"A Key Element Of Tostenson's Memo"

That, Ladies and Gentlemen, is the beginning of a line in a June 3rd, 2007 story by Dan Browning and Pat Doyle of the Star Tribune. That story may be a key in explaining why the unDynamic Duo of Ron Carey and Tony Sutton had to amend and re-amend and sometimes even re-amend the re-amended FEC (Federal Election Commission) Reports. Here’s a key excerpts from Dan Browning and Pat Doyle’s June 3rd, 2007 story:

A key element of Tostenson’s memo deals with his accusation that the party appears to have violated federal law by repeatedly delaying the deposit of employee payroll contributions into their retirement accounts. He said the “misappropriation” helped cover party expenses before the money was deposited.

“As reported on our payables at the state executive meetings last summer there was as much as $12,000 not deposited at any one time,” he wrote. “This represented months of paycheck withholdings by the Party which had not been deposited within the 30-day legally required time limit.”

The party offers Simple Individual Retirement Accounts for some employees. Federal law requires that money deducted from employees’ checks for those accounts be deposited as soon as possible, and in no case later than 30 days after the month when it was withheld.

In cases of tardy deposits, employers may be required to make the plan whole by paying back any lost investment earnings. If they had mixed the employees’ retirement money with general operating funds they could be required to pay an excise tax.

Party records show that money was withheld for employee retirement plans from September 2005 through May 2006, but Federal Election Commission (FEC) records reflect no deposits into the accounts during that period. In June 2006, the party made two makeup payments totaling $12,243 into the accounts.

The delay in depositing the money could have benefitted the party by giving it temporary access to the employees’ funds.

Carey didn’t explain why the retirement money wasn’t deposited promptly.

“There seemed to be some gray areas as to what was the requirement,” Carey said. Asked to explain the gray areas, he said, “I really would prefer not to get into the weeds on something like that. (StarTribune.com)

“gray areas”??!? “…get into the weeds…”??!?

Yeah, “right.”

Supposedly, the newly-elected Chairman of the State GOP – Tony Sutton – is holding an overview of 2010 election today at 1:30 at GOP HQ; I’d bet they don’t get “into the weeds” on just how much GOP mismanagement – when Sutton was GOPer Treasurer – is going to figure into 2010.

T Minus 83 – George Bush and Erik Paulsen, Planet Denial Denizens

“We’re never been stay the course, George.” — George W. Bush, attempting to distance himself from what has been his core strategy in Iraq for the last three years, interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, October 22nd, 2006

I picked this Bushism for a very special reason. Just as Boy Blunder tried to distance himself from who he is and what he believes, “right” here in Minnesota’s 3rd Congressional District there’s a Republican candidate for Congress that’s tried to pull the same stuff concerning who he is, what he’s done, and what he believes – Erik Paulsen.

Let’s go back, and look at what part of what I wrote concerning Erik Paulsen’s campaign announcement, in January:

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.(MnBlue)

On that day, January 29th of this year, I asked “Just who does Erik Paulsen think he’s kidding?

Well, who Erik Paulsen didn’t fool, was the Candidate Endorsement Committee at The Star Tribune:

“Paulsen was a fiscal and social conservative in the Legislature, voting for measures that this newspaper opposed. Why he’s casting himself as a moderate in this race is unclear. (emphasis added) His conservative credentials are solid; he should have run on them.”(Star Tribune)

Hmmm….sounds familiar: “We’re never been stay the course” and “I’m a moderate in the mold of Frenzel and Ramstad.”

Simply not credible; simply not believable. Paulsen has run his entire campaign on a house of cards – trying to portray himself as something he clearly is not. It was noted immediately after his campaign announcement, and it was cemented in today’s Star Tribune non-endorsement.

In 83 days, January 20th 2009 will mark The End Of An Error. In one week, Americans go to the polls. Just as George W. Bush’s political career will be over, hopefully career politician Erik Paulsen’s political career will be over, too.

(crossposted at MnBlue)

(originally posted at MnProgressiveProject.com)

Caught Tellin' A Whopper, Paulsen Dances

Any decent PR Flack will tell you that if you have something you want to hide, release it on a Friday. And since Erik “The Hustler” Paulsen wants to hide who he really is, he held a press conference yesterday, on a Friday. And he told a whopper; a whopper that’s been told by other republiCons; and a whopper that’s been thoroughly and completely debunked. Asked to clarify that whopper, by the media, instead of acknowledging a mistake and trying to move on, Paulsen just danced. Mark Brunswick has the story, here, on his blog, in a story entitled ”Katrina oil spills and what the meaning of the word “is” is”.

In a passing reference to offshore drilling, Paulsen said this:

“We have seen even in tragedies like Hurricane Katrina where there have been environmentally sensitive areas that have been protected, where oil was not spilled and some of these catastrophic challenges that faced the United States. These are critical areas that we need to tap additional reserves and sources for our own energy sources here in the United States.”

… and with that Paulsen stepped into a potential political spill of his own, one that seems to have gummed up the works of several other candidates. Presumptive Republican Presidential nominee John McCain spoke out a townhall meeting on July 15, saying Katrina and Hurricane Rita “did not cause any real difficulties.” McCain’s senior policy advisors have said the same thing.

The talking point has been repeated and massaged. It all may come down to the Clintonian question of what the meaning of the word “is” is. But Paulsen is clearly stretching reality if you take away from his statement that no oil was spilled offshore as a result of Katrina or Rita.(StarTribune)

Ladies and Gentlemen, a Star Tribune reporter, any reporter, saying a politician “is clearly stretching reality” is Reporterese for “he flat-out told a whopper.”

And Paulsen telling this particular whopper is an appropriate time to point out Eden Prairie GOPer Mayor Maybe, er, ‘scuse me, “Phil Young”, had a similar problem with what the meaning of “help” is.

Both Paulsen and Young, elected GOPer officials, offer stark reasons why reasonable people no longer can reasonably trust elected Republicans to tell the truth. Both were caught telling whoppers; both refused to ‘fess up and move on.

Mayor Young survives his whopper for now; he’s not up for re-election for another two years and he’s hoping voter’s memories are short. Will Paulsen may survive his latest whopper? He told it on a Friday which PR Flacks would tell you is a good day to hide stuff. Not as good as a Sunday, but still pretty good. And I bring up “Sunday”, because it was on a Sunday, when very little coverage could be expected, that Paulsen announced his campaign for congress, and announced he was moderate candidate, like Frenzel and Ramstad. One thing Paulsen said that is true, is Paulsen promised in this race, he wouldn’t be out-hustled.

Ladies and Gentlemen, like Mayor Maybe in 2006, Erik Paulsen is trying to hustle the electorate. Thirty-four years ago today, Richard “I am not a crook” Nixon resigned, because he didn’t tell the truth. Thirty-four years later, Erik Paulsen has not learned that lesson, and hustles onward, hoping voters won’t notice a whopper told on a Friday.

(cross posted at The Eden Prairie News)

(originally published at MnBlue.com)