyers missed some steps in the initial reviews during the mandatory recount, but by then the cat was out of the bag for those non-compliant ballots that were given the OK in the dem counties.
“Only when it was apparent that Coleman didn’t have the votes did his lawyers request the additional ballots get looked at. That’s the fishy part of this whole deal — is that bad lawyering, or just a desperate, last-minute act establishing the basis for an appeal”
>One man’s “desperate last-minute act” is another’s attempt to point out flaws in the process — which I believe you would agree Franken’s team would have done had the mandatory recount left him still behind.
The dems in urban dem counties allowed absentee ballots that they knew — or should have known — did not conform to the strict rules regarding absentee ballots, rules with the three judge panel later recognized. Given the venue, they certainly would expect that more of those ballots would go to Franken. And they did.
Didn’t the Coleman folks have the opportunity to contest these ballots during the recount?
Dora’s been an election judge for many years - I think she’d disagree with a lot of what you posted - specifically about feeding a ballot in twice.
It’s really divisive when people complain about the election results, John. As a Republican, I’m sure you know this from 2000.
monty says:
“Right. You bring up lotsa issues-votes counted twice, absentee ballot standards, etc. You honestly believe tese issues wern’t covered in court(IF they could be substantiated)?
No, it was the crooked dems….”
>Read the SC decision please.
>By rules of evidence, we may not know that OJ killed his wife. But that’s not the only way to “know” something.
>The rules of evidence are to protect the presumed innocence principles of our judicial procedures. They are not intended to supplant considered evaluation in a non-judicial setting, as even the more relaxed standards of the civil courts show.
More than one perpetrator has rested on the claim that “you can’t PROVE it in a court of law.”
SgtPendleton says:
“Didn’t the Coleman folks have the opportunity to contest these ballots during the recount?”
The short answer is “No”. They did not have the opportunity to contest absentee ballots already opened and run through the machine. They did initially concede — I think wrongly — that the discrepancy between ballots on hand and machine counts could be settled by allowing the machine count to stand.
“Dora’s been an election judge for many years - I think she’d disagree with a lot of what you posted - specifically about feeding a ballot in twice.”
>I, too, have been an election judge for many years, and in a dem precinct where it it hard to get a repub judge. I’ll put my stories up against any she may adduce, including stories in the last election.
“It’s really divisive when people complain about the election results, John. As a Republican, I’m sure you know this from 2000.”
>Divisive is fine with me, when the issue is itself divisive.
>Our country is not based on “koom-by-ya,” but on the wrestling of thoughtful minds engaged in debate in order to find workable compromise on divisive issues.
>As an aside, I do not find conservatives arguing that all who disagree should just “shut up”. That seems to be a prerogative of the liberals — uhh, progressives — for as long as I can remember. Spare me, please.
seems to me the folks claiming to be against devisiveness are curiously willing to propegate it…..?
At the end of the day, it didn’t really matter who won this contest…..you still were going to have 60% of the voters in MN opposed to the “winning” candidate. The main negative I see is that one party now has a “filibuster-proof” majority in the Senate, but I suspect that is of diminishing importance too, as that particular party’s window to shove through whatever policy their little hearts desired is rapidly closing.
Regardless of party affiliation, politicians are more concerned with their own ability to be re-elected than with their party’s agenda. The good of the country runs a distant third on that priority list for too many of them, unfortunately.
“>Read the SC decision please.”
Why? They voted 5-0 to uphold the lower court decision, which was also unanimous, that the election went to Franken. You can get all lawyered up if you want, but better legal minds than you or I have examined Colemans case and found it wanting.
If your way to deal with this is to blame the “crooked dems”, that’s your business. Sounds like a classic case of scapegoating to me, however.
Sadly, I agree, Jay.
For me, the likely problem with Franken is that — as a junior senator — his votes will be pretty much determined by what the party wants, no matter his actual views or the interests of the state. Not that I expect him to have conscience problems about that.
As for the filibuster-proof senate, it seems to me the dem majority will have to be pretty careful about demanding compliance from all dem members, largely because of what is stated in your last paragraph: inidividual survival of a member is the primary concern except where the home base is guaranteed regardless of how the member votes.
Monty,
I say again, please read the decision itself. It’s worth the effort, and will both modify your “they won” stance and impress you with their careful parsing of the issues.
“But what do you do when no opposing parties judges are available for a precinct? You have all judges of one party watching.
And sometimes, as I have seen, even when opposing party judges are present they are prevented from witnessing the screening of absentee ballots.”
Where John? What precincts?
“The dems in urban dem counties allowed absentee ballots that they knew — or should have known — did not conform to the strict rules regarding absentee ballots,”
That’s simply not true. Court testimony pointed out that in suburban Republican counties they didn’t always check the witness registration.
“[Coleman lost]BECAUSE OF the disparate treatment of ballots, where numerous strictly non-allowable ballots were passed in dem counties.”
Utter bs. IF, and it’s a big if, “non-allowable ballots” were “passed in dem counties”, then they were “passed” for both Coleman and Franken. There was no way to know who voted for whom.
“They did initially concede — I think wrongly — that the discrepancy between ballots on hand and machine counts could be settled by allowing the machine count to stand.”
That was the decision in every previous recount in which ballots were lost. The machine count stood.
Monty,
You can find a redirect to it on Eric Black’s “Eric Black Ink” blog at MinnPost.
John,
Are there issues with MN voting law-sure. Are they substantial enough to invalidate the election-no. If you want to play supreme adjudicator on this one, as I said, that’s your business. But spare me the “careful parsing of the issues” bit. Bottom line, they rejected Colemans argument. Case closed.
Get over it.
Hi, Dora! Welcome to the discussion!
Dora says:
“But what do you do when no opposing parties judges are available for a precinct? You have all judges of one party watching.
And sometimes, as I have seen, even when opposing party judges are present they are prevented from witnessing the screening of absentee ballots.
Where John? What precincts?”
>Not telling. More than one.
“The dems in urban dem counties allowed absentee ballots that they knew — or should have known — did not conform to the strict rules regarding absentee ballots,
That’s simply not true. Court testimony pointed out that in suburban Republican counties they didn’t always check the witness registration.”
>How does your comment make mine untrue? Or do you believe two wrongs make a right?
“[Coleman lost]BECAUSE OF the disparate treatment of ballots, where numerous strictly non-allowable ballots were passed in dem counties.
Utter bs. IF, and it’s a big if, “non-allowable ballots” were “passed in dem counties”, then they were “passed” for both Coleman and Franken. There was no way to know who voted for whom.
>Are you suggesting that in my precinct, where over 3/4 of the ballots were cast, as usual, for a straight dem ticket, the judges could not opine that a similar percentage would be reflected in the “passed” non-complying ballots? Seems a little odd to me if you actually think that.
“They did initially concede — I think wrongly — that the discrepancy between ballots on hand and machine counts could be settled by allowing the machine count to stand.”
That was the decision in every previous recount in which ballots were lost. The machine count stood.
>Have you heard or seen anywhere that the number of signatures in the register was compared to the number of ballots counted?
>Did the the tickets collected by the ballot judge exceed the number of ballots on hand?
>Have you seen or heard anywhere that the number of absentee ballots marked “copy” was compared to the list of absentee ballots?
>I have not, in spite of carefully searching for these indicators to be mentioned, which if they supported the decision I believe they would have been.
>Perhaps these steps WERE taken, and did in fact prove that more voters voted than the ballots on hand showed. I need these facts to rest easier about it.
I think it’s pointless to quibble on about how one or the other should actually be the winner in an election this close. 300 votes out of 3 million is WAY smaller than the statistical margin of error for any kind of poll.
There were probably more than 300 people at the polls that day who were too blind or too senile or too drunk or whatever to know who they were really voting for.
Sure there were probably subtle variations in how different election judges in different places count absentee ballots or follow other procedures but again I doubt that accounts for more than the statistical margin of error.
I would vote to institute instant runoff for our elections going forward just so that I don’t have to put up with folks like ya’ll quibbling and arguing for months on end all convinced your guy won it when it’s obvious there’s no clear winner.
“I would vote to institute instant runoff for our elections going forward just so that I don’t have to put up with folks like ya’ll quibbling and arguing for months on end all convinced your guy won it when it’s obvious there’s no clear winner.”
Second.
John: “the likely problem with Franken is that — as a junior senator — his votes will be pretty much determined by what the party wants, no matter his actual views or the interests of the state”
I’ve seen nothing from Franken that would lead me to believe that his views are not right down the party line anyway, so this is a non-factor for me. He will be like Wellstone(!) in that although his votes are always in lock-step with the party, he will get kudos for standing his ground and voting his conscience…..problem being of course that his ground and his conscience are flaming leftist, maybe more so than the party itself.
Hopefully people will review it in 2014, and make decisions accordingly. Maybe the angry little man turns out to be a solid senator. I doubt it, but I wouldn’t mind being prooven wrong on that. In 2014, Franken will actually have to run on his record as Senator Franken, not simply on “look how bad my opponent is- vote for me instead.”
Given the state of politics in America and the dissatisfaction the public shows, the years of actually holding a competitive advantage as an incumbant might be over for a while. Well-financed challengers may have the upper hand in many races to come.
Instant runoffs are one solution, but fraught with their own problems, amongst which are:
>Getting all the various paid staff and judges, as well as all the volunteer observers together again in a matter of days presents both logistical and financial concerns.
>Getting absentee balloters, especially those overseas, to have the opportunity to vote timely again presents problems of disenfranchisement.
>Getting the various organizations that go out to nursing homes and to those who have transportation difficulties to do it “all over again” with volunteers to recruit for it increases the risk that this part of the population will be unable or unwilling to go to the effort again, particularly if only one race is in quesion.
>Assuring that similar problems will not recur in the runoff election is far from certain.
Another solution proposed is to allow pre-election voting, instead of absentee ballots. But this ignores the problem with those out of the country, and still does not protect from the possibility of problems in precinct management of ballots.
In the end, I believe on consideration I prefer to clear up the problems discovered in this recent election’s procedures, and to leave our pretty good system intact.
Jay,
I suspect you’re right about Franken’s political bent.
I don’t think waiting for 2014 is necessary, as Amy will be up sooner, and she may face the backlash from the Obama solutions. And there is always the House.
As for the incumbent advantage, history has shown it ebbs and flows, particularly when the economy goes bad.
I haven’t seen anything from Klobuchar that is especially compelling for her to lose my vote. Time will tell. I still think she will do a decent job. I also think the party might be willing to protect her a bit if a vote comes up that they know won’t play well at home, and they have the votes to pass it anyway.
“Getting absentee balloters, especially those overseas, to have the opportunity to vote timely again [in an IRV scenario] presents problems of disenfranchisement.”
Aren’t there flavors of IRV where you put down your first and second choice and there is really only one ballot cast? isn’t that what the “instant” part refers to? People’s second choices are counted if the contest between the first choices is too close?
Of course, if we had done it that way in this last cycle my ballot would have been,
1st choice: Barkley
2nd choice: my dog
3rd choice: ya mamma
But not Franken or Coleman.
Depends on the economy and who runs against her, I think.
I still have problems with how she ran the prosecutor’s office, and some of her votes in the Senate, but at least she’s not doing pilgrimmages.
” In 2014, Franken will actually have to run on his record as Senator Franken, not simply on “look how bad my opponent is- vote for me instead.” ”
Yup. We don’t know what we have in a junior senator right now. We will have something upon which to base our judgements by 2014.
I was one who voted for Franken, not because I was enamored with him or his stance on the issues, but as a vote against Coleman. Voting against Coleman therefore precluded voting for Barkley, as at this point in MN, the IP is more of a spoiler than anything else.
I think alot of pople voted like I did-against a candidate rather than for one.
dubbla: I have heard about those options.
If it were do for each office, I can imagine a national election with a ten page ballot, and confused voters all over the polls.
It would address the problem of the absentee voters overseas, though, IF absentee ballots were allowed.
“>Not telling. More than one”
So you have no specifics then just your opinion.
“How does your comment make mine untrue? Or do you believe two wrongs make a right?”
It’s not just “dem counties” who didn’t check everything as you are strongly implying.
“Are you suggesting that in my precinct, where over 3/4 of the ballots were cast, as usual, for a straight dem ticket, the judges could not opine that a similar percentage would be reflected in the “passed” non-complying ballots? Seems a little odd to me if you actually think that”
What seems odd is that you contend that precinct judges had anything to do with “passing” ballots. As you well know precinct judges get the “passed” ballots, open them, and feed them into the ballot counter. And what also seems odd is that you think that the absentee ballot panel could divine which ballots to “pass” from a stack so as to influence the election which you again are strongly implying. Pure partisan bs on your part.
“Perhaps these steps WERE taken, and did in fact prove that more voters voted than the ballots on hand showed. I need these facts to rest easier about it. ”
Yes I did see that covered. So your comments about how closely you followed things isn’t entirely correct apparently. And as monty has pointed out, where was the evidence from Coleman that those steps were not taken? He was not prevented from introducing any evidence he wanted. The election contest court and MSC both agreed unanimously that Coleman lacked evidence. That is what should put your mind at ease.
Monty: Happens all the time!
“Voting against Coleman therefore precluded voting for Barkley”
I wish I could convince you to re-think that strategy. If we wish to have more choices through a 3 (or more) party system, you are doing yourself no favors by embracing that which the 2 major parties want you to believe. Make no mistake about it, a vote for Franken was a vote *for* Franken, not against Coleman.
My vote for Barkeley was because I thought he was the best candidate of the three. I am not willing to throw away my vote by casting it for someone who I do not support. That mentality has caused me to split tickets nearly every year, write some names in, and occassionally even vote for myself a couple of times, but I’ve never voted for someone I didn’t truely want to.
“Voting against Coleman therefore precluded voting for Barkley”
I know what you mean, Jay. I usually vote my conscience, rather than along party lines. But I’ve seen how my vote for a Tim Penney has resulted in a TPaw. And I really, truly, did not want another 6 years of Norm.
I’m all for a viable 3rd(or more!) political party. In this particular race though, I found it necessary to vote against rather than for.
Dora: “Pure partisan bs on your part.”
I gotta side with Dora on this, simply because when it comes to the matter of pure partisan bs, I view her to be something of an expert. Sorry, John.
“I’ve seen how my vote for a Tim Penney has resulted in a TPaw. And I really, truly, did not want another 6 years of Norm.”
Forest versus trees, my friend. Refusal to vote outside of the two-party system (for good candidates, not misc idiots) will insure many decades of continued dysfunctional government, versus the occassional and brief 4-6 years of some candidate you may not happen to like.
“I found it necessary to vote against rather than for”
No such thing….no matter how many time you tell yourself that.
Dora says:
So you have no specifics then just your opinion.
>How does “Not telling” mean I have none?
>Being an Aristotelian thinker, I have concepts, not opinions, as a rule. I LOVE the left-wing Cartesian posture that no objective truth is attainable and all “truth” is reduced to opinion one can persuade others to share. But I don’t share that conviction. Honesty helps discussion. It also helps if logical thinking contributes.
“It’s not just “dem counties” who didn’t check everything as you are strongly implying.”
>I implied no such thing, as my additional comments made clear. And that non-dem precincts did it as well does not invalidate my statement. Honesty helps discussion.
“What seems odd is that you contend that precinct judges had anything to do with “passing” ballots. As you well know precinct judges get the “passed” ballots, open them, and feed them into the ballot counter. And what also seems odd is that you think that the absentee ballot panel could divine which ballots to “pass” from a stack so as to influence the election which you again are strongly implying. Pure partisan bs on your part.”
>As you know — if your experience is less parochial than you suggest — not all absentee ballots are pre-judged before they get to the precinct. And where they ARE prejudged, no opportunity is usually given to observe as those judgements are made, or to challenge them.
>And I restate my position that knowing the typical makeup of a precinct would give those judging a pretty fair idea of how the mix of those non-complying ballots would turn out. If you think otherwise, it seems to me you must have a pretty poor idea of the intelligence of those passing the ballots.
“Perhaps these steps WERE taken, and did in fact prove that more voters voted than the ballots on hand showed. I need these facts to rest easier about it. ”
“Yes I did see that covered.
>Reference to a source would be helpful. Is there a reason you do not refer to it?
“And as monty has pointed out, where was the evidence from Coleman that those steps were not taken? He was not prevented from introducing any evidence he wanted.
>Yes, he was, and you know it. Honesty helps discussion.
The election contest court and MSC both agreed unanimously that Coleman lacked evidence.
>WHICH evidence? On this point? And wasn’t the evidence desired evidence acceptable in a court of law that would prove deliberate intent? And how, praytell, would such evidence be obtained?
That is what should put your mind at ease.
>Just the facts, please, ma’am. Just the facts.
I’d also to like to point out that the demographics of absentee voters don’t match the overall demographics of the county they’re voting in. Absentee voting isn’t conducted by a perfect slice of the overall voting population.
Jay, Franken’s actually a big support of domestic oil exploration. He actually leans a bit conservative on some issues.
…and FYI — I voted for the Buffalo in the last election.
Jay:
No offense taken.
Sarge,
Well may be true that the demographics differ, it remains true that in an extremely partisan precinct such as the inner city one are the absentee votes will likely favor the predominant side, as in fact they did in this election.
I’d actually be kind of intrigued by a system that *would* allow for votes against, rather than for. I’m not sure if it could be done in a fashion that wouldn’t be too confusing for some voters; but I like the idea of having one vote with the option to spend it +1 for someone or -1 for someone else.
If that was the case in 2000 or 2004, I may have used it instead of writing in for Prez.
“Jay, Franken’s actually a big support of domestic oil exploration. He actually leans a bit conservative on some issues.”
I’d be curious where you saw that and/or when that happened. The only things I saw from Franken in regards to energy were support for renewables, and higher tax rates on the companies that are involved in drilling/exploration.
Time to go.
It’s been fun, folks.
“Yes, he was, and you know it. Honesty helps discussion.”
Ok, let’s be honest, John. You feel Coleman was robbed. Two courts unanimously disagree. Either the courts are being partisan or you are. You sure there isn’t just a slight chance that your republican zeal isn’t influencing your considered opinion in this particular case?
“Forest versus trees, my friend.”
Perhaps. Again, I vote my conscience. And, as I said, I what I wanted in that election was for Norm not to win.
Oh, to be back to the days not long ago when the MN DFL was excited about the prospects of Coleman winning a campaign for national office……
“not all absentee ballots are pre-judged before they get to the precinct. And where they ARE prejudged, no opportunity is usually given to observe as those judgements are made, or to challenge them. ”
You’re wrong. And, yes there is an opportunity to observe when the panel is reviewing them. All meetings are open to the public.
“If you think otherwise, it seems to me you must have a pretty poor idea of the intelligence of those passing the ballots.”
It has nothing to do with “intelligence”. Election judges can’t divine who voted for whom based on looking at an envelope. You have a pretty poor view of the honesty of election judges.
John you are full of it. Coleman was NOT prevented from introducing evidence and YOU know it. You are as intellectually dishonest as they come on this issue. As you know, if you make a claim it is you who has to back it up. You don’t prove something didn’t happen, you prove that it did.
As for references, they were numerous. I didn’t save links to them.
You can continue repeating the same discredited bs all you want, it doesn’t make it true.
As monty so aptly put it: “Bottom line, they rejected Colemans argument. Case closed.”
Well, it was on an interview that he was talking about it Jay - but in his campaign literature (and website) you’ll note that he lambasts the “imported-oil” economy.
Dora:
I want to apologize for the harsh tone of my last post. I was tired and somewhat cranky at the time, and I regret it.
I do maintain what I said, however.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
tamiflu uk shop?
tamiflu medical Tamiflu Related To Pan Epidemic Outbreak tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Flu Shoots Baltimore flu treatments without tylenol! philadelphia flu shoots Tamiflu Generic home treatment of the flu tamiflu 60 mg Flu Shoots Copanys relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Shelf Life Of Tamiflu tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu Pregnancy Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Does Tamiflu Contraindicate With Acetaminophen what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms headache Tylenol Flu Med flu shoots companys stopped tamiflu early Chaep Tamiflu Without Prescription buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Tamiflu Z-pack tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu without a prescribtion Parvo Tamiflu flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Donald Rumsfeld Tamiflu tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots 2009 Flu Season Update cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Tamiflu Flu tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Pandemic Flu Home Care Kits tylenol flu night timeflu treatments without tylenol!
H1n1 Swine Flu "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" h1n1 flu symptoms Tamiflu Parov Canine tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Homeopathic Treatments For Stomach Flu tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Tamiflu Manufacturer tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Whats In Tamiflu acheter tamiflu weaponized swine flu; Buy Tamiflu W No Prescription flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Swine Flu Facts Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Chilli Cold And Flu Treatment tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Tamiflu Invent tamiflu without a prescribtion flu masks Tamiflu Oseltamivir Phosphate swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Flu Strain In Idaho molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Flu Remedies swine flu in ohio tamiflu flu Flu Prednisone Shot tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Flu Treatment For Children tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Cheapest Tamiflu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Swine Flu Statistics intestinal flunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Singulair Flu Shot "medwatch form for tamiflu" what if i don't finish tamiflu Natural And Alternative Bird Flu Treatments tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Treatment For The Avian Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Stomach Flu Symptoms swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Over The Counter Flu Prevention rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Buy Tamiflu Without Prescription tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Canine Parvovirus aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Swine Flu In Texas tamiflu invent prevention of flu Latest Reports On Swine Flu chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Flu Prevention tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Government Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Got Better H1n1 Without Tamiflu tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Avian Flu Treatment who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Philadelphia Flu Shoots pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Star Anise In Tamiflu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work North Carolina Swine Flu influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Flu Symptoms 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Bird Flu Pandemic pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Swine Flu Course Progression Duration Treatment Tamiflu swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Order Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu suspension Tamiflu Dose For Influenza tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Swine Flu Test Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu In Cancun "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Health Care Flu Shoot tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Flu "medwatch form for tamiflu" "when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu Bestellen tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Counterfeit Tamiflu Avian Bird Flu tamiflu tamiflu mexico; Tylenol Severe Fluswine flu wisconsin?
flu vaccine! Tamiflu Orders No Prescription swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Tamiflu Order Without A Prescription tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Que Es El Tamiflu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu tracker How Fast Does Tamiflu Work "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Flu Shot While Taking Prednisone tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Oculo Tamiflu 60 Mg tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Flu Shot Side Effects tamiflu dosing instructions star anise in tamiflu Tamiflu Black Box acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Remedy For Stomach Flu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Flu Vaccine And Coumadin Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Bactrim And Tamiflu Together tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Buy Tamiflu Without A Prescription tamiflu without a prescribtionnumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Tamiflu Adverse Events "medwatch form for tamiflu" "when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu By Vbulletin tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Drug Treatment For Swine Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Buy No Online Prescription Tamiflu swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Motrin Cold And Flu rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere!swine flu wisconsin?
flu vaccine! Swine Flu Vaccination swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Mercury In Flu Shots tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu History Of Flu Vaccination Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu Virus "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Cdc Indications For Tamiflu tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Tamiflu Melbourne"post-exposure tamiflu dosing"
h1n1 flu symptoms Swine Flu In California tamiflu alcohol rebate on tamiflu, Tamiflu Over The Counter"medwatch form for tamiflu"
"when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu Medical tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Price tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Swine Flu Funny swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Flu Shoots Essex County Ny rebate on tamiflu, depo flu provera symptom Cipro Tamiflu Drug Interaction tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Dosing aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Stomach Flu
This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.
We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.
Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.
Learn more about RSS