Super Bowl

Ah, the Super Bowl is upon us finally. To talk about the Super Bowl on our show we will have Patrick Reusse, the best sports columnist in the state! He will be talking from his hotel in Detroit just before he goes to cover the big game.

Listen for some of sports best insights!

My prediction? That will come later this week.

Ethical decision making means blame goes elsewhere

(H/T: MDE)
Ethical decision making. That is what Coleen Rowley claims. Yesterday her website put up a doctored picture that gave the appearance of Rep. John Kline wearing a Nazi uniform.

Well, it seems that she has offered an apology and blamed it all on a volunteer.

Rowley had the photo removed from her website and took steps to apologize personally. She said an unpaid volunteer prepared the blog, and she approved it without making the Nazi connection.

Rather, she said she focused instead on the message that Kline, a retired Marine Corps colonel, was "incompetent" like Klink, a Nazi colonel easily fooled by his American prisoners in the TV series "Hogan's Heroes."

Just want you to understand what "ethical decision making" is to Rowley. She blames the picture depicting Kline as a Nazi on someone else even though she approved it. She should be given a pass because she was focused on the message...that Kline is like a Nazi and against fighting the KKK.

Yep, she has lost her mind...and officially fits in with the rest of the looney wing of the Democrat party. I repeat what I said yesterday about Rowley's "ethical decision making":

I am betting this is what you can expect to see from her campaign throughout the campaign AND after the election. I am putting a bet down that after her loss she will scream about voter fraud.
...
With every story and action that comes from the Rowley camp her credibility as anything less than a partisan hack...and an unethical one at that.

If this is her shining example of "ethical decision making" that she lives by it makes you wonder about everything that she said during her career. Maybe we should look with MUCH more skepticism at everything she said in her whistleblower letters and her claims to credibility on intelligence matters. We should realize her thought process has less to do with Ethical Decision Making like she claims and more to do with partisanship, pure and simple. In fact, I am beginning to think her whistleblower letter was 100% about attention grabbing in the twilight of her career.

This whole incident has me utterly disgusted and for it I am taking points away on the scoreboard (- 5).

Shut up about these reporters

Shut up already about Woodruff and Vogt.

"World News Tonight" anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt left Germany Tuesday on a military plane bound for the United States, where they will receive further treatment for their injuries from a bomb blast in Iraq.

I think what really bothers me about this story is the amount of attention these two are getting.

This duo should get LESS attention than the average military member that is injured. Our military told these idiots they would be in danger. Ignoring the advice of the American military Woodruff and Vogt ventured out to get their story and got hurt in the process. They knew the risks, accepted the risks and went out into the risks. They deserve nothing from the country.

They are getting all of this attention for one reason. The rest of the media feel the sudden smack of reality...and feel that because it is a story to them it is actually a story. They are wrong, but it goes to show you how they have no perspective on what news actually is...and their own feelings get in the way of their reporting.

This "story" is not a story. So, please, shut up about these two!

Alito confirmed

Having absolutely no honest basis beyond ideology, 41 Democrats voted against Judge Alito's confirmation. The up or down vote, until recently, has been to indicate a confidence in competence. There was ZERO foundation to question Alito's competence, yet the divisive and partisan Democrats found it necessary to turn the vote into one of fabricated issues.

Judge S. Alito was confirmed today by a vote of 58-42. Congratulations. You deserve it after the slanderous treatment you received from the Democrats.

Makes me wish Ginsburg had to be reconfirmed.

I guess it all comes down to respect for the system. Clinton won the election and appointed Ginsburg. The Republicans respected the Constitutional duty of making sure she was qualified. Now the roles are reversed and we see that the Democrats are disrespectful of their Constitutional duty AND nothing more than hypocrites in philosophy.

I expect that from them.

Bengals rookie shows sports building character

It seems that Cincinnati Bengals rookie WR is getting into trouble...again.

Cincinnati Bengals receiver Chris Henry was arrested on gun charges in a weekend street altercation, authorities said.

Henry pulled a 9 mm pistol on a group of revelers early Saturday, according to a police report.

An officer directing traffic aimed his gun at the 22-year-old Henry and ordered him to drop the pistol, the report states.

Henry froze, then moved toward a limo in the street and threw the gun inside the car, the report says. The officer pulled Henry away from the limo and pushed him to the ground, according to the report.

Tsk, tsk, what a pity.

Colleen Rowley's example of ethical decision making

(H/T: MDE)

At the top of Coleen Rowley's website the phrase "Ethical Decision Making".

Somehow in that ethical decision making process of Rowley's is the initiating of a smear campaign (I dare her to claim a clean campaign!). Not just any smear campaign. But one where her website puts up a doctored picture of her opponent, John Kline, dressed in a Nazi uniform.

Some ethical decision making. I am betting this is what you can expect to see from her campaign throughout the campaign AND after the election. I am putting a bet down that after her loss she will scream about voter fraud.

With every story and action that comes from the Rowley camp her credibility as anything less than a partisan hack...and an unethical one at that.

What a horrible fall from grace.

********** UPDATE **********
Welcome to the readers of Psycmeistr

www.racetotheright.com

The show's website is back up and has been updated. Check it out. We have some exciting things coming up.

Additionally our two favorite interviews are available to listen to.

Check it out...www.racetotheright.com

Coretta Scott King

Coretta Scott King passed today.

Mrs. King died in the late evening of January 30, 2006 at a rehabilitation center in Rosarito Beach, Mexico, where she was undergoing holistic therapy for her stroke and advanced stage ovarian cancer. The King family maintains that King died on the night of January 30, 2006, the very same day Mahatma Gandhi died. The main cause of death is believed to be respiratory failure.

Lobbyists, money, politics and the solution

I have been hesitant to post anything on the whole Abramoff scandal. Why? Because there is too much that still needs to be discovered and, honestly, the stupid ideas on how to fix this whole debacles will be the only ones to be heard.

How do you fix the system? Well, I look back to a general philosophy of the Founding Federalists. They understood what was in human nature and created ways to use human nature rather than fighting that nature.

Accept realities. Most politicians are very crooked. All of them speak out of both sides of their mouth (with the very rare exception). Money is speech. Money is to politics what gasoline is to NASCAR. If money is made difficult to reach legally than polticians/lobbyists will find grey areas in the laws or, as my co-host mentioned in defending DeLay, they will use "legal loopholes".

So stop fighting these truths. Open up the spicket. Money will always find its way into politics so let it. Remove the limits on contributions and there will be no incentive to hide the money. Remove the restrictions on who can give to candidates and there will be no incentive to launder money.

The only catch: reporting must be immediate and available via the web.

Face it. The only two ways to keep financial scandals out of politics as realistically as possible are to ban all money or allow it all. In order to ban it all you have to get around the fact that money actually does equal speech and not just in political races. Additionally you have to make every aspect of a campaign free. Lawn signs, brochure printing, sticker printing, phone banking expenses, polling, staff would have to be subsidized, travel, television ads, radio ads, newspaper ads, billboards, postage...you get the idea. I am very much against this.

The other option is to allow it all in. Doing so lets us see where everyone is. A lobbyist representing the Widget industry is pouring $5 billion a day to the Something Party? Well, you know where the Something Party's interests are. Regardless of how you look at a candidate, as being bought by donors or by being funded by people who share beliefs, this system will tell you what they believe (or are being paid to believe). It is the most open system possible.

Oh, yes, I hear the peanut gallery already. "The poor would have no place in the system then." That is fiction. The "special interest" groups represent every segment of our population in almost every permeation possible. Everyone has a voice. Look at labor unions or the AARP for example. Even freaks have a lobby (called ACORN). Even race baiters have a lobby (Rainbow Coalition).

The other fiction that I know will surface is the idea that elections will be bought. Nope. Not true. Just like the gasoline in NASCAR, you MUST have it but it does not guarantee victory. Better gas helps, more gas is good but the race still depends on the driver. Same thing with elections. The message and the candidate still have to run their race.

The solution to corruption in politics is to make the money situation as open as possible. The only way to do that is to end the limits and end the restrictions.

Kiffmeyer's Platform (Sec of State)

Per a very legitimate request from Marty to evaluate Mary Kiffmeyer's platform I am doing so now. Something that should be kept in mind is that all of the current office holder's will be evaluated for what they actually do in office a little more weighted than what they say they are about.

That said, let's look at Kiffmeyer's platform.

Guiding principles: Seems more like a mission statement to me than a platform. These are truisms...in the same sense that every candidate runs as being "against crime". Find me a legitimate candidate that runs against Access, Accuracy, Privacy and Integrity in the Election system and I will then give credit for them here. Until then...no credit.

How to enhance participation: I see nothing here that gives an actual positioin aside from moving the primaries. To this I ask "Why?" Can't give points for this and I can't take points away for this position. Something that stands out to me is the phrase "chief election official" which brings me right back to my biggest complaint against her actual performance. That said, there is nothing in the phrase itself that is a position. Again, as with other candidates previously evaluated, there is a growing number of empty phrases like, "innovative outreach efforts" and "chief cheerleader for liberty and freedom." I would like to see an actual position. WHAT types of innovation? Finally, did I miss the online voters guides? To me it sounds like the awesome system they have in California where they send a booklet (if requested) of each race and bios of each candidate. For issues they have a statement for both the pro and con. Is this what Kiffmeyer is talking about? I think so and since I have not heard of it existing, and since there is nothing preventing such a position from actually being carried out in Kiffmeyer's time in office I have to actually deduct points for failing to follow through on this (- 3). If someone can point me to where these actually exist OR correct the record I will correct this deduction.

How to reach younger citizens: This sections tells what HAS been done (appointing two groups for outreach). I would probably award more points for this EXCEPT for two things. It sounds more like these blue ribbon task force type of deals...what is their budget? Also, what are you GOING to do is not addressed at all. Therefore the award is minimized (+ 1). Something else in here that I am highly against: "voting instructions in multiple languages" (- 3). This is America, a melting pot and one should be expected required to understand English.

What changes would you make: Here is the mention of creating a group for outreach (you mean more?). I'm very tempted to take points away for this extra increase of bureaucracy but will give her the benefit of the doubt...that her website is just horribly written. Again with the online voter guides...but I will not deduct for the same thing twice. Again with the primary change to August idea. These justifications are kind of poor: 1) give the voters more time to evaluate the candidates. Somehow 2 months is not enough, but magically 3 months will be? Why not make the primaries in May or June instead? 2) Give the SoS and officials more time to conduct an orderly process. Two months is not enough time? I think I am now officially against this idea as presented, but I will not deduct points for it here.

Driver's License Requirement. Finally...a straight answer. And a good one. YES it should be required. Now, I have not heard a full court press from her office to make this happen. A few token speeches here and there, maybe, but nothing substantial. The answer itself gets points (+ 2) and would have gotten more if she had done something to get this done during her 2 terms.

Political party balance for election judges: Good answer and there is nothing to suggest in her performance that this is simply campaign rhetoric (+ 2).

MN have provision to guard against another Florida: There is nothing here that I believe can be credited to Kiffmeyer. A Federal law and her being required to carry out that law does not garner credit for a position. She can do her job, at least in this aspect.

The next several "questions" are more of her promoting that she can follow her job requirements. I see no reason to give bonuses or take points away. Providing access is expected.

The next question of consequence is about Voting by Mail. I think the requirements for Absentee voting are WAAAYYYY too loose, in that you simply have to walk in and vote. There is no secret when Election Day is and as such a RESPONSIBLE voter will make every effort to do so. There are valid exceptions that need to be made and I expect that, but for the able bodied person not confined to a hospital or their bed I see very little excuse. The laws even require employers to allow people to take of so that they can vote. Very little reason, if any, for the current system. Kiffmeyer lauds the current system and for this I must disagree (- 2).

BUSINESS
Streamlining and operations: Almost had me on this. All of the platitudes here about customer service for businesses fall upon deaf ears after Kiffmeyer's juvenile behavior during the Ventura administration. Remember, to protest how and how much the funding was for her office she closed down her office hours by half. Hardly a "customer oriented" move. Her performance speaks louder than her words here. I refuse to add points for anything she says about customer service as it is proven that politics and partisanship rank higher. As I have previously deducted points for this I will not do so here. She also goes on to say that they collect more fees than their operating budget uses and that the surplus goes to the legislature. She wants her office to keep the fees instead (- 2). Yikes...how about a little small government platform from a Republican. The better position would be to advocate the cutting of those fees.

Position on unfunded mandates: Against them. That would have gotten points except that her answer was not 'against the mandates' but 'against UNFUNDED mandates'. Where is the smaller government advocate (- 1)?

Restriats on what the media may publish: What the hell is this? You mean someone was advocating that the media could not publish election results as they were being reported? Show me that and I will give points here. This is also an important position of her platform because as I have mentioned before she does not produce out-state results in off-year elections. So of course she would like the media to report results...who else would? The candidate I support MUST be responsible for ALL election reporting, even if they are not required to provide the service. No points here for this position.

Corporate responsibility: A lot of vague positions here but the one that I don't see would have actually gained points: removal of dividend taxes. That would give an incentive to investors to buy stocks that pay dividends which in turn would mean that compaines actually would have to pay them out. You cannot do what Enron was doing (or what their seperate auditing companies said nothing about) if you are also paying out dividends. Corporate fraud is tied in large part to fabricated profits, dividends are paid from actual profits. You cannot have both. Anyway, I see nothing in Kiffmeyer's position that is tangible or realistic. No points.

OK, so, at the end of her platform I see a grand total of: - 6 bringing her grand total to - 26.

Dayton may be on show, Alito, Unitary Executive

We have invited Sen Dayton on to our show. His office said "they will try" and give us about 5-7 minutes.

We already know he is going to vote against Alito and asking him about that may give us little time to hear anything but talking points. But what would be more fascinating is asking him if the Republicans were wrong for confirming overwhelmingly Ruth Bader Ginsburg? How does he feel to be echoing talking points from Sen Durbin (IL) about Alito's threat to stare decisis (code word for the Democrats for Roe v Wade) when Durbin has already made it clear that there is not a Constitutional guarantee for abortion?

Though it is now a semi-dated list Real Clear Politics has a great breakdown of which Judiciary Committee Democrats can hold up to the standards that they are placing on Alito. The hypocrisy in the matter is staggering.

One of the complaints against Alito is that he supports a Unitary Executive which would lead to, according to Nazism's return. Those people actually have it wrong (big surprise). A Unitary Executive is not about making Congress into an advisory role. It is about an executive "in which all executive authority is centralized in the President.

What is "Unitary Executive"? Good question...and one the Democrats will not give an honest answer, if any answer, to.

There are three aspects of Unitary Executive Theory. (1) The president’s power to appoint and remove subordinate policy-making officials at will, (2) the president’s power to direct the manner in which subordinate officials exercise discretionary executive power, and (3) the president’s power to veto or nullify such officials’ exercises of discretionary executive power.

The third item is where the controversy sits. But if you think about it there should be very little controversy. It is basically saying that the President determines how the laws he must uphold are interpreted by the executive. After all, the person who executes the laws must have an interpretation and that interpretation, by virtue of the separation of powers, must be the executive's interpretation and NOT Congress'.

Alito was instrumental in the Reagan years in expanding this portion of the Unitary Executive. How? By expanding the use of presidential statements upon signing legislation. The logic is actually quite sound. The Constitution requires laws to be approved by Congress and the President. The Congressional Record is used in Courts (improperly, imho, but that is another topic) as proof of what Congress' interpretation of a law was. There was little that was offered to provide evidence of what the President's interpretation at the time of signing was. This was kind of lopsided. Presidential statements helped to provide that balance.

In that, it gave the Executive more power to enforce ITS interpretation.

Quite frankly, this is good. If Congress does not like this occurring they have two options. Get the law into court so that the Judiciary decides which interpretation is correct (not by creating a new law, please). The other option is pro-active...make better laws.

I wonder if Sen Dayton will use the phrase "Unitary Executive" and I bet he will end the call as soon as the false rhetoric that will come from his mouth gets corrected.

********** UPDATE **********
Welcome to the readers of Digital War Fighter. I noticed that DWF did not understand what I originally posted so I submitted a comment there to re-explain it. Here is that response:

"

I think you’re missing the point of the Unitary Executive that I was addressing. Two bodies sign off on a bill for it to become law. In the courts they (improperly) look at they do not look at the law by itself when making decisions. They look also to the Congressional Record to understand what Congress’ interpretation was. The same should be true of the Executive…what was that interpretation at the time of signing.

Additionally, do you seriously contend that the FBI should run to Congress to find out how to interpret new laws? Or that the IRS consult the Senate to understand new codes? Nope. They interpret those on their own and if there is disagreement it gets decided by the courts.

What you seem to imply is that the EPA should run to Congress to ask how a law is interpreted…which is, the way I see it, a violation of the seperation of powers."

NoIndoctrination.org

A great website, NoIndoctrination.org collects examples of classroom bias. What makes this site better is the process before a submission goes online. They do not let vague assertions go without challenge. They want details. They also do research and try to hunt down the professor in question to get their side. I doubt many would even want to "legitmize" the charges by responding, but that is through their own arrogance. What gives No Indoctrination more credibility is the fact that they seek out rebuttals.

My first submission is now online. I know you people who attended the U of MN have many stories to share...so do it.

As I was going through my transcript to find out what the class number was for the one above I had a flood of memories about many of my other classes. Time permitting I will submit those as well.

And I encourage you to do the same.

You can hear me on Glenn Beck

Yeah, it is just as a caller, but you can hear me on Glenn Beck's 1st hour today. Since KTLK has 2 of Glenn's 3 hours on a delay you can listen. The last call of the 1st hour.

Nothing spectacular this time, but hey, I'm there!

Listen for Anthony at the end of the first hour (at about 1:50 on KTLK, I think).

Iran is a danger

Why is the War on Terror so crucial? Because the fanatics in the Middle East want Israel destroyed and it is well understood that the road to that goal stops first at the defeat of America.

Now Iran wants a conference to examine the "evidence" of the Holocaust.

The planned conference, which has drawn condemnation from Western leaders, is yet another step in hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's public campaign against Israel.

"For over half a century, those who seek to prove the Holocaust have used every podium to defend their position. Now they should listen to others," Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, was quoted as saying Tuesday by the official Islamic Republic News Agency.

Ahmadinejad already had called the Nazis' World War II slaughter of 6 million European Jews a "myth" and said the Jewish state should be "wiped off the map."

Dan Gillerman, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, said the planned conference was "proof of what a global threat Iran really is."

Why does this show what a world threat Iran is? Because after claiming that there is no Holocaust and the idea that Israel needs to be wiped off of the face of the Earth shows the absolute hatred for Israel. Should that kind of mentality have nuclear anything?

I think not. It is time to take them out.

Fallacy of War Protests

Vindication is mine.

I think I have to disagree a bit with Ben at Hammerswing. He seems to have the take that Joel Stein is patriotism of Against the War people. That is not what he is saying. He is saying the same thing that I have been saying for nearly 3 years...and what the Left has been saying I'm wrong about.

I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.

I'm sure I'd like the troops. They seem gutsy, young and up for anything. If you're wandering into a recruiter's office and signing up for eight years of unknown danger, I want to hang with you in Vegas.

And I've got no problem with other people — the ones who were for the Iraq war — supporting the troops. If you think invading Iraq was a good idea, then by all means, support away. Load up on those patriotic magnets and bracelets and other trinkets the Chinese are making money off of.

But I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.

Exactly. It is not only a wussy position, it is not honestly possible.

The ONLY reason anti-Iraq war people claim to be supporting the war is as Stein says...

The real purpose of those ribbons is to ease some of the guilt we feel for voting to send them to war and then making absolutely no sacrifices other than enduring two Wolf Blitzer shows a day. Though there should be a ribbon for that.

I understand the guilt. We know we're sending recruits to do our dirty work, and we want to seem grateful.

See, the War and the troops in the War are a package...all or nothing.

And I am vindicated by a flaming liberal. The end of the world MUST be near.

Mary Kiffmeyer (Secretary of State)

By oversight on my part I had established a score on the Candidate Scoreboard without explaining it. I am going to fix that problem right now.

The current Secretary of State, assuming she runs for the office again, is not getting my support or my vote. That includes at the conventions. The reasons for this are plenty. Probably the biggest and most recent is the fact that her office does not see fit to report odd-year election results outside of the metro area. True, she is not required. However it shows an absolute ignorance towards public service to the state within her role. (- 4).

Next, remember the first budget year of her office? Jesse and the Legislature cut hers AND everyone else's budget. What did she do? She cut her office hours claiming that she could only maintain half the business hours. By doing that only temporarily is evidence that it was 100% political posturing and 0% regard for her actual duties. (- 2)

Additionally the arguement that budget cuts reduce necessarily her ability to run the office show two things. One: a big government mentality in that cuts are not allowable...they are only good when someone else is getting cut. So I guess it is the big-government (- 3) AND partisan hypocrisy mentality (- 3). Two: she is an ineffective administrator (- 3). I cannot support her for ANY executive position ever.

Finally I have a radio show. On four occassions we have invited her on for an interview, three of them within a month or two of an election. On four occassions we had confirmation either the day before or two days before. On three occassions she was a no-show (- 3 one for each no show). When I finally commented on this blog about it her family (some through anonymous comments, traced by IP though, thank you) gave every excuse on why it was OUR fault. Hey, if her office does not know her schedule enough then she has an huge problem running her office (already penalized above). Take some responsibility for a change (- 2). Can someone point to something that her office took responsibility for without trying to justify it? Whoops, we messed up kind of thing.

For these reasons I started her out at - 10 and any opponent starts with a + 5. After actually doing this post I decided that her penalty is not hard enough in the score. All opponents will continue to get the starting bonus, but her new score will be

So, instead of starting her out at - 10 I think she should be started out at - 20.

Count on it, her nomination at the convention will not be unanimous.

Conservatives take lead in Canada

Canada has replaced the liberals with conservatives.

Canadians installed a Conservative government in office for the first time in 12 years but with a limited mandate, signaling voters' desire for change at a measured pace.

Baby steps.

Monday's election gave the Conservatives 124 seats, below the 155 needed to form a majority. The ruling Liberals won 103 seats while the left-leaning New Democratic Party won 29 seats. The Bloc Quebecois, which campaigns only in the French-speaking province of Quebec, won 51 seats.
...
Opinion polls had pointed to a Conservative minority. But the number of Conservative seats was somewhat below forecasts, indicating an unstable government unlikely to last for long.

Minority governments in Canada rarely last longer than 18 months. The outgoing minority Liberal government stayed in power for 17 months before it was defeated in November 2005 over a kickback scandal.

How bad have the liberals been screwing up in Canada?

The defeat was a humiliating blow for outgoing Prime Minister Paul Martin, who inherited a large majority when he took over in December 2003, only to see support fade amid scandals.

He has said he will not lead the Liberals into the next election.

The Liberals, long viewed as Canada's natural governing party, slumped in the polls after police said in late December they were investigating whether the finance minister's office had leaked information about proposed tax changes.

"Canadians voted for hope over fear and accountability over corruption," senior Conservative Jason Kenney said.

The Conservatives won 36.3 percent of the popular vote and the Liberals won 30.2 percent, their second-worst showing since Canada gained independence in 1867.

I think the same is happening here, though at least in Canada they lose with grace. The same cannot be said of the liberals here.

Archive overhaul

While the blog itself is working you may find some of the pictures link to non-existant pages. This is temporary as I am moving my archive pages to a different blog so it does not clutter this blog. Confused? Don't worry. All you need to know is that the pictures should be working again by the end of the week.

********** UPDATE **********
All of the pictures in the margins should work now. Pictures in messages will be fixed over the coming several days.

Check THIS posting for updates on the project.

Thanks for your patience.

Ford cutting jobs

Those of us who live in or around the Twin Cities have heard non-stop about Ford's pending announcement listing which plants will be closing. St Paul is expected to be one of the plants...and why wouldn't St Paul be closed.

We have just had a St Paul mayor's election where the business friendly candidate lost to a business hostile candidate.

We have a "conservative" Governor giving strong indications that fiscal responsibility are pipe dreams this year. Actually, we have a Governor whose bonding bill proposal shows us that there is little fiscal awareness in the coming years.

Without fiscal responsibility there will be a need to extract more money from the taxpayers (businesses included) to make the government ends meet. How onerous is it getting? From personal experience my wife and I are now calculating next year's tax bill to see if we want to take certain promotions which will put us into the next tax bracket. Our net could potentially be lower (because of the progressivity of the tax codes) and the fact that our state is looking at spending problems continuing does not give us hope. We are looking for positions out of state as options.

Without getting into a big discussion about the stupid idea of progressive tax rates or the broken mentality of tax hikes to increase state revenues I will say that tax hikes decrease revenues.

So with all that is going on in the state why would Ford keep a plant open in a state that is moving towards a hostile business atmosphere? In other words, why should Ford keep the St Paul plant open?

You lovers of government spending made this situation...accept the responsibility of it. Take ownership of the results of your ideas.

********** UPDATE **********
St Paul was not named to be closed, but let that scare be a wake-up call to the government spenders!!

Canadian Control of Parliament

Today the elections in Canada are going on. The Liberal party is probably sweating bullets because the polls are showing that they are going to lose control of Parliament. The latest SES poll (covering 1/20-1/22) indicates the Tories are leading 36%-30%.

Now TradeSports' accuracy from the 2004 U.S. election is on the line...they have contracts based on the elections today. What is TradeSports saying?

Tories have 93.3% chance of winning the Parliament.

We will see.

Christian Sande (Secretary of State)

Christian Sande is running as DFL candidate for the Secretary of State. He gets a head start simply for being an opponent of Mary Kiffmeyer. But now let's score him through his website.

Sadly his website has NO insight into his positions on anything much less positions as a Secretary of State candidate. I find this a troubling pattern from the DFL candidates. As I said before, of all of the positions on the ballot the one that should be most concerned about an informed voting population is the Secretary of State. This lack of position would not be as heavily downgraded in other races. For this one it is marked down heavily (- 5).

With no stated platform we can only judge him on those he surrounds himself with. This is also very empty aside from the quotes/support from people. He is an environmentalist which has become the nice way of saying tree-hugger (- 3). He is a lawyer that has sued investment funds and Minnesota businesses. Hardly the right thing for "past experience" when running for the Secretary of State's office (- 5).

Names that Christian drops on his website that warrant scoreboard adjustments are Wendy Wilde (- 1), Vance Opperman (- 2), Bruce Vento (- 1) and David Lillehaug (- 1). I hit the reference to Vance double since it was in bold face.

Again, because there is no platform on issues we are left to simply analyze his associations with people and with phrases he deems important. One of those is "dealt with Republican challengers sent to indimidate Minnesota voter." This shows how incredibly incapable Christian is to hold an office that is should be as non-partisan as possible. For all of the criticism (some legitimate) that Kiffmeyer gets for being partisan I find it incredible that both of the DFL candidates have indications that they will be just as "dangerous" as the DFL claims Kiffmeyer is. Based on the standard that the Left is holding Kiffmeyer to I will apply heavier penalties for these indicators from DFL candidates. Therefore this phrase from a DFL gets heavy penalties (- 5).

Since that is about all that is available on Sande's website I can give no meaningful analysis.

I have a total adjustment of -23 to the +5 headstart giving Sande a -18.

Mark Ritchie (Secretary of State)

Mark Ritchie is running as DFL candidate for the Secretary of State. He gets a head start simply for being an opponent of Mary Kiffmeyer. But now let's score him through his website.

Sadly his website has very little insight into his positions on anything much less positions as a Secretary of State candidate. I find this troubling. Of all of the positions on the ballot the one that should be most concerned about an informed voting population is the Secretary of State. This lack of position would not be as heavily downgraded in other races. For this one it is marked down heavily (- 5).

One thing that is mentioned in the personal section of the biography is the fact that his daughter was killed by a drunk driver. I do not mean to sound cold, but of what relevance is this to the Secretary of State race or the campaign? I hope this is the only mention of this as I would find this to be a very inappropriate exploitation of his own tragedy, an act which I have very little patience for (- 2).

With no stated platform we can only judge him on those he surrounds himself with. He quotes Paul Wellstone (- 2), in fact, putting Wellstone in a positive light gives us quite a bit to speculate about his beliefs. He also won the 2004 Progressive Activist of the Year Award (- 3). I think we are getting a clearer picture of this guy WITHOUT him giving the public his positions.

His endorsements are something to be afraid of as well. First of all I thought the DFL hated PACs, special interests and organized groups to give money to candidates. An obvious hypocrisy from the DFL since they say nothing about union money in DFL campaigns and only whine while PACs support GOP candidates. Nonetheless I think the it should be pointed out that one of his endorsements comes from a PAC (- 2) and the PAC is the extremist group ACORN (- 6). ACORN revolts me and the very fact that Ritchie is endorsed ALREADY by them gives me reason to penalize him heavily.

Next is the growing list ALREADY of union endorsements. Yes 3 of them are steelworkers, but he has 4 union endorsements...and NONE from worthy business groups. This troubles me especially since the Secretary of State is the ONE position that should be more pro-business than anti-business or anti-free marketplace (which is what a pro-union stance is lately) and should be more pro-business than any other elected office in the state. For this obvious contradiction I deduct heavily again (- 6).

I have a feeling that one reason there is no list of positions from Ritchie is because he wants to hide how partisan he actually is by his own nature and thus how partisan the office would be if he won. Perhaps his positions are not on his campaign website because he knows he cannot win for who he is. I do not know, but I have a feeling that his score will take a bigger nosedive IF he ever puts out a platform.

At this point I calcualte a -26 from the five point advantage that he started with for a current score of -21.

********** UPDATE **********
After reviewing a comment about the mention of Ritchie's daughter I found myself to be too harsh. Ritchie did only mention his daughter and what happened to her...no different than saying "she graduated from this college".

The points have been restored.

Bruce Kennedy (Secretary of State)

During today's show we received a phone call from Bruce. Come to find out that he is a candidate for Secretary of State but I did not have him on the scoreboard. So he e-mailed his information to me and I have put him on the scoreboard. Now Mary Kiffmeyer is at a -10 and her opponents start with an advantage simply for running against her. They all have a + 5. Bruce also gets this anti-incubent advantage.

Bruce & I had a pretty good conversation on the air about raked ballots. Basically you rank all of the candidates in the order of your preference. If no candidate wins a majority then the bottom candidate is dropped and the ballots recalculated. At the time of the call I was pretty undecided about the issue. By the end of the conversation I was convinced...this is a bad idea. At some point in the near future I hope to do a post about this topic. For the purpose of this post I will say that Bruce maintained his composure very well and I love his position that only the people who actually vote deserve to control the process. And, in my words, the others deserve to be controlled by those who vote. This idea is a very healthy idea in a republic. It is the idea that is also very crucial in understanding the truth about same-day registration...that it is horribly damaging to this society. For this I give Bruce a few points. (+ 3)

The fact that Bruce supports so strongly this ranked ballot idea forces me to deduct points (- 2).

I then decided to review his website (something I have not done for the other candidates yet).

I love his voter's pledge. There are 7 bullets all of which I think are incredibly healthy in their premises (+ 7)

I disagree with the major concepts in the voter's rights. I do not like the ranked ballot (for which I have already deducted) and I do not like what seems to be a cousin of proportional elections (- 2).

I would have liked to see more biographical and background about Bruce on his website. Some other things I would like to find out from the Secretary of State candidate are his position (in his words) on same-day registration, campaign finance laws, issues with students being able to vote at school when their permanent address is elsewhere and should the SoS be the central information provider of election results for ALL elections within the state?

I do not detect a philosophical bias in the website and that is refreshing.

Please add my results to check my math, but I come up with a total adjustment of +6 to be added to the +5 starting point for all of Kiffmeyer's opponents.

Higher Ed failing highly

Are you a college grad? Great. The fact that you read THIS blog means you have to have some type of cognitive ability. The fact that you read THIS blog means your comprehension must be higher than the average bear to make up for my lower than the average bear writing. Can you compare the viewpoints discussed here with those of another blog? MY readers are capable of that.

Now, pat yourself on the back because the very fact that you can read commentary and compare it to othes puts you above 87% of all adults in this country. Scary. More frieghtening is the fact that this puts you above 62% of graduates of 4-year higher education institutions.

No wonder so many people at the campus seem to be actual idiots. No wonder the campus newspaper's editorials are empty of logic and the letters responding to those appear to not understand the points made by the editorialists.

A new study released from the Pew Charitable Trusts has this and many more alarming results.

Why is this happening? Because the teacher in K-12 are not focusing on the fundamentals, are not required to be proficient in the field they teach and are given tenure with wreckless abandon. This is also happening in higher ed because (as cliche as this sounds) the faculty do not teach HOW to think. Instead they tell students what to think and what to say. This is very evident when you try to talk to many of these sheep. They will tell you an opinion but when asked to explain the premises or foundations of those opinion they get stuck. The most "informed" of these students speak in talking point fashion. They give one sentence conclusion without any idea how they arrived at their conclusions or how their various conclusions apply to each other.

The sinister side of this problem is that the faculty are perfectly content with this situation. They have little drones voting the way the faculty dictate while the drones recite enough bumper sticker knowledge to appear as knowledgeable. Many of the faculty cannot handle a serious questioning of their ideals. I know this from first hand experience in dozens of classes. In fact, some of the more respected professors are so incapable of actually defending the positions spewed in their classes that they prevent any discussions from occurring. Certainly they allow the people who parrot their beliefs to speak, but they do not typically allow oppossing views to be discussed by those who believe the opposition. Instead they paraphrase and distort.

The inability of the teacher to provide opportunity to practice analytical thought prevents the students from learning how to analyze.

The answer is to overhaul the k-12 system, enforce an actual curriculum, allow competition between private and public schools and fire the teachers who are not performing or are unable to pass proficiency tests. A very high percentage of smart kids going to college will demand intellectual growth in college rather than the present dish of instructor reproduction skills.

66% of 4-year graduates cannot compute everyday calculations like the cost per ounce of food. 87% of all adults are unable to perform computations like estimating (not guessing) how many more miles are left in your car's gas tank before you need to gas up.

There is a game played on my favorite radio program where they call up people at random and ask them simple questions. I used to wonder why it was so easy to find the morons that play. My wife used to think the game was a fix. This study shows us why it is so easy to find real contestants for Moron Trivia.

Some of the questions today give you an idea of how deeply in trouble we are. Question: If you were driving 60 mph, how far would you go in 30 minutes? The answers given: "About 3 miles" and "60 mph in 30 mnutes I would travel, 6 miles, no 60 miles, a mile a minute".

Question: What year is the next pesidential election being held? One answer given: "next year".

From previous years (2004 specifically):
Question: What Van Halen album entitled 1984 had the year 1984 in the title? The answers: one person didn't know and the other answered "OU812". OK, kind of like the Grant's tomb question, but this is simple analytical skills that would solve this question.

For nearly 10 contestants the question "Who fought in the United States Civil War?" was asked before anyone got ONE side right.

Scary. The answer for decades has been to throw money at education. It is time to admit that the unions are killing education and the system needs an overhaul, not more money.

NFL Conference Championships

Here we are...the Final Four in a sense.

Sunday, January 22, 2006, 2:00 PM
at
Denver has been the silently great team of the NFL this year. Plummer became a good quarterback somehow and the Broncos hava a solid defense. Pittsburgh knocked off the best all-around team last week and have been continuing the Steel Curtain tradition. Both teams have proven that they can move the football, grind the clock down and score lots of points. Both teams have proven that they can shut down the running game. This game should be a close game. I'm thinking that it won't be that close at all.

TradeSports has the Broncos chance to win at 61.0%. I'm going to go on a limb and pick Pittsburgh.

Listeners of the Glenn Beck understand the incredible accuracy of Mor(e)on Trivia which predicts Pittsburgh to win.

Sunday, January 22, 2006, 5:30 PM
at
Word is that Shaun Alexander is going to play this week after suffering a concusion last week. Bad move! I think Seattle can win without him...they are that complete. Not to underestimate Carolina, they have nothing for a running game and not much beyond Steve Smith for WR and somehow Smith still dominates. Overall, like I said, Seattle is a much more complete team and should pull this game out. If Alexander is 100% this game won't even be close.

TradeSports has the Seahawks at 62.2% chance of winning. I agree.

From personal level I like to see teams in the Super Bowl that have never been so I am pulling for Seattle to make it. I like Bill Cowher and the loyalty the Steelers have shown to him and would like that to be rewarded with a win in the Super Bowl. That is what I am hoping to happen. Of course, if the Broncos get thoroughly embarrassed I would consider it to be a satisfying post season.

Wetterling drops from race

The breaking news today is that Patty Wetterling is dropping out of the Senate race.

Patty Wetterling will withdraw from the U.S. Senate race this afternoon and endorse Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar, according to a DFL activist knowledgeable about the plan.

Where is Wetterling going? Will she run in the 6th?

Wetterling is said to have been wooed as a gubernatorial running mate and has been urged by some to enter the congressional contest in Minnesota's Sixth District, where she lost a hard-fought race against Rep. Mark Kennedy in 2004. Kennedy is now the presumptive GOP nominee in the U.S. Senate race, and has been amassing funds for what many say could be the most expensive race in state history.

...

Wetterling, who came within 8 percentage points of Kennedy in 2004, has already thrown her support to the only announced DFL candidate in the Sixth District race, Elwyn Tinklenberg, former mayor of Blaine and transportation commissioner under independent Gov. Jesse Ventura.

Tinklenberg on Thursday said Wetterling had assured him repeatedly that she would stay in the Senate race. "I take her at her word," he said.

Good luck with that El.

Sen. Wes Skoglund, DFL-Minneapolis, who called Wetterling on the day U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton announced his retirement to urge her entry into the race, said Thursday that he hoped she was not being pushed out.

Skoglund said that he did not know whether she was going to withdraw, but that "if it makes her happy [to withdraw], that's fine. I just don't want to see her pressured out. There's been pressure on her to get out from the start."

Political newcomers, he said, "are a bit more vulnerable to that than people who've been around."

I would bet there was incredible pressure on Patty to get the hell out of the way. But from whom? The DFL? Klobuchar? Special interest groups?