6th District Forum

This is a long post...

Today was the 6th CD GOP Candidate Forum that Andy organized. It was by far one of the best events. More welcoming even than a state convention...In fact I'm going to say that this was the best GOP event I have been to. Congratulations Andy.

In attendance was Hammerswing 75 and he recapped nicely who was there.

Other bloggers in attendance were Chief and Guy from Freedom Dogs, the infamous Eva Young, Tony from Always Right..., King Banian the SCSU Scholar who moderated and of course Residual Force's Andy who was the driving force behind the whole event. Thanks Andy. He is also a bigwig at Kennedy v. the Machine. I should ask him about the press secretary!

Notably missing was my co-host from whom I have not heard. Last I heard he was going to attend.

While I sat next to Mayor-elect Dave Kleis and we traded observations throughout (almost all of which we agreed on) I also took notes. Here are the notes I took...and this is by no means close to a transcript of the event. I do not write fast enough for that so I called on an old debate skill (called "flowing") to take only what I subjectively felt to be the important or crux of each answer. All questions and answers are given in the order they occurred, which rotated through the candidates. Quotation marks are my best effort to get verbatim quotes. Parenthesis are paraphrased interpretations. Square brackets are my own side comments, some are things I thought at the time some are from reflection as I re-read these. The candidates (if they are reading these) should take them all as constructive criticism because what you say is almost as important as what the audience thinks you said.

Opening Statements
Krinkie: "reliable consistent conservative"
Esmay: "I see a problem, I wanna bring solutions"; riding coattails of John Kline & Mark Kennedy; "independent of MN political (structure)"; not of the "re-election campaign" mentality; [took the gloves off and hit the other three gov't veterans...a lot more tact than earlier in the campaign!!] [the anti-entrenched candidate candidate]
Bachmann: "awesome" to be here; you "have to make a choice" between 4 great candidates; why I'm better is because I "have represented over 25% of this district already" [that makes one qualified for Congress?]
Knoblach: [Very Dynamic speaker--overshadows the other 3 by far] I have "deep roots" in the 6th; I'm an "electable conservative that gets things done"; 100% pro-life rating; Legislator of the Year for 2003 by MN VFW; 2004 Taxpayer League score of 100% [and about 60% for 2005]

Abide by endorsement
Esmay: "Yes" [that is all he said]
Bachmann: "Don't need my 2 minutes either...Yes..." [it seems she needed her 2 minutes]
Knoblach: "Yes..." (qualified yes...only if everyone keeps their agreement). [how would this work? if he's endorsed and someone else breaks the agreement he is still running, if someone else is endorsed and he con't running then he broke the agreement; if someone else is endorsed & someone else breaks agreement will he make it a 3-way primary? confusing]
Krinkie: "Yes..." supports the delegate process

What to do about Illegal Immigrants
Bachmann: Guest Worker Program is bad..."Guest = Permanent". more restrictions on citizens instead of on the borders. (airport as example) we do have an illegal immigration problem. assimilation is the key
Knoblach: state level issue; enforce laws; use technologies & (follow) minutemen example; does not support amnesty; check criminal records and deport the illegals w/ a record; hard to do anything about the hard-working illegals [gotta do something but nothing we can do? Hedge on answer!!]
Krinkie: we need comprehensive overhaul of INS laws & rules; change in infrastructure & enforcement needed...(using technology); supported having driver's licenses show immigration status [and expiration of visa, huge plus in my book]
Esmay: enforce the laws we have. the (re-election mentality) [of Krinkie, Knoblach and Bachmann] makes their reaction to want more laws. need to enforce the laws we have. congress underfunded immigration programs [long list of EXPENSIVE technologies that he wants used...more spending]; don't need more laws; 1st step is not the borders [big minus], but enforcement

How to keep U.S. from having its own Paris
Knoblach: secure borders; english is our language it should be THE official lang..."within reason" [HEDGE]
Krinkie: assimilation is key; English is the "commonality"; "every state" should make it the official language [Federalism!! BIG PLUS]
Esmay: assimilation [big long anecdote...necessary?]
Bachmann: "france suburbs are rioting because welfare is not good enough"; the liberal mentality run amok; french immigrants are "listening to al-jazeera" whose inciting them to riot; "not all cultures are equal; not all values are equal" [that's a bold statement] "french culture is disappearing because muslims are not assimilating"...not that muslims are bad, just that they are not assimilating and the french culture is disappearing [whoops...not sure that was a smooth recovery]

How do you finish war on terror
Krinkie: Esmay should have been first to answer this. "remain ever vigilant"; create conversations; can't continue letting terrorists infiltrate Saudi Arabia, bosnia [wasn't gop against this], somalia [wasn't gop against this], etc, iraq from iran
Esmay: military is doing their job & we must make the U.S. see it; we are doing what we could have done by taking Hitler out early; the lives lost now save many, many more in the long term. we are a short-term visioned nation and we need to look at the long term [hate how everyone uses hitler's name to stiffle opposing debate]
Bachmann: "we love freedom"; not trying to get a "land-grab" in iraq; we "export freedom"; we can commit long term [premise of question was that we cannot stomach long term commitment to war]; we must commit long term because "jihadists are playing for keeps"
Knoblach: premise of question is wrong...we can commit long term; problem is the leadership [dfl talking point?] & the selling of the war; "many mistakes"; "more than other campaigns"; we need to hear more about the successes; "can't cut & run"; "this is not a vietnam" because the red army is not providing supplies to our enemy here; we must "win the war the right way"

Support Bush's effort to reform Social Security
Esmay: nobody could see what Bush was doing; it was good; i will make sure solutions get put up
Bachmann: [long anecdote] soc sec share could be as high as 25% of income [really did not say "for" or "against" bush's plan, wants to lower taxes, big speech about how bad it is]; JFK understood how bad taxes were
Knoblach: bush grabbed the 3rd rail of politics & lived to tell about it...he should be complimented; we can't cont. $800 billion trade def, health care expesnes, etc, etc, etc, [basically can't continue anything--will you end everything?]; 3 options to save soc.sec. (1) raise taxes (2) cut benefits (3) raise investment returns; only the 3rd option is (feasible or acceptable by populace)
Krinkie: three steps (1) educate americans that soc.sec. is a "pay as you go" (2) age of retirement is 65. why? [wanted to say it needed to be raised but wouldn't] (3) need a defined contribution plan

vote on Northstar Rail being extended from Big Lake to St Cloud
Bachmann: Northstar is a big issue; key is transporation, how to best get people from A to B [she's going to say why roads are better than rail]; vote for cutting the extension because we spend "money hand over fist"; [guess she's not going to articulate why spending on roads is better than on rail]
Knoblach: would not vote for cutting the extension; LRT is not right for everywhere but it is right for Northstar [because it is his locality?]; willing to vote for cutting (the extension) if there is no other place to cut; has cut his own projects before to lower the budget [HEDGED answer]
Krinkie: count on me to stand up against pork barrel spending; vocal critic of LRT & Northstar; "it's the spending stupid" [why are republicans paraphrasing clinton? same reason as democrats copying everything about reagan?]; northstar will have "less than 2000 riders per day" [Mayor-elect Kleis says that number is not accurate]; why support a project that already projects an annual subsidy of $12 MM?; invest in roads
Esmay: support north star up to big lake and will have to wait to see if the extension is necessary; with that sd, changes in funding should not be the responsibility of federal gov't; should be a local issue [point gained for that] not a federal issue; reason it is a federal issue is there is a focus by (career politicians) to concentrate on being re-elected [Kleis & I agreed that this jab at Krinkie, Knoblach & Bachmann was as aggressive as the opening statement but much more tactful]

would you extend Bush's tax cuts
Knoblach: want to move away from income tax and move more to a consumption tax; (wants some kind of income consumption tax) [don't understand that one and need that explained to me]
Krinkie: (1) say "no" to spending issues; gov't has spending problem not a revenue problem (2) hold to pledges from campaign trail (from the taxpayer's league) [first real shot at colleagues]; eliminate death tax; remove savings from taxation
Esmay: "absolutely extend the tax cuts"; % of GDP on mil is 1/2 what it used to be [where the hell is the relevance of this?]; our investments are shifting [thought he was going to bring the military point back home but never did...just a gratuitous place to mention the military]; u.s. companies pay share of income taxes but foreign companies do not, unfair advantage for foreign companies; need to move towards a consumption tax [how about an income consumption tax?]
Bachmann: would extend tax cuts; (long 'i'm a tax lawyer anecdote to say tax code is too big and burdensome)

what 1 question would you ask the gas gouger law seekers
Krinkie: prices in MN are regulated on (1) gas, (2) milk and (3) cigarettes; what do they have in common? they are all sold in convenience stores [joke did not go well at all]; does not support gas gouger law but rather open markets which leads to innovation
Esmay: i would ask them first "do you understand supply & demand"? [decent chuckle from the crowd] if they answered yes i would ask "show evidence" of gouging; if they did then we should take action [more uncomfortable fidgeting from the crowd than any other time in the whole event...I think Esmay picked up on this too]; "but i don't think there is any evidence of gouging"; we should explore anwr drilling and look at the long term; prince island sound was cleaner 3 years after the oil spill than before the exxon valdez crash; must look at long-term, politicians always look at short-term
Bachmann: fix price controls after fixing price controls on concert tickets for springsteen, streisand [long list of uber-liberal performers and liberals in general...had the flow, but went too far with the list]; prices were up and now they're down to $2.00 per gallon, that's not low, but in context that is low [what?]; the economy will take care of itself [as with most people the effort to simplify the economic machinations was painful...wonder what King thought of it]; open up other energy sources (nuclear, etc)
Knoblach: i would ask them 'should we subsidize oil companies during their bad years?"; [the last person on a question should be able to hit home runs like this regularly...awesome debate execution!!]; why are the prices high? regulations

renew no child left behind (NCLB)
Esmay: end it! feds should not be involved in education [i like this answer but there was more fidgeting in the crowd]; should change the curriculum; school board races in st cloud all of the candidates said they were going to address diversity and concentrate on making students feel good...not one of them ever mentioned educating the kids [no surprise, great to hear someone say something...kleis confirmed this concern w/ the school board race]
Bachmann: we have a great education system (anecdote about her education in the MN public schools); end NCLB; problem is that the feds are involved with education; that was the problem with profiles of learning...that the feds made this program (the profiles) [uh, that was a MN creation, wasn't it?] and we (the MN legislature) had to fight to end it; then came the NCLB which was another unfunded mandate. [kleis mentioned that she kept calling Profiles "federal" when it was not--glad it was not my imagination]; solution is local control
Knoblach: we don't have a great education system [knoblach's first real jab, this one was specifically shot at bachmann]; we have a system that is great compared to the rest of the country, but it is not great on its own; we have problem in the education system that needs reform; NCLB "is a new name for an old program"; state level is where education should be responsible, not at the federal level [better delivery but it just has no luster on it like when Esmay said it. one of the few times a better delivered line came off worse than the more poorly articulated lines]; stop the unfunded mandates [i thought this term died 10 years ago] [btw, someone else used this term also I just did not put it in my notes so i cannot beat them up for using it]
Krinkie: ever have your parents say, 'while you are in my house you live by my rules'? that is what the feds say about their money, 'if you take any of our money for education you must follow all of our rules and restrictions on education'; again, if you can't say 'no' to spending (then you are making your bed by taking the money and you must then lie in it by accepting the unfunded mandates) [these dots were not connected very well at the event, but the idea i like alot and would have given bonus points for]; education is not the federal gov't responsibility it is a parental responsibility [i like that concept, how do you make it happen again? i will take whatever solution you come up with on this, i just don't know of any that would work]

you will be faced with situations where you will have to betray interests of your own, what one Republican value will you never betray?
[this was the finale question, and i'm proud to say it was one that i submitted!! even more proud was when kleis, without knowing i submitted this, said a couple of times, "great question"]
Bachmann: commitment to life
Knoblach: "ditto that"; explained his breaking his taxpayer's pledge to maintain his pro-life score
[I knew these 2 would answer that...they pretty much said that when we asked them 'is a fee a tax'. here is where the intolerance of priorities other than pro-life comes out]
Krinkie: i will never betray the value that "noone can own my vote"; cannot be compelled to vote one way or another by anyone but myself; am elected to represent my district in the best way i can, (not the best way others tell me to); i will always vote how i see best regardless of pressure from the party, interest groups, the governor, the president or anyone else; "i will never trade my vote away"
[the best fiscal conservative candidate in the field and the party knows he would be good if selected, but he cannot say that his priority is fiscal responsibility because of the GOP intolerance for any priority above pro-life]
Esmay: i will never betray the "value of sleep" [strong laughter]. (i will never vote in a way that will cause me to lose sleep); [Congratulations Jay Esmay for winning the hard-to-win award for Making Humor Make Your Point! Very good execution!]; something about not liking federal presence [sorry, missed what he said]; i will always be who i am; my duty is to God, country and myself.

closing statement
Knoblach: "electable conservative that gets things done"
Bachmann: great field of guys and "1 girl in a pink coat" [kleis & i laughed...that is one way to set yourself aside from the field]; great country of 200+ years, great record on freedom, but we won't have freedom if we continue to tax as we currently are, won't have freedom if we lose our culture, (a few others) [again with a list that outlasts the effect of the list. also seemed like she was trying to work into a grand crescendo but her voice just does not allow for it to work]; in washington i will "have a titanium spine" to carry out the conservative agenda [A for effort on trying to capitalize on the "spineless politician" complaint...just did not come off well for some reason]
Esmay: my mission is [subtle military jab?] proving that i am (1) a candidate that will abide by conservative values and (2) the candidate that can win in november [big claime...that the others cannot win. i think this race is the GOP's to lose almost regardless of candidate]; this state likes candidates with non-political experience, kline, kennedy, and even wellstone [more fidgeting] [stop trying to ride the coattails of successful politicians who had 'other experience'. this really comes off as picking and choosing which career politician you label as careerists and also offers the impression that you are not confident in running on your own merit]
Krinkie: all of us want to do a lot of great things but noone has mentioned the most important thing. none of it is possible unless we win. we must win next november; "i can win"; need a positive vision, "we have lost the positive vision..." [uh, not certain that saying 'we lost the positivity and i can bring it back' exactly shows positivity. just say 'i want to bring positivity'.]

Andy thanked everyone. The best moment may have been when he was done and noone left their seats he said to make us understand it was over, "Break."

********** UPDATE **********
Welcome to the readers of KvM.

And to anyone that has clarifications on some of my notes please do not hesitate to jot them down here. One thing that will be coming (if time allows this week) is a scorecard from 2 perspectives. One perspective will be based on my college debate experience and the other from the delegate perspective. Like I said, if time allows...we are trying to sell our house.

********** UPDATE **********
Welcome also to the readers of The First Ring