Big News In The Sixth

Ladies and Gentlemen, I have no dog in this hunt. I worked with fellow military veterans for Sergeant Major (Ret.) Tim Walz in the First, and against Kline in the Second during the last cycle; this cycle I’m concentrating on those AND holding Erik “The Hustler” Paulsen accountable for his extremist rightwing record. Add to that, keeping the local republiCons here in “The Hustler’s” hometown honest, keeps me quite busy.

That said, what’s coming out of the Sixth District, cannot be ignored.

I’ve heard that those questioning El Tinklenberg’s lobbying, er, ‘scuse me, “consulting” activities simply have an axe to grind because THEY have a dog in the hunt. I’ve heard those questioning Tink saying it needs to be vetted now, because if we don’t do it now, Bachmann’s Bootlickers will do it later – and they’re simply doing due-diligence duty at the time due diligence is supposed to be done.

I happen to side with the latter. Quite frankly, what I’ve seen and heard, reeks. And if it’s true, it needs to be aired out, and aired out now; and if it’s not true, it needs to be STOPPED. NOW.

Folks reading this can take the motivation of those that sent the letter to the U.S Attorney’s office any way they want; what they cannot deny is they pushed this issue to a “Put Up Or Shut Up” point.

And in the vetting of candidates, a “Put Up Or Shut Up” point is always a good thing.

Link for the actual letter sent to US Attorney Frank Magill, and the commentary of one of the signatories at Developers Are Crabgrass

The "Hustler"

At his announcement, Erik Paulsen claimed to have, and I quote from his press release: “…years of working in bipartisan fashion, across the aisle, to get results in the business world and in the Minnesota legislature.”

Yeah, “right.” Anyone even slightly paying attention understands Erik Paulsen did not rise to Republican state House leadership position by being “bi-partisan.”

Right out of the box, Paulsen forces the interested citizen to question his credibility.

The very first line of the press release says, and again I quote: “Saying ‘Congress is broken, I will work to fix it,’ Erik Paulsen….”

Just who does Erik Paulsen think he’s kidding?

Jim Ramstad tried to fix it, and for that he was rewarded by GOP Leadership with backbench status.

If Jim Ramstad couldn’t fix it, what reasonable person could possibly believe Erik Paulsen could?

Newt Gingrich’s “Contract With America” fundamentally changed how power is structured in the Republican Party, in Congress.

Serious academics can explain exactly how power was removed from committees and placed in party leadership, leading to things such as the strong-armed ouster of Gingrich and the installation of Dennis Hastert as Speaker, with Tom DeLay the muscle. Not to mention the Abramoff Scandal, the K-Street Project, etc etc etc.

To the layman, the following explains it clearly: when it comes to Republican Congressmen, “the people elect them, but the GOP Leadership directs them.”

Paulsen’s claim he’s going to “work to fix it” is simply not credible.

Like Erik Paulsen is really – as a freshman congressman – going to take on and challenge John Boehner and Roy Blunt’s power and authority?

Quite frankly, in a one page press release, Paulsen seems to have a knack of saying things that simply don’t ring true.

Consider this: “Failed ideas and yearning for the past stand in the way of change. So do the politics of blame, division and partisan spin. Minnesotans are weary of this brand of politics.” (emphasis added).

Say, Erik?

THAT’S YOUR PARTY YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT.

Especially in Eden Prairie, in Paulsen’s home town. Paulsen’s party’s website is the epitome of blame, division, and partisan spin.

Gentle readers, that’s the local GOP website that blamed the DFL and spun the per diem issue; that put Erik Paulsen (along with David Hann) in the position of: “Well, I voted against it, before I profited from it.”

And that per diem issue is but one example of the “blame, division, and spin” Paulsen’s party’s website is known for; not to mention dirty politics and distortion.

Is Erik Paulsen really condemning his party, here?

Right before he’s going to ask them for their endorsement of his campaign?

Will reasonable people really think Erik Paulsen is being sincere?

Just who does Erik Paulsen think he’s kidding??!?

In his speech, Paulsen claimed to be the moderate candidate, like Frenzel and Ramstad, that accurately represents this district, Minnesota’s 3rd Congressional District.

ROFLMAO!!!!!

Erik Paulsen, “moderate”??!?

Ladies and gentlemen, Erik Paulsen is no moderate. He represents the extreme right wing of the GOP. He always has. If Erik Paulsen is saying he’s a “moderate”, I’m asking “since when – tomorrow?”

At the end of his speech, Erik Paulsen stated:

“I will not be out-hustled in this campaign.”

Clearly, those that look into Erik Paulsen’s past – his verifiable record – and compare that to what Erik Paulsen said on Sunday, can only conclude that Erik Paulsen is indeed a hustler.

Because he certainly isn’t believable.

This is crossposted at The Eden Prairie News

The “New! And Improved!!” Erik Paulsen

Folks, you just can’t make this up – Erik Paulsen claiming to have, and I quote from his press release: “…years of working in bipartisan fashion, across the aisle, to get results in the business world and in the Minnesota legislature.”

ROFLMAO!!!!!

Just who does Erik Paulsen think he’s kidding??!?

ERIK PAULSEN, working in a “bipartisan fashion”??!? Those two belong together the same way “George W. Bush” and “articulate” do. Well, more like: “don’t.”

I was at Paulsen’s formal campaign announcement, and it was surreal. Now, most professional media types will tell you 1:30 on a Sunday afternoon is NOT when you want to have an announcement – not if you want to have a lot of media attention, that is.

And for this “major” event in a major race, I saw only one TV camera there. When I arrived, I asked the friendly folks at the check-in table for a media kit – and nobody knew where they were, or even who had them. After a half hour of asking volunteers for the kit, and even just who was the media contact, a volunteer brought me a one page press release.

I asked the cameraman if he had received a media kit; and he said his “media kit” consisted of the same as mine – a one-page press release.

That’s hardly what one would expect from a candidate wanting to get his message out – unless, perhaps, a candidate simply doesn’t want to get his message out. And quite frankly, with Erik Paulsen’s highly partisan past, it strongly occurs to me that he simply doesn’t want to be questioned about what he says. How else does one explain a one-page press release by a major party candidate for a seat in Congress?

There were no questions after Paulsen’s “I will represent the common sense values of Minnesota families…” sound-bite laden address.

Excuse me? I thought Paulsen was running to represent the THIRD DISTRICT’S families. And he’s claiming “common sense”? Common sense should tell people to question Mr. Paulsen very, Very, VERY closely about what he says – like what he said about “civility in politics”, and how he learned this lesson from “his friend and mentor, Jim Ramstad.”

Ladies and gentlemen, I’ll be the first to recognize the genuine civility Jim Ramstad has graciously shown throughout his career.

And I’ll also be the first to say Erik Paulsen is no Jim Ramstad, in the civility department or, for that matter, just about any other department. If Erik wanted a lesson on incivility, all he would have to do is go to his party’s local website, which is the epitome of incivility. This website, which represents Paulsen locally, has a documented record of incivility and distortion. Just who does Paulsen think he’s fooling?

And in his quest to ditch his record for the “New! And Improved!!” label, Erik Paulsen correctly stated that Congress is broken. What Erik Paulsen neglected to say is that government is broken because of blind partisanship as practiced by the ilk of him here in Saint Paul, and John Kline in Washington.

Quite frankly, Paulsen – the former state house GOP majority leader – claiming to want to work to fix the Congress that republicans broke, defies credibility. Paulsen rose to power by being part of the system; Ramstad never rose to prominence because he refused to compromise his values. There’s a reason Jim Ramstad, first elected to congress in 1990, never rose to a leadership position, while Roy Blunt of Missouri, first elected in 1996, has.

And that reason is partisanship – Blunt personifies partisanship in Washington, while Ramstad personifies bi-partisanship. And Paulson’s record is clear; he has personified partisanship in Saint Paul.

Erik Paulsen – “new, and improved”? Not a chance.

All in all, Erik Paulsen’s performance yesterday, in stealth mode and by design, just goes to show once again why reasonable citizens simply cannot trust republiCon leadership.

republiCon, or Republican? Here Is The Difference

Ladies and Gentlemen, many of you have heard the term “neo-conservative”, and wondered what it meant. For the sake of discussion, let’s compare/contrast in a “republiCon” versus “Republican” method. For instance:

Ronald Reagan = Republican
George W. Bush = republiCon

Whether you liked President Reagan or not, whether you liked his politics or not, most reasonable people will agree that President Reagan was authentic, consistent, and principled. When his administration got caught up in the Iran-Contra Scandal, President Reagan spoke to the nation and accepted responsibility. What President Reagan said, is well-worth hearing again:

“I’ve studied the Board’s report. Its findings are honest, convincing, and highly critical; and I accept them. And tonight I want to share with you my thoughts on these findings and report to you on the actions I’m taking to implement the Board’s recommendations. First, let me say, I take full responsibility for my own actions and for those of my administration. As angry as I may be about activities undertaken without my knowledge, I am still accountable for those activities. As disappointed as I may be in some who served me, I’m still the one who must answer to the American people for this behavior. And as personally distasteful as I find secret bank accounts and diverted funds—well, as the Navy would say, this happened on my watch.”

Compare President Reagan’s words with the flip-flopping of Bush The Lesser with regards to the disclosure of a CIA agent’s identity. At first, Bush The Lesser said, in essence, he’d fire anyone “involved” with the leak; later he morphed that to “convicted”. At no time did Bush The Lesser ever accept responsibility for those under him; rather, he speculated that the leaker would never be caught. Bush The Lesser said everyone in his administration would “fully cooperate”; his spokesperson claimed no one was involved because “he had asked.” Yet when convicted, Libby’s prison sentence was excused via Bush’s presidential pardon.

In the administration of Bush The Lesser, those that make mistakes are promoted; those who make catastrophic mistakes are awarded medals, and Libby, who made a criminal mistake, was rewarded with a “get out of jail” card.

President Reagan was solid and consistent and a Republican; Bush The Lesser is consistently inconsistent and a republiCon. Reagan was seen as believable and credible, Bush is seen as neither.

There are more examples.

Senator Boschwitz is a Republican; Norm Coleman is a republiCon. If Norm Coleman doesn’t agree with you today, don’t worry – sooner or later, he will.

Former Governor Arne Carlson is a Republican, as is current Governor Tim Pawlenty; candidates Jon Grunseth and Allen Quist are republiCons.

Congressman Jim Ramstad is a Republican; Congressman John Kline is a republiCon. Every year, Jim Ramstad willingly meets his constituents in a series of Town Hall Meetings; citizens can and do ask unscripted questions from the floor. Congressman Ramstad wants to know what the people think. John Kline had to be shamed into holding his only Town Hall Meeting. John Kline could care less what the people think.

When activists protesting the occupation of Iraq conducted “sit ins” in all of Minnesota’s congressional offices, Congressman Ramstad’s staff treated them courteously, listened to them, and even provided coffee and other refreshments. Kline called the cops. The difference cannot be starker: Congressman Ramstad seeks to govern by the consent of the people – he is a Republican; Kline seeks to rule by the force of government – he is a republiCon.

Barry Goldwater wrote “The Conscience Of A Conservative” and was clear and unabashed about what he felt the conservative philosophy is and where it should take government. Mayor Phil Young and Council Members Brad Aho and Jon Duckstad speak in rhetoric but deny where their alleged philosophy would take this city. Goldwater was a Republican; Young, Aho, and Duckstad are republiCons.

The point here is that as the current leadership of the GOP Party in large part is controlled by the neo-con movement, most of today’s GOP Leadership cannot be called “Republican” by most reasonable people. I use the term “republiCon” where it is clear and appropriate, and I do not apologize for this. I call republiCons “republiCons” for the old-fashioned reason: they’ve EARNED it.

(crossposted at Eden Prairie News)

No Info, But Send Dough

I have the distinct misfortune of being aware of Erik Paulsen’s less than stellar “service” in the state house. For those wondering what he’s like, I’ve heard a good analogy – reflecting Paulsen’s desire to go to W.D.C. – “If you liked Bush, you’ll LOVE Paulsen.”

It was recently brought to my attention that Paulsen has a website that’s, well, “unique”.

“Unique” as in “there’s no info, but you can send dough.”

So I thought the locals in Eden Prairie should be reminded of what I said about Paulsen in the local paper, just a couple of years ago. Here’s what I cross-posted over at http://www.edenprairienews.com :

***
It is interesting to note that while the three announced candidates for Jim Ramstad’s seat have active websites and are out generating excitement, Eden Prairie’s Erik Paulsen is not. He does, however, have a website: http://paulsenforcongress.com/

And on Mr. Paulsen’s website is no information. However, Mr. Paulsen does offer the opportunity to donate. Why you should donate he does not say; but donate you can.

So in the spirit of providing historical information on what Mr. Paulsen’s candidacy for congress represents, I thought this would be a good time to go back into the “Letters To The Editor” of The Eden Prairie News, and reprint what I wrote about Mr. Paulsen, back when he led this state to a government shutdown.

Letters from the July 14, 2005 News
Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Not represented

South Dakotans have twice tossed U.S. senators out of office when they felt the senators became big-shots, no longer representing them, but instead representing the party’s other officials and special interests. Both McGovern and Daschle came to be seen as getting too big for their britches by not listening to what the locals had to say, let alone taking care of what the locals needed done. We have a state representative that reminds me of those South Dakota senators, and that’s House Majority Leader Erik Paulsen.

Most folks I meet on and around the prairie are reasonable people, and feel that the gay “marriage” issue could and should be settled reasonably. Many personally know gays and lesbians; for instance, the family down my block has a lesbian daughter. Who cares? Not me. Not my neighbors. But, Michelle Bachman does. In Mr. Paulsen’s leadership position, he represents fear-mongers like Michelle Bachman. Actually, in his position, he LEADS them.

Most folks I meet on and around the prairie are sick of staying stuck in traffic; business folks losing money from employees idling away in a jam (by the way, for many businesses it’s cheaper to pay the nickel a gallon “user fee” than the wages of the employees); commuters losing precious time with family in the same jam. Would you pay a nickel a gallon more to get home quicker? Most folks I talk to would. And I don’t care where you go; it’s a jam – for much of the day. Yet Erik Paulsen, in his “leadership” position in the House, can’t get a compromise out of the governor – one simple nickel.

Most folks I meet on and around the prairie willingly compromise, go along to get along, and don’t feel they have to get it all. Politics is the art of negotiation and compromise – something Mr. Paulsen in his position of House majority leader clearly has demonstrated he cannot and/or will not do. Last year, he wouldn’t compromise and get the bonding bill done. This year, he wouldn’t compromise and get a budget passed, despite TWO deadlines.

For these reasons, it’s clear to me that Majority Leader Paulsen does not listen to the reasonable people on the prairie. He might hear the reasonable people, but he doesn’t listen. He’s listening to somebody else, representing somebody else, and leading somebody else. I personally don’t care who runs against Erik Paulson; the same way South Dakota voters really didn’t care who ran against Daschle or McGovern. It’s quite apparent he has become beholden to his party’s special interests, and no longer represents the average citizen of Eden Prairie. I trust the citizens of Eden Prairie will give Mr. Paulsen the same lesson South Dakotans give their elected officials that no longer represent them.

Thomas Johnson
Eden Prairie

A Man Of Substance

Honor. Integrity. Ethics. These are words I heard over and over and over last night at Mayor Jim Hovland’s event. And Jim Hovland does look like a congressman; it’s a picture that’s very possible in the 3rd CD.

Yesterday morning, Jim Hovland announced his candidacy at the SouthWest Metro Transit Station in Eden Prairie. This is fitting as Jim is a leader on transportation issues. There was a good turnout, and Jim had a great intro, explaining who Jim is and where he’s come from. And it’s an impressive resume.

I was surprised with Jim’s speech, although the reality is that in an era of Obama, the bar is set high. Not once was there applause. The speech reads much better than delivered, and could easily be rewritten for excitement. Too often, the line that should generate spontaneous applause is in the wrong place.

Although not stylish, Jim clearly can articulate in a manner that captures attention. Jim highlighted his thoughts on the environment, healthcare, Iraq, Social Issues, Telecommunications, Transportation, and Veterans. Jim’s message bridges divisions; it is a “We The People” reaching out, and being reached to, message. And it’s a balanced, progressive message that needs to be heard. As he gets more comfortable on the stump, and hones his delivery, I expect to hear a lot of applause to his message.

The event last night was, also fittingly, at Hyland Lake Park Reserve, and it was packed. It was fun to see some Republican faces I recognized at a DFL event, and fun to talk to several I wouldn’t expect to see there – except they’re as disgusted with GOP Leadership as most of America is. Jim talks about bi-partisanship; about working with Republicans. There is no doubt Jim can work with Republicans; it’s working with the Republican Party and its elected officials I have doubts about. Clearly, the GOP and its elected officials have shown no inclination to work in anyway in anything with anybody that could remotely be considered “bi-partisan.”

Jim Hovland is in this race, and he’s in it to win. Jim Hovland is a man of substance.

More GOP "Tricks"

Ladies and Gentlemen, I post on the local paper where I live, The Eden Prairie News. And lately, I’ve actually been posting quite a bit. That’s because the rightwingnuts have taken control of the city council.

And there’s a thread about fact checking and truth-in-politics that I recently posted on, because local republiCon leadership wouldn’t know truth if it bit ’em on the ass.

So I thought I’d re-post that post here, so you kind and gentle readers can get a glimpse of the home of Erik Paulsen, who apparently has been declared “The Annointed One” in the run for Ramstad’s seat by the republiCon party LEADERSHIP in CD-3.

So, without any further ado….here we go!

***
Well, it depends on what your definition of “fibs” is!

Let’s take a look at today’s front page of the official local republiCon website, shall we? Here’s what it says:

***
HOT TOPICS

DFL LEGISLATURE SETS PER DIEM SPENDING RECORD — Minnesota lawmakers have set a record in 2007 and the proof was in their paychecks. 5 Eyewitness News has learned that last year, State Representatives and Senators took home more than $2 million above their annual salaries.
***

Now, this would indicate the republiCons are accusing the DFL of spending big-time taxpayer dough, wouldn’t it? And if you follow that link to the KSTP story, KSTP points out that the top state Rep and state Senator by per diem payments are DFL, and then this is criticized by a republican.

It sure looks to me like the local GOPers are inferring the problem is the DFL. But, I notice the local republiCons don’t talk about GOPers Erik Paulsen, or David Hann. And I really notice they don’t rip DFLer Maria Ruud.

This sends the “red herring” flag up the ol’ flagpole, because the local republiCons LOVE to make State Rep Ruud look bad. But, they aren’t. Gee – I wonder why?

So, now I’m now guessing that republiCons David Hann and Erik Paulsen spent more time at the Per Diem trough than DFLer Maria Ruud.

So, I go to the links from the KSTP website, and guess what?

Local republiCons David Hann and Erik Paulsen did indeed spend more time at the per diem trough than DFLer Maria Ruud.

Erik Paulsen is way up there at the top of the – to use a republiCon phrase – “lining his pockets at taxpayer expense” list, with a total taken of $11, 737.

And there’s David Hann, loading up with $14,016 of taxpayer dough.

What did Maria Ruud take in per diems?

$5,445. SIX THOUSAND LESS than Paulsen; over EIGHT THOUSAND LESS than Hann.

Yet the inference of the GOPer website is that it’s a DFL problem.

This is another example of why you simply cannot believe anything the local republiCon LEADERSHIP says.
***

This was originally posted here

Gentle readers, you can expect plenty of dirty tricks by the republiCons; they’re desperate. Karl Rove may no longer be practicing The Dark Arts at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but that’s no reason to believe the local GOPers won’t be working out of his book. Because, gentle readers, they have been, they are, and they’ll continue to do so.

Their “urge to purge” their party of moderates has caused good, honorable people to leave the GOP, and they will stoop as low as necessary to slur and smear those that disagree with their small-tent ideology, in order to win elections.

I’ll keep you updated what’s happening at SD42, “ground zero” for republiCon Erik Paulsen.

Rush Limbaugh Is Excited!

I listen to Rush Limbaugh. Not because I like it; but I want to know what he’s saying because bootlicking ditto-heads parrot him religiously. Now, most people have seen or heard Rush calling former Senator John Edwards “The Breck Girl”, and remember that Rush called a teenage girl, Chelsea Clinton, “the White House Dog.” Women that believe in equality before the law are “femi-nazi’s.” The list goes on. Rush Limbaugh likes to slur and smear people – it’s his shtick. What bothers me most about Rush Limbaugh is not what he says; it’s that people actually take him seriously.

If you think about it, how can a guy who dodged Vietnam because of a pimple on his backside be taken seriously as a war promoter? How can he be taken seriously, when at first Rush proclaimed that anyone abusing prescription drugs illegally should be locked up, until he illegally abused prescription drugs and got off on a technicality? How can a guy that’s been divorced THREE TIMES, and celebrated his third divorce by loading up with Viagra and heading to an island infamous for is prostitution, be seen as a paragon of “Family Values”?

I guess to some, Rush is an expert on families, because he’s had three of them. Well, three wives, but no kids. Guess that makes him an expert on education, to some.

As demonstrated above, Rush Limbaugh loves to call names. So on a discussion board I’ve been posting at for years, I respond to his bootlicking ditto-heads by calling Rush “El Druggo”, in reference to his hillbilly-heroin habit. Well, “The Maja Viagra” too, due to how he “celebrated” his third divorce. “Drug Limpstick”, in reference to both. Oh, and “The Round Mound Of Hate Sound”, due to the name calling he does.

And to no surprise, the bootlickers on that site go ballistic, accusing the ol’ TwoPutter of bein’ a name caller. The point they miss, is they love it when El Druggo calls names, but hate it when what they do, is done to them. Kinda like bullies, don’t you think? Which gets me to what The Maja Viagra said, just a couple of months ago.

Last November 19th, Rush Limbaugh was talking about the November ’08 election, and he proclaimed (and I quote):

“It’s going to be a vicious, dirty, mean campaign to rival none other. It’s going to outdo anything that we’ve ever seen. It’s going to be exciting for people like me. It’s going to be frustrating for people who get turned off by that kind of stuff in politics, be up to people like me to keep ’em interested. We’ll do that. Future of the country, including national security. Make book on it.”

Yes, Rush Limbaugh is proclaiming he’s excited that dirty politics are in the future. Meanwhile, here in Eden Prairie, republiCon Party LEADERSHIP practicing dirty politics has never really stopped. We can look back and see when the local republiCon website was distorting letters to the editor on their website, or when candidate Phil Young tried to claim the local republiCon party wouldn’t be helping him, even when it was. And, of course, there was that dirty rumor they started about me being an alcoholic. When someone has the audacity to point out the emperor (local GOP leadership) has no clothes, those folks get uglier than normal.

Recently, Mayor Phil Young tried to claim that the former city council, comprised of 5 republicans, was “left of center.” Today, the local republiCon website says, and I quote:

“Thank you to Mayor Phil Young and council members Brad Aho and John Duckstad for finally introducing fiscal discipline to an out of control budget process.”

Now, most reasonable people would assume that an all-Republican council that earned an AAA rating from Moody’s, could be reasonably called “fiscally responsible.”

Folks, I have to tell you: the local republiCon party leadership, and its local elected officials, cannot be called “reasonable.” These people are the epitome of intolerance, and the epitome of why GOP now stands for GreedOverPriniciples. Those Republicans that don’t bootlick to their dictates, are called RINO and worse. It’s a mighty small tent these people own, and if you don’t agree with it, you’re not welcome.

But, no worries, for the local republiCon Party Leadership: – Rush Limbaugh is excited, and will help keep it interesting.

(this blog entry originally published Sunday January 6th, 2007 at The Eden Prairie News)

The DFL Veterans Caucus Endorsements

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I’d like to share the commentary of Jim Bootz, concerning the recent Candidate Endorsements by the DFL Veterans Caucus, to fellow members of the Caucus.

From Jim Bootz, Chair of the DFL Veterans Caucus:

***
I had mentioned earlier that I was going to comment on the choices that were made on our three early endorsements, and I think I’ve finally got time to do it.

There probably isn’t much that needs to be said about the endorsements of Sarvi and Madia. I think we all agree that they’re great choices. The first was unanimous and the second was nearly that.

There was a bit less of a consensus on the endorsement of a Senate candidate, though it wasn’t really close. I’d just like to make a few points about the reasoning behind my vote. Any and all of you are welcome to do the same.

As far as the criteria that we use to endorse a candidate on behalf of the Veterans Caucus, probably the most concise way of wording it is to ask just one question: “Who would best serve the interests of veterans, active military, and their families?” That’s the one area that should be of equal importance to all caucus members. As individuals, we have other issues that we feel are important, possibly even more important than veterans issues. But, we shouldn’t be taking those into consideration in the decision to endorse. If we do, we’re not serving the caucus anymore, we’re serving ourselves. Most likely there are some Vets Caucus members who consider themselves pro-choice and some who consider themselves pro-life. But, if we start bringing those biases into the equation, then we’ll be trying to turn the Veterans Caucus into the “Pro-Choice Veterans Caucus” or the “Pro-Life Veterans Caucus”. And, we’re neither.

If anyone has read even a few of the letters to the editor that I’ve managed to get printed in the Star-Tribune, there should be no doubt about where I stand on the Iraq War, and it’s a position that I’ve held from the very start. But, nowhere in the founding or the intent or the mission statement of the DFL Veterans Caucus was there any mention of it being a vehicle for an anti-war message. It’s as simple as this: the Vets Caucus has a pro-veteran agenda, not an anti-war agenda. There are plenty of good pro-veteran and pro-troop arguments to be made against Bush’s war. But, I’d have to ask this about the candidate: Is his stance against the war one of many ways that he supports veterans, or is support for veterans just one of the many facets of his overall anti-war stance? In other words, where is his primary focus?

And, then ask, not only “Where is that focus now?” but “Where has that focus been in the past?” One Senate candidate has been speaking publicly on behalf of veterans and active duty service members for several years. The same candidate has made several trips to visit with the troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kosovo, and made a learning experience out of it. Again, that same candidate has used his books, editorials, speaking engagements, and a nationwide talk radio show to inform the public about inadequate body armor and vehicle armor, new technologies that have made it possible to provide life-saving helmet liners to the troops, and the many ways in which veterans have been getting short-changed on the benefits they were promised as compensation for their service. Only that one candidate created a veterans group in his campaign, inviting the public to its kick-off rally and a commemoration of Veterans Day. The same candidate held veterans’ listening sessions around the state to educate himself and his campaign staff about the issues. That candidate was one of only two who said he will try to get on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee if he’s elected. Nobody is guaranteed their choice of committee assignments, but that is his first choice. And, finally, only that one candidate invited the DFL Veterans Caucus to set up a table at his summer picnic and raise funds for the caucus. With his encouragement and help from campaign volunteers, the caucus left that night with $735 in donations. Any of the candidates could have done that. Only one of them thought to do it.

Veterans are a high priority with Al Franken. They’re not an afterthought. They’re not a group to pander to. I like all four of the Senate candidates, but I don’t see how someone could even begin to compare the other three with Al when it’s a question of who would best serve the interests of veterans, active service members, and their families.

Again, I welcome your comments. I don’t mean for this to be a contest. It’s just my way of explaining my rationale. I want to make sure that, if anyone is feeling that there was something unfair about the process, they at least have the information about Franken that I was looking at when I made my decision.

Thanks,
Jim
***