Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Enquiring Minds

In last Friday's Star Tribune which featured an entire page dedicated to the Mark Sanford affair (on Page 3), yet no coverage of the historic House vote that day on Cap and Trade...I noticed something interesting in a sidebar:

The State, Columbia, S.C.'s daily newspaper, has been at ground zero of the case, indirectly triggering Sanford's admission Wednesday that he had been having an affair with a woman in Argentina.

Prodded by an anonymous tip, a reporter for the newspaper staked out the Atlanta airport Wednesday morning -- and promptly ran into Stanford getting off a flight from Buenos Aires.
Here's her account of the encounter:

First of all, it's funny that the Strib would dedicate any local reporter on this story...why not just run something from the AP? Aren't they supposed to be strapped for resources? Didn't they just fire a bunch of writers? I guess there are still enough folks left that they could assign somebody to report on a story that only affects the people of South Carolina.

But more importantly, does anybody recall any paper--ANY-- tracking down John Edwards in Beverly Hills with the mother of his love child? Did any reporter stake out LAX or the hotel rooms where he met time and time again with his mistress? Did anybody ask why he lied about the affair while he was still on the campaign trail for President? Or- why Edwards hired this woman- who he met in a bar- as a paid campaign worker? One paper did, the National Enquirer, who now holds as much legitimacy as any other newspaper as far as I'm concerned.

The mainstream media admitted it was tipped off almost a year before the story finally broke.

Reading this account in Newsweek surely begs the question: "What did the media know and when did they know it?"

John Edwards was the Democrat's Vice Presidential nominee, he was a strong contender in the Democrat's bid for the White House DURING the time he was having the affair.

Look, Mark Sanford cheated on his wife. He was caught and he immediately admitted to the affair to the press. The main problem was that he left the country as a sitting Governor- and nobody knew where he was. What would happen if there was an emergency? Stupid. If I were in South Carolina, I'd be calling for his resignation.

But let me just point out that Bill Clinton and John Edwards lied again and again and again and only told the truth when their backs were right up against the wall. Bill Clinton "just lied about sex." No, he lied to a federal grand jury during testimony in a sexual harassment law suit and then lied again to the entire country while shaking his finger at us.

But, it's the Republicans who receive the brunt of the feigned shock from the media when clearly --time and again-- the people in our party tell the truth in these situations while theirs lie. Doesn't that count for something?

Believe me-- I'm not excusing the behavior-- it's all scandalous. Sanford is a grade-A FLAKE based on some of the stuff that's being said now. It sounds like a really bad soap opera and his wife would be absolutely nuts to stay with him. I know there are kids involved, but he has completely humiliated her and he doesn't love her and those four boys shouldn't see that as a role model for their future marriages.

But the real issue here is of a continued double-standard in the media. There seem to be so few enquiring minds in the journalism field today. Blinded by their personal politics, yet pretending they're not, reporters rarely demonstrate enough curiosity to break stories that affect their friends in the Democrat party. But, boy-oh-boy, they'll stake out an airport if it means they get to bring down a Republican.

Monday, June 29, 2009

A Must Read

I'ts no secret that I've been a skeptic of catastrophic man-made global warming (CMMGW).

It simply doesn't make sense to me and I'm not anti-science.

Yes- God created the earth. But there is something to Darwin's theory. Look at a monkey-- now look at your husband--monkey--husband--monkey--husband. It makes some sense when you stop to think about it. Of course I believe there's divine intervention along the way and I think the two things can co-exist. Nevertheless Darwin is also theory and although we fight in the schools about what should be taught/what shouldn't be taught...we didn't try to throw our entire economy down the toilet in the name of finches.

Now the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming? It makes no logical sense and when I first heard about it I scratched my head like a monkey. You mean to tell me that by driving our cars and turning on a light switch we humans are going to warm the earth so such a degree that it's going to result in famines and floods? How could we possibly have that much of an impact on this massive planet? It's the sun, stupid.

Per scientists, there are urban heat islands that are causing some of the distortion in comparing temperatures records.

Too bad the idiot Democrats in Washington (how many are scientists by the way?) Can't bother with facts before passing such terrible legislation.

Here's a great Fortune Magazine interview with John Christy, one of the IPCC authors, that talks about the heat island effect. The IPCC is the United Nations Intergovernmetal Panel on Climate Change- the folks who brought you all of this stupidity along with numskill Al Gore. Remember- the IPCC are a bunch of government appointed scientists from around the world and here's a little factoid about how they work:

The word “consensus” is often invoked, and sometimes questioned, when speaking of IPCC reports. In fact, there are two arenas in which a consensus needs to be reached in the production of IPCC assessments; one is the meeting of the entire IPCC, in which unanimity is sought among government representatives. Even though such consensus is not required (countries are free to register their formal dissent), agreement has been reached on all documents and SPMs to date—a particularly impressive fact.

Wow- total consensus...kind of like how the Democrats work these days. If somebody voted against cap and trade it's possible that they accept some of the global warming theory, that the earth is warming, that humans may have some small impact They just don't buy into the idea that ruining our modern economy is going to solve that problem. Or that trying to reduce CO2 emissions without any mention of nuclear energy seems a teensy bit odd. However, if somebody voted for cap and trade then they would have to believe that global warming is an absolute certainty- right? Sort of a monolithic view, huh?

Friday, June 26, 2009


This is unreal. I can't keep up. I can't even get my blog post together on Obama's terrible performance on Wednesday's prime time Universal Health Care Infomercial and they've already passed Cap and Trade through the House. (It passed by only 7 votes-- 8 Republicans voted for the bill.) KICK THEM OUT of the party today!

If you live in any of these states, I urge you to call your Republican leadership and tell them that you want these people out of office. This legislation was completely black and white and there's no way that any Republican should have voted for it.

Mary Bono Mack (Calif.), Mike Castle, Mark Steven Kirk (Ill.), Leonard Lance (NJ), Frank LoBiondo (NJ), John McHugh (NY), Dave Reichert (Washington), Chris Smith (NJ)

Here in Minnesota, here's what the worthless piece of garbage known as the Star Trib featured today:

3 Pages of Michael Jackson (including the front page)

1 Page of Farrah Faucett (page 2)

1 Page of Mark Sanford (page 3) By the way did John Edwards get one ounce of this coverage? Mr. If-we-knew-you-were-cheating-on-your-cancer-ridden-wife-Hillary-would-have won? No, that wasn't NEARLY as newsworthy. Forget about the astounding historical implications it has had.

1 Page of fluff on Michelle Obama and how she likes being the First Lady

They mentioned NOTHING today about this historic house vote on Cap and Trade except for a related, (and brilliant,) George Will column in the back of the paper. Reading the Strib today was like skimming through "Life & Style" and "OK" magazine in the grocery line.

This monster bill was 1,200 pages long! An additional 300 pages was added in the wee hours this morning...HOW did any of the FOOLS even read the legislation? Can you imagine such carelessness and thoughtlessness? But it's not thoughtlessness, it's completely contrived by the left wing nut-job multi-millionaire Al Gore types. They want us living in urban areas in 1,200 square foot apartments, driving tiny cars or riding light rail while they fricking jet around the world putting out more CO2 into the air then I would in a lifetime of driving my large SUV.

I'm sorry- I know there are a lot of Bush haters out there, (and you'll never catch me defending his spending), but please-- "No Child Left Behind" and "Medicare Part D" don't even come close to the amount of damage that this legislation is going to cause.

In yesterday's post I said that this was just another excuse to redistribute wealth, that low income folks would get subsidies...but, I didn't know it was going to be this bad until I heard some of the bill's language on Rush today. They are actually going to electronically transfer funds into the bank accounts of low income people every month, (at least low income people with bank accounts I guess.) The money is going to offset their "estimated loss of purchasing power" that will be caused by this bill. They acknowledge that there is going to be a lost of consumer purchasing power...unreal. Of course the taxpayers won't get any help to compensate this loss, unless we want to buy a $25,000 Prius that is.

We better start hoping global warming is real here in Minnesota, because we're going to have a hard time paying our heating bills here soon.

Pretend "moderate" Democrat Tim Walz (MN) voted for this one. If that can't help us win back the 1st Congressional District, boy I give up.

God, Help Us....They Passed It

The kids are watching a cartoon so I hop on my computer to watch the House of Representatives live coverage...I see Waxman laughing, Pelosi smiling....

They passed it. They passed Cap and Trade. God help our economy.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

We Knew This was Coming

It's not a great shock that the King of Pop is dead at fifty. He's looked terrible for years and obviously had some health issues. I try not to think about what he became but remember fondly what he was...one of the most talented people to ever walk the earth. Justin Timberlake, Robin Thicke, Usher, amateurs all. Nobody, but nobody, moved like him. He didn't need a choreographer, he created all of the moves that people still try to mimic today.

I worshipped Michael Jackson in elementary school. Prince was for the very hip kids at that age-- my mom wouldn't let me listen to him because of his racy lyrics. Of course I love Prince now, (and so does she.) Madonna was, (note: WAS) very cool and I loved her too. But Michael, ah, Michael....

Here's the poster that was in my room when I was 10-years-old

Preppy, cute Michael. It was his poster and Dino Ciccarelli's from the North Stars-- I had a thing for curly hair I guess.

Like most 80's kids I loved "Thriller" and stayed up late to watch all of his award show performances. I learned to appreciate earlier Michael Jackson music later in life. I love the Jackson 5...is there any happier song than "I Want You Back"? Was there anything cuter than a young MJ?

The Jacksons were awesome too ..."Blame it on the Boogie"...another song that makes me sing, dance and smile every time I play it..check the video-- how cool is that 'fro?

"Off the Wall" is one of my favorite albums of all time. "Working Day and Night"-- so funky cool..one of the best intros ever.

But my favorite tune of all was this one-- the best...(and he never had a video for it!)

His life was a train wreck, he's gone, but his music will have me dancing until I'm dead in the grave.

Past the Point of No Return?

Cap and Trade is absurd...."hey, let's tax ourselves just for the heck of it because the climate is warming, no it's cooling, no it's warming, What do you think?"

For the folks that don't understand what cap and trade means...we will be capping the amount of CO2 (yes the air we breath out,) that certain energy companies put out (the "bad"ones like coal) and they will have to pay another company (the "good" ones) for any amount over the cap that is emitted..."trade".

Here's a better summary of what's before Congress this week.

Remember folks: Global warming is a theory. It is not a proven fact that CO2 is warming the atmosphere nor is it fact that any warming that is occurring will lead to catastrophic weather events. It is theory. I've asked this question many times, haven't had an answer yet: When have we ever made public policy so detrimental to our economy based on a scientific theory?

This is the only thing that gives me hope that the absurdity that is Cap and Trade be made law is that liberal benefactor and early Obama supporter Warren Buffet thinks it's a terrible idea.

He's right, it is a regressive tax. The energy companies will push the cost down to the consumer, because this is what they do today with government-imposed taxes and fees. But we know what the game plan is here-- right? Lower income folks will have a problem paying the higher energy bills so they will be further supplemented with energy assistance programs (we already have these today,) which will be paid for by the rest of us. This is just another tool of the left to redistribute wealth in this country.

Of course the farmers have their exemption in place thanks to MN Congressman Collin Peterson (D). Of course other special interests will have their say in the final legislation and will lobby to change any provisions down the road. The only people who are going to pay at the end of the day are us-- the ever-more-endangered-secies that is the U.S. Taxpayer.

Our life expectancy in 1900 was 47 years old, today it is 78. We have an extremely high quality of life in this country, but that's not good enough for the lefties who bemoan our health system and warn that we're all going to perish from global warming.

More taxes on producing energy that fuels the United States economy. Proactively punishing progress. Ah, more irony.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

You Tell 'Em Sister

Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann addressing the House of Representatives on the mess that is now Government Motors. Worth a watch.

Ideological Tests at the U Part 3

For all of those who have been following my reporting on the U of M School of Nursing's Essay Question. I finally have my answers.

Well-- no, not really. But I did get back a couple of documents from the Nursing School last week. I had requested "all data related to the decision to change the Masters of Nursing Program admissions essay question to one regarding Illegal Immigration".

Here is the question on the admissions application:

Statement: "It is appropriate for the state government to provide funding for health care and education of illegal immigrants."First, take the perspective of someone who agrees with this statement and provide rationale that supports agreement.

Next, take the perspective of someone who disagrees with this statement and provide rationale that supports disagreement.

Finally, indicate the position - either agreement or disagreement - that YOU support given what you know at this time. Provide rationale for your position, considering the validity of the rationale you provided previously for agreement and disagreement.

I wanted to understand how the decision was made to include such a controversial question and ideological test in their admissions process. (Thanks to the Nursing School staff who got this information to me very quickly and easily beat the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in turnaround time for a Data Practices Request.)

First, I received meeting minutes from March 23, 2009. The only part pertaining to the question was this:

Online application updates. The fall 2010 applications are being updated and Mary Rowan requested feedback from the group regarding the MN essay questions and whether or not they need to be changed since there seems to frequently be redundancies in responses. Cathy Juve suggested adding a question similar to the ethics essay required on the DNP (Doctoral) application. Reneed Sieving motioned that the second question on the application be changed to be more of a point-counter point essay. Cathy Juve seconded, all approved. Laura Ducket and Mary Rowan will craft an appropriate question.

Lastly, I received a brief email exchange between Mary Rowan and another staff person at the Nursing School. Apparently the Illegal Immigration question is also used for admissions to the undergraduate Nursing honors program.

The only concern expressed in the emails is that somebody who applies to that program could possibly also apply to the Masters program and may have the same question posed twice. There was no concern that the question could be construed as an ideological test. No concern that the issue of illegal immigration is a political issue that has no relation to the practice of nursing.

I find great irony in the fact that an admissions committee- who feels so strongly about the need for a student to be able to argue both sides of a controversial issue, who feels so strongly about the ability to debate and provide valid rationale to support their views, who feels so strongly that nursing school is about turning out future leaders-- would spend no time--zero, zilch, none--in debating the merit and the potential problems that their new essay question poses. I guess their students need to be able to demonstrate intellectual curiosity, but they do not.

I could go on with this exercise and take it to the President's office, but I know he doesn't care. I'm quite confident that he would think that this question is just dandy. I'm sure if I dug around I'd find similar ideological tests are being required all over the University. I mean- a President who boldly defends a Professor who desecrates Catholic Eucharists and then blogs about it using University time and resources, (which is a clear conflict with Board of Regents policy) ain't going to care about the fact that the nursing school is--whether intentionally or unintentionally-- testing students on their political views for admission to the program. Nope.

A public University, my beloved alma mater, it makes me sad. I would hope when President Bruininks finally steps aside next year that perhaps things can change, but I'm not holding my breath.

So what to tell my conservative friend who wants to reapply to the program but can't bring herself to providing her true opinion on illegal immigration for fear that the admissions committee won't like her answer?

I can offer the advice of my mother, (another U of M almuna) "find other schools to apply to, forget it." Or I can offer the advice my husband, (also a U of M alum), "Play the game, just play the game. Tell them what they want to hear."

Hence why my dear husband has a M.D. on his wall and I'm a housewife.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

So I Think I Can Dance

Dear God,
If there is such a thing as reincarnation, then please let me come back as someone who can dance like this:

New Blog

A friend forwarded this blog on...

I think my Prepublican readers will love it!

Awaken the Elephants

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Get OVER Yourself!

You have to be kidding me...

Another Hypocrite Bites the Dust....

Nevada Senator John Ensign had an 8-month affair with a married staffer. Ensign's a well-known Republican leader and strong social conservative.

Maybe he and John Edwards can get a Georgetown bachelor pad together.

Ensign's wife is standing by him (just like Hillary). If Ensign truly cared about his marriage, he'd resign a job that requires him to be away from home for most of the year. He'd go home to his wife. Then the GOP could get a better, younger, more honest person in his place.

The issue has to do with political party certainly- I mean the GOP can't sit and tout "family values" (although have we been touting that lately?) and then not kick these guys to the curb when they act like this.

But, more importantly it's about very weak men in high-level leadership positions. This issue may also be about misuse of money as it appears Ensign may have been paying his mistress and her family inappropriate amounts of money as staff --she was his campaign Treasurer and her husband was employeed as Ensign's administrative assistant

Hampton was paid $162,000, almost the maximum allowed for aides

And their son was also employed by the campaign. Nice. I mean- come on dude- resign.

I'm going to give something to President Obama here. He loves his wife. He clearly loves his wife. I can't see him cheating on her in a million years. She's a strong woman and he's not afraid of that. Stability is a character strength. It's something that he and George W. Bush have in common and I appreciate it.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Preferential Treatment

Interesting thing I found on the web about the U of M Masters of Nursing admissions process:

This is from a blog post from a student who is currently enrolled in the program. A male, Minnesota native who lived out-of-state for 10 years before applying for the program.

As far as where you take your prereq's, they really don't care. I had 3 to take and I took them all through online community colleges, one of which was not even in the state I lived in at the time. So don't worry about that.

After some time, I was told that I qualified for an interview. Normally, they want you to do this in person, but I asked if it would be ok to do a phone interview and they let me. About 3 weeks after the phone interview I found out that I was accepted.

.....Anyway, I took online courses through a local community college in Michigan (Oakland Community College) where I lived before I moved here to attend school.

Online Community College courses vs. courses taken within the University of Minnesota system. And a phone interview? The four women I know of didn't even qualify for an interview, let alone one over the phone. Again, current Minnesota residents and taxpayers.

Must be nice to be a man and get that free pass.

What a shame.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

They Didn't....

I was trying to fix formatting on my last post (Blogger formatting is such a pain), and accidentally deleted my original link in this paragraph:

Odd that the word "leader" appears nowhere on their program description. The Masters in Nursing is for people who have a non-nursing Undergrad so that they can prepare to be RN's.

So I go back and find the link tonight and as you can see- the word "leadership" very much appears in the program description. So do the words "moral and ethical issues".

Now, I could be wrong on this, but I worked on this blog post on and off all day and was on the Nursing School's website many times....and I swear those words weren't there earlier today when I linked it....unfortunately I have no screen shot to prove that.

The new link shows at the bottom of the page: Last modified on May 18, 2009

However, click back a couple pages to this one (the Nursing School Home Page) and you see: Last modified on June 16, 2009


I would assume with web pages the "date modified" would be automatically changed? I don't know, perhaps I was seeing things earlier today....note to self: always save screen shots.

So I stand corrected...the program IS about leadership. Therefore, I'll take a reader's comment and point out that nonchalantly lying about your real opinion in order to gain perceived favor with an admissions committee is the antithesis of leadership.

Ideological Tests at the U Part 2

My post last week about the recent change in essay question for admission to the U of M's Masters of Nursing Program program has received a lot of notice. Readers can't believe the audacity of the University to pose such a question let alone not provide any assurances to the students that this is not a test of ideology that could prevent them from being admitted into the program.

Here is the question:

Statement: "It is appropriate for the state government to provide funding for health care and education of illegal immigrants."

First, take the perspective of someone who agrees with this statement and provide rationale that supports agreement.

Next, take the perspective of someone who disagrees with this statement and provide rationale that supports disagreement.

Finally, indicate the position - either agreement or disagreement - that YOU support given what you know at this time. Provide rationale for your position, considering the validity of the rationale you provided previously for agreement and disagreement.

(The YOU in all caps is exactly as it appears on the U's website). You're supposed to do all of this in 2 double-spaced pages. Such constraints would lead to a debate with all of the intellectual quality of Cher's from the movie "Clueless".

I've had phone calls and emails about the post and wanted to give you more of the story.

I called the School of Nursing at the U a couple of weeks ago wanting to know about the decision to change the question from a more generic one that had been used up until now. I first spoke with Jamie Gearhart. I asked when and how the decision was made and inquired if I could speak to somebody on the committee that decided to add this controversial question to the admissions application. She didn't know exactly when the decision was made, but when I guessed "in the last six months", she said "yes".

She informed me that she took the meeting minutes and was there that day, although she was not a member of the committee. I said "Great, I'd like to get a copy of those meeting minutes"....she then told me I needed to talk to the Chairperson of the Nursing School's Graduate Admissions Committee, Associate Professor Renee Sieving.

Prof Sieving picked up the call, we spoke briefly. She said that the question I had was about their Doctoral program, I said "no, I'm looking at the questions for the Doctoral program and they are generic, this is for your Master's program. She requested that I schedule a call with her, which I did for the following week.

Sieving was recently featured in the Star Tribune and her area of research includes: "youth health promotion; prevention of multiple health risk behaviors (sexual risks, violence involvement, school drop-out) among adolescents."

Some of her published articles include:

Family and racial factors associated with suicide and emotional distress among Latino students. Journal of School Health

Young adolescent responses to different question formats assessing race/ethnicity (letter to the editor). Journal of Adolescent Health

The effects of race/ethnicity, income, and family structure on adolescent risk behaviors. American Journal of Public Health

Here's another one: Parents’ Beliefs About Condoms and Oral Contraceptives: Are They Medically Accurate?

which concluded: the more politically conservative a parent was, the less medically accurate his or her views typically were.

Fascinating findings.

Anyway-- I called Prof Sieving back the following week. She was polite enough, but the conversation just went around in circles. She initially said that the question was changed because there was "a lot of redundancy" using previous questions. This is interesting, because last fall there were two questions: 1. Describe how life experiences (e.g., personal, family, educational and work-related experiences) have prepared you for excellence in nursing.was about and 2. Given that there are many more applicants than can be admitted, discuss what makes you an excellent candidate for this intensive program.

Now they've combined those questions into one question and added the illegal immigration question. It's interesting to me that people trying to distinguish themselves as individuals sounded so much alike that there was "a lot of redundancy."

She stated that the purpose of the question was to give students a chance to logically lay out two sides of a controversial issue and that they didn't care whether students agreed or disagreed. If the purpose is to make sure somebody can debate both sides of an issue logically, then the third part about what they thought was entirely moot.

She kept circling back to "it's not our intention" (to test someones political views.) To which I kept replying, "Whether or not it's your intention, that is the consequence of posing such a question."

She also kept referring to the second half of the third part of the question which reads: Provide rationale for your position, considering the validity of the rationale you provided previously for agreement and disagreement. She seemed to be saying that this made the question fair.

Considering the validity of the rationale? Who determines the validity? Validity is truth that can be demonstrated- correct? Again, 2 pages-double spaced for the entire 3-part essay question.

I pointed out that I had several people look at the question and many were puzzled what such a question would have to do with the field of nursing, to that line she quickly snapped "Then they don't understand nursing."

Apparently I don't either.

There is certainly a new breed of nurse-activist/leader out there, that I know. State Representative Maria Ruud fits this mold as a card-carrying member of the Nurse's Union-- she uses her professional experiences to further a lefty political agenda.

Sieveg said that their graduates are taking on "leadership positions in the field of nursing" and they "must be able to understand perspectives on controversial issues related to health care." (And obviously in issues related to education too.)

Odd that the word "leader" appears nowhere on their program description. The Masters in Nursing is for people who have a non-nursing Undergrad so that they can prepare to be RN's.

At one point in the conversation Sieving said "I can tell that you are passionate about this issue." (Don't you love the passive aggressive, "it's just you who's crazy" move?) I replied "Actually some 70% of Americans cared enough about this issue, many of whom called Congress as recently as 2007", (I was wrong it was actually 62% of Americans who were either "very concerned" or "extremely concerned" with illegal immigration in 2007. But, I reminded her that my opinion on issue was neither here nor there.

Sieving then said that this was the type of question that would be asked in an ethics class in the program. I said that I could understand that the issue could be raised in a classroom once a student was in the program. (I mean these types of political questions are posed even if you're an Engineering major these days). But, I still thought it was unsuitable as a way to determine whether or not to a student should be admitted into the program.

Finally I shared with the Professor that my advice to a friend applying to the program would be to keep her answer murky and not give her real opinion about the issue to which Sieving replied, "And that would be fine." I said "No, it wouldn't be fine and that's exactly my point in raising this issue".

The University either wants individuals with no point of view, who they can easily mold, or they want prospective students to lie on an admissions application. Now do you want to talk about ethics?

Admission to the program should be based on merit, PERIOD. But we all know that's not the case in modern day academia. The application states:

"The School seeks to admit and educate a diverse student body, both in order to enrich the student's educational experience and to prepare them to meet the health needs of a diverse society."

Here are the admission statistics for the program. They admitted 21% men into the program when only 5% of nurses are men nationally. So my daughters would be given preferential treatment if they had born with a ......What nonsense! Affirmative action run amok.

The University complains to the legislature about lack of funding and continually increases tuition rates to the point where our public University is almost unattainable for many students-- yet they turn away perfectly qualified candidates which could help drive down costs for all.

I know for a fact that qualified students, with stellar academic records, who are lifelong residents of Minnesota, are being turned away from this program-- not even given the chance for an interview. They happen to be Caucasian women. Now let's say these same Caucasian women answer an essay question in a way that the committee sees as "closed-minded," how do they even stand a chance to get into our PUBLIC University?

I still have more to say on this, but I'm waiting for a response from the U. We're going on almost a week without any acknowledgement of my Public Data Request for committee members names and meeting minutes. Shouldn't this take about 10 minutes to send over? I wonder what valid rationale they have for the hold up.


I have a simple plan:

Let all of the AMA and other liberal docs go work for the government hospitals (and we will have government hospitals with the Pelosi/Obama plan--just like Canada) and let all of the conservative docs work for the privately run hospitals.

The liberal nurses union can join the liberal docs at the government hospital and the non-union nurses can join the conservative docs at the private hospital.

Problem solved.

Gipper's List Hits Instapundit!

Posted at 11:13 pm by Glenn Reynolds

Monday, June 15, 2009

Gipper's List

Sean Hannity just mentioned http://www.gipperslist.com/ on his radio show! I scooped Sean Hannity :)

Go post your stuff now!

Gipper's List

I'm so excited to be one of the first bloggers in the entire country to launch a new web site:


Gipper's List is the brainchild of my creative sister, Mary. It's quite simply a "Craig's List for Conservatives." A pro-active protest against the liberals out there who want to take all of your hard-earned money using the power of government. Republican to Republican transactions.

I'm a big Craig's List user...just bought a very cool old set of leather bound encyclopedias for $20 from a woman in Eden Prairie a few weeks ago. I've bought and sold many times and never had a problem except when some crazy chick shopped my kid's clothing sale and stole things.

I also sold a sofa to an artist who lived in Linden Hills. We developed a brief friendship. She had a cute line of handmade children's clothing-- it wasn't cheap stuff, but I appreciated her work. I bought a couple things from her and encouraged her to be more aggressive with her business plan. We met a few times, she wanted some advice on getting her business to the next level. One day the state of the economy came up, she started bashing George Bush and Republicans. She later emailed me to invite me to one of her clothing shows, asking me to bring friends. I politely declined-- why would I help somebody who so hated my political party and what I stood for?

I also sold an armoire to a young couple...when I saw the Army bumper stickers I knocked down the price "Military discount".

This Gipper's List idea is a big one. Finally we have the option to support like-minded individuals who understand that hard work, success and achievement are good things. Who believe in the American Dream and way of life.

I'll be posting a lot more about this website soon....but go check it out!

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Breaking the Law

My husband and I were driving home from downtown Minneapolis the other night when I realized I was breaking the law.

I was sitting in the back seat of our sedan and didn't have my seat belt buckled. Minnesota just passed another stupid nanny state law which requires every passenger in a car to be buckled up or they can be pulled over and fined $25.

Sometimes I buckle my seat belt when seated in the back seat, sometimes I don't. It's usually just a matter of not remembering to do it. I also have a habit of not buckling my seat belt when I'm driving until I'm pulling out of my neighborhood.

As I watched a guy on a motorcycle careening by our large 4-door sedan- I thought about the absurdity that he could do so without a helmet on and it would be completely legal. I, on the other hand, could be pulled over and ticketed.

I don't care if somebody doesn't want to wear their motorcycle helmet, that's their stupidity. So, why do people care if I'm wearing my seat belt in the back seat of my own car?

Friday, June 12, 2009


I finally got a simple letter to the editor printed in the EP News this week. I can get a book published, but can't get a letter to the editor printed in a suburban newspaper without extreme effort.

I think it's been about two years since I've submitted anything. I had an experience back in the fall of '04, during the election, where they questioned me on my opinion and wouldn't print a letter I had submitted without editing major content. I made the case that Planned Parenthood was associated with Moveon.org, the editor debated me on the phone about it arguing that there was no connection. At the time Planned Parenthood's logo was on Moveon.org's home page, now they just share info via a PAC. Yeah, no connection. Anyway, I wouldn't let them take out the information, which would have weakened the argument I was making in the letter, so they didn't print it.

I know from several local Republican campaigns that the EP News purposely holds back letters, "fact checks" opinions and has even called the DFL caucus to tell them about letters to the editor from GOP candidates.

The letter I submitted on June 1st was about what I had heard Rep Maria Ruud (42A) say at a town hall meeting on May 30th. I blogged a bit about how she likes to use stories to make political points...My original letter read:

Ruud also claimed in the Star Tribune that the cuts to GAMC would result in 8,000 jobs lost. I can't come up with any facts to substantiate that claim, but did discover one job that may be lost- hers. At the same Town hall meeting, she explained that because of the cuts to the program, her department at Park Nicollet Hospital would be eliminated.

The fact-checking should have been calling Rep Ruud and asking her to explain what she meant. Perhaps the EP News could attend events and fact check her....oh, that would be called reporting, sorry.

It only took a week or so of waiting for the editor to "fact check" me...I was first called by the editor on June 2nd and told my letter would be in that week. I specifically asked "no edits?" and was told, "nope, just spelling out the word percentage, that type of thing," "Great!" I let them know that I'd keep it off my blog since they were going to print it that same week. Too easy, I thought though, after hanging up the phone.

On the afternoon of Wednesday, June 3rd, I get a voicemail that my letter would appear in the following week's edition and that the editor now had some questions for me. I called back the next morning (Thursday), and left a message back and I never got a returned call. I got an email at 5:08 pm Friday afternoon.

Here's the email:

I got your voicemail, thanks for calling back.I called Park Nicollet to confirm your point about the program being eliminated because of GAMC cuts and received the following response from a spokesperson:

"In regards to your question about cuts to GAMC, Park Nicollet is notrestructuring OB/GYN programs at our Brookdale and Minneapolis clinics dueto cuts in General Assistance Medical Care. These changes were already underconsideration and are not about budget cuts. They are about designing carethat can be delivered in a sustainable way in each community we serve."

"Our OB/GYN services vary greatly from community to community. And, in somecommunities, OB/GYN services are not provided at all. Park Nicollet currently provides OB/GYN services at 9 of its 17 primary care clinics. Inthe Minneapolis and Brookdale Clinic locations, Midwifery services have beenoffered for some time and will be expanded in the future. All of the OB/GYNdoctors and nurse practitioners from these two clinics will be relocated toother clinics over the coming months."

So, I'd like to give you the opportunity to rewrite that portion of your letter. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at the number below or 612-616-6701. I would need the changes by the end of the day Tuesday.

So- the EP News called Park Nicollet to disprove what I was saying that Ruud said?

I also believe they sent my letter to Maria Ruud- or her campaign. I can't prove it, and the EP News wouldn't answer any questions about it, but the way this all played out certainly leads me to that conclusion. Ruud had a commentary the week that my letter was supposed to be in which mentioned Methodist Hopsital in St. Louis Park being affected by the cuts, but not Park Nicollet. Then this week there was a letter right next to mine with a defense of Ruud on the same exact topic. All coincidence?

A friend of mine pointed out that I should use the EP News email from Park Nicollet to further strengthen the argument against Ruud- either she has a conflict of interest, or she purposely exaggerates to make political points. So, I took their advice and resubmitted the letter.

The effort to get a letter printed in a local paper is pretty ridiculous. I mean incredibly ridiculous, which is why I rarely send them in and exactly what they seem to want.

So, finally, two weeks after the town hall meeting that I attended, here is a letter to the editor of the local paper. It isn't online- only last week's edition. But here is the content.

Rep. Maria Ruud makes many claims regarding the DFL’s failure to craft a budget that could gain bipartisan support and prevent Gov. Pawlenty from single-handedly balancing the budget.

Her commentary in the May 28 Star Tribune laments that we are losing the “soul of Minnesota” because of cuts to the state’s General Assistance Medical Care. GAMC is a welfare program that provides payments to hospitals for poor patients who – for whatever reason – haven’t registered for existing government programs that they may qualify for.

Ruud said in the Eden Prairie News on May 28, “We voted against the poorest of the poor and then we voted to protect the richest of the rich.” Originally, Ruud voted against the DFL effort to create the fourth highest income tax rate in the nation, so she apparently supported “protection” of “the rich.” Then she changed her vote in the final minutes of the legislative session, claiming at the EP town hall meeting on May 30 that her constituents started saying “everyone needed to share the pain.”

The “soul” of Minnesota isn’t found in the halls of the legislature or in government programs, but if legislators truly wanted to fund this and other welfare, which encompasses 30% of the state budget, they would’ve worked on ways to fix programs months earlier when the governor proposed his budget. The GAMC program was growing 35% per biennium and in obvious need of reform, but the DFL’s only answer was “more money.”

Ruud also claims that the cuts to GAMC will cost 8,000 jobs. I can’t come up with any facts to substantiate that, but did discover one job that may be lost – hers. At the same town hall meeting, she explained that her department at Park Nicollet Hospital would be eliminated because of cuts to the program.

I’m sorry that Rep. Ruud could lose her job, but using her position as a state legislator to protect programs which directly contribute to her household income undermines her argument about responsible insurance programs for the poor. Oddly enough, while fact-checking this letter, the Eden Prairie News contacted a Park Nicollet representative who stated that “Park Nicollet is not restructuring OB/GYN programs at our Brookdale and Minneapolis clinics due to cuts in [GAMC]. These changes were already under consideration and are not about budget cuts.”

If it is true that the restructuring isn’t about budget cuts or GAMC, why is Ruud saying that her job may be lost because of GAMC reductions? If the restructuring is due to GAMC cuts, as she says, then she has a conflict of interest by supporting GAMC. If the restructuring isn’t related to GAMC, as Park Nicollet says, then Rep. Ruud is embellishing details at town hall meetings for some perceived sympathy and potential political gain while unintentionally giving the impression of a conflict of interest. Assuming Park Nicollet is correct, one begins to wonder what other flawed antecdotes and unverified “facts” Rep. Ruud is using to justify continued support of this unsustainable spending.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Republicans Announce an "All of the Above" Energy Plan

House Republicans yesterday introduced legislation under the "American Energy Act"

I haven't read the entire bill, (then again neither do our Congressmen), but here are the talking points:
  • House Republicans recognize that as gas prices and home utility bills rise, American families are dealt an even greater economic hardship.
  • The Democrats' answer to the worst recession in decades is a national energy tax that will lead to higher energy prices and further job losses.
  • Thousands of dollars in extra energy costs and millions of jobs lost is a high price to pay for an energy policy that will do very little to clean up our environment.
  • The American people deserve better. The American Energy Act is an all of the above plan that will provide energy independence, more jobs here at home, and a cleaner environment.
  • The American Energy Act increases our domestic supply of energy by lifting restrictions on ANWR, the Outer Continental Shelf, and oil shale in the Mountain West.
  • The House Republican plan renews America's commitment to clean and emissions-free nuclear energy. The Department of Energy has stated the best way for utility companies to reduce carbon emissions is to increase their supply of nuclear energy.
  • Despite the enormous success of nuclear energy, no new nuclear reactor has been ordered since the presidency of Jimmy Carter. The House Republican plan builds on the success of nuclear energy by laying down a national goal of ordering 100 new nuclear reactors over the next twenty years.
  • Revenue generated by the sale of leases will be invested in renewable and alternative sources of energy. The House Republican plan also encourages conservation through proven tax incentives.
  • The American people don't want a national energy tax; they want energy independence. The House Republican plan is the comprehensive energy solution this country desperately needs.

Alternative energy innovation, exploration of our own resources, and 100 new nuclear facilities-- policy based on what we need and moving forward--gee, makes perfect sense to me.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

On the Letterman Flap

This MSNBC interview reminds me of the babe who did the Tea Party/CNN interview.

Best part, "That's actually happened to me, I'm fine I'm still here". She gets so upset, like a child not getting her way.

Great journalism- these women give us women a bad name.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Ideological Tests at The U

So- here are the essay questions for entrance into the University of Minnesota Masters of Nursing Program:


Please respond to all of the following essay questions. Prepare your responses carefully, as they are your opportunity to tell the Admissions Committee about yourself in ways that might not be evident from your academic record. The School seeks to admit and educate a diverse student body, both in order to enrich the students' educational experience and to prepare them to meet the health needs of a diverse society. Student body characteristics that will enhance the diversity in the school include leadership qualities, a strong work record, community or public service record, special talents and interests, gender (males are underrepresented in the nursing profession), and a wide range of economic, social, racial/ethnic and geographic backgrounds.

Essay I: Given that there are many more applicants to the MN program than can be admitted, discuss what makes you an excellent candidate for this intensive program. Include experiences that have prepared you for a career in nursing and your career goals. (Please do not exceed 2 double-spaced pages.)

Essay II: Following instructions 1 – 3 below, prepare an essay in response to the statement below. (Please do not exceed 2 double-spaced pages.) If you cite any published sources provide citations within your response and complete references at the end of your response.Statement: "It is appropriate for the state government to provide funding for health care and education of illegal immigrants."

First, take the perspective of someone who agrees with this statement and provide rationale that supports agreement.

Next, take the perspective of someone who disagrees with this statement and provide rationale that supports disagreement.

Finally, indicate the position - either agreement or disagreement - that YOU support given what you know at this time. Provide rationale for your position, considering the validity of the rationale you provided previously for agreement and disagreement.

Can you believe this? Of course you can- it's liberal academia. Although they deny their bias continually.

The second question was recently changed from a more generic one.

More on this later....

Monday, June 8, 2009

What on Earth is This? Part 2

Here's some of the Back Story on last week's "Earth 2100" ABC News Program from the company who produced the cartoon/sci-fi movie.

Working with a big company like ABC was thrilling because of their resources and large-scale vision (which includes numerous interviews with scientists,

The entire process was amazingly collaborative, with the plot points and characters emerging out of long brainstorming meetings. I really enjoyed sitting at the ABC studios conference table with the producers, fellow writers, editors, and production assistants, kicking ideas around.

(One thing I learned from the experience was to not let my writing get too precious — due to the many, many edits and revisions, not much of our original language remains in the script, though the scenarios and specific shots remain much the same.)

What's most interesting to me is that a news organization would promote outright lies in this program. Even if you accept the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's findings (which were entirely generated by computer models and are not able to be tested in any way), the program is full of holes.

This writer spells them out:

The evil that ABC did in broadcasting Earth 2100 will live on long after them. By presenting a fictional account of future global warming, they will make it far more difficult to do what we do need to do to combat global warming.

Earth 2100 predicts a temperature rise of 6 degrees Celsius by 2070. The UN's IPCC predicts between 2 and 4 degrees by 2100.

Earth 2100 predicts sea level rise of 3 to 7 meters by 2070. The IPCC predicts about 1 and a half feet by 2100. "The new report says rises could range from 18 cm to 59 cm."

Earth 2100 predicts melting of the Greenland ice cover. The IPCC says that they don't think that will happen, but if it does it will take over three thousand years.

So basically none of what was shown in the movie is going to happen, but ABC News felt compelled to help propagate the lies anyway. ABC News

Sunday, June 7, 2009


For those of you interested in the Governor's race and who's in/who's out, here's a piece from the Star Trib.

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Early Prediction from a Little Old Activist

In the race for Governor- The DFL's best bet is cleary Margaret Anderson Kelliher. Minnesotans would love to put a woman in as Governor and although she's from ultra-lib Minneapolis, she grew up on a farm in Southern Minnesota where she was a 4-H member. She's also a Harvard Grad (not that I care, but liberals sure do).

Her liberal views, her bobbling of this legislative session may have an effect, but she looks so much like a nice Minnesotan that she can probably get around that. People have a very short memory. This legislative session- believe it or not- will not be on the radar in 2010.

Never under-estimate demeanor and style. Yes, I realize that it's comical that I'm using the word style in regards to the Speaker of the House-but that's exactly what it is.

Any of the following DFL candidates that are currently being discussed would be a dream for the GOP:

Corrput rich-guy Matt Entenza
Loser rich-guy Mark Dayton
Ridiculous liberal mayor of St. Paul, Chris Coleman
More ridiculous mayor of crime city Minneapolis, R.T. Ryback

Bring any of these guys on- bring on MAK and it will be a race.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Obama "Whiz Kid"

Did you know that there's a 31-year-old in charge of dismantling GM?

Hi- I've never worked a day in the business world and I was a mid-level campaign staffer last year, but now I'm making recommendations on how to run GM. Wow.

Reminder- GOP Candidates Debate

With Governor Pawlenty out in 2010- it is even more critical that we have the right leadership at the State Party. If you're interested in learning more about the candidates for State Chair, Deputy Chair, Secretary and Treasurer then be sure to attend tomorrow night's debate- here are the details:

The Voices of Republican Women (VOICES) is hosting a forum between the Minnesota Republican Party Leadership candidates for Chair and Deputy Chair.

Date: Thursday June 4, 2009
Location: Maple Grove Junior High (7000 Hemlock Lane Maple Grove, MN 55369)
Time: Mixer 6:30 p.m

Forum 7:00 p.m. – 9:30 pm

This forum is an opportunity for Delegates & Alternates of State Central Committee, Republicans and all others interested to hear directly from the candidates running for these critical leadership positions. The forum is designed to bring together candidates to discuss important issues relating to the Republican Party. It is an opportunity for each candidate to explain their position on important leadership issues, their vision for the future and how they would run the State Republican Party.

All Chair and Deputy Chair candidates have been invited to participate in the Forum. Secretary/Treasurer candidates have been invited to distribute material, give a short statement and respond to at least one pre-selected question. See the FaceBook link for the candidate list.There were will be a series of pre-set questions. There will also be an opportunity for the audience to submit questions to be asked of the candidates. We will also be accepting questions at the event, via FACEBOOK http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=161357190244&ref=ts#/event.php?eid=161357190244
and email (info@voicesofrepublicanwomen.org) .

The forum is open to the general public. All are welcome!

Liberal Logic

So the Schubert Theatre in Minneapolis gets Obama stimulus money, but the 169/494 interchange does not?

Check out this quote and try not to laugh:

"I'm thrilled to be the last money in," said downtown-area Council Member Lisa Goodman. She noted that performers at the theater are often low-to-moderate-income and that dance tickets are cheaper than live theater on Hennepin. Mayor R.T. Rybak also lauded the council decision.

Bravo City Council! You are going to create more jobs for actors and bring down the prices of live theatre! Liberal elitist buffoons!

Tuesday, June 2, 2009


I was just telling Todd that it was weird how I just noticed the promos for "Earth 2100" a few days ago- it was like it was thrown together.

What exactly was the extent of the coordination between ABC and The White House on this show?

Remember Obama's paid "infomercial" before the election, now we see a free Obama infomercial for his radical climate change policies. What next a cartoon about our healthcare system with liberal doctors telling us we're all going to die if we don't do something now? It's a pattern, a pattern with this President.

Could it be that they know that Americans were finally seeing through the B.S. and it's a minority opinion that climate change is man-made? So- they throw this stupid movie together and try to ram it down our throats again- but this time it's more urgent telling us our children and grandchildren are ALL GOING TO DIE.

What on Earth is This?

"Earth 2100" is on ABC right now (thanks for the tip, buddy M)...this is the most bizarre thing I've ever seen on network TV. I'm watching the last 30 minutes of the 2-hour special- my Direct TV info reads "Educational/Scientists predict the consequences of inaction"

This September, in Earth 2100, a dramatic ABC News 2-hour broadcast, the greatest minds across the globe will join together in a countdown to the year 2100 to tell us what we must do to survive the next century … And what may happen if we don't

I'm watching this, my mouth agape, A scientist says that by 2100 we're going to see an "official die-off" of the human race? It's a weird cartoon show with a narrator "Lucy" talking about a fictional world in 2100 interspersed with scientists giving commentary and then there are segments on climate change, renewable energy, mass transit, smaller cars, and talk of the President's agenda with his "Green Jobs" advisor. There are talks of sacrifice comparing our need to adopt the President's energy plan NOW with the fight in WW II. The CEO of Google is featured, Tom Freidman...they are showing pictures of tiny, tiny vehicles that we could be driving in. Pictures of tiny babies who will be a "precious commodity" in the future-- like they aren't now?

Is this 1970- population control?

I've had it with these bizarre scare-tactics- the enviro-nuts are taking over! It's one thing for flipping Miley Cyrus to tell kids that the need to "Reg and Pledge" (Register and Pledge to be a Part of the Friends for Change Climate Challenge). Note Disney/ABC the same company....this is CRAZY!

And lefties like to call US Nazis??

We are officially undergoing a government Propaganda campaign- I'm starting to get scared- seriously. WHO is behind this crap?? Don't tell me this is winning ratings for the network.

You know sometimes when I get hopeful (see previous post) that people are on our side- I see this stuff and I almost want to cry, I feel like we're up against this awful machine. This is exactly how they want us to feel- defeated.

This will be all over the radio and blogs tomorrow.

Pulse Check

It's been a busy day and my scattered political brain is even more scattered now with Governor Pawlenty's announcement that he won't seek a 3rd term in office. My initial thought was "Oh no!" The idea that we wouldn't have our goaltender at the net in St. Paul with the crazy DFL here scares the daylights out of me. But then I thought about the weak field of candidates on the Dem side and the vibe that I've been getting lately that the tide could be turning.

The national mood in 17 months will be the most important factor, but my gut read on Minnesota politics is that people (not just conservative Republicans like myself) have had it with 1. Ridiculous levels of Government spending 2. Government picking winners and losers and and 3. Power-hungry politicians who stay in office forever

I always thought Pawlenty would stay Governor, if indeed his aspirations are to be a Presidential candidate- it only made sense. But this is really a smarter move because he's coming off some very good press from his "Unallotment move" (he's single-handedly cutting almost $3 Billion off our state budget without raising taxes- in response to a showdown with our DFL-led Minnesota legislature). Quit while you're ahead, why take the chance of residing over a 3rd 4-year term when many things could go wrong? Pawlenty is a career politician and although his speech today (wisely) made reference to term limits, make no mistake, he's going to be in the public-sector for many years to come. (Perhaps he'll take something in the private sector to fill out his resume, but he'll be back).

I attended a local Townhall meeting last Saturday with our local legislators, State Senator David Hann, Representative Jenifer Loon (42B- Eden Prairie) and Representative Maria Ruud (42A Eden Prairie, S. Minnetonka). I only knew perhaps 10 of the 40 (or so) people there. Some local Republicans, some of the leaders of the local DFL (Including Eden Prairie School Board Chair Carol Bomben and Progressive-Majority School Board Member Kim Ross). I have no scientific evidence to support this- but the questions were mainly from the conservative standpoint. One woman questioned Ruud on taxes and why the DFL always insisted on raising taxes as an answer- Ruud explained "we're only raising taxes on those making over $250,000" -- the woman shot right back "we'll we're not rich and we're seeing our taxes continually increase" she also added (as I recall) that those "rich" are the job creators.

Another woman asked a simple question: "How do states without income taxes survive?" One guy questioned the "rancor" in St. Paul and the lack-of-ability to get a budget done and another said "there should be no special sessions" and got a round of applause. Another guy asked why the DFL chose to ignore the Governor when he said that the budget proposals shouldn't include new taxes. There was a gentleman there who said he represented the Fair Tax organization in Minnesota who asked why the state would be unwilling to spend $30,000 to have a study done to see if it's feasible in Minnesota (he mentioned 11 other states have the model in place and aren't in the red like we are)-- Ruud shot back that he would have been better off finding private funding for the study. I laughed out loud at that remembering that the state's Climate Change Advisory Group cost taxpayers $40,000 and I'm sure if I looked at voting records Ruud approved that cost... The Fair Tax guy shot right back at Ruud that he talked to the Tom Baak- Chair of the Tax Committee- who told him specifically that such a study needed to have some government money to pay for it so there were no conflicts. Ruud looked pretty bad with that exchange.

Another senior gentleman provided a little Minnesota tax history when all taxes were derived from property owned- saying that "if someone owned a typewriter, they hid it when the tax man came".

The event ended with some rambling lib offering up ideas of how the U.S. could run more like Ireland and then babbled about other DFL platform planks in his non-question-speech. I also heard there was some crazy DFL'er that kept walking out of the room saying loudly "I can't take this" anytime a conservative viewpoint was expressed- loudly slamming the City Council Chamber doors- if anybody can tip me off on who this is- shoot me an email!

Bottom line- that room went our way- big time.

Hann and Loon were fact-based calm and reasoned. They were all congenial. Ruud was anecdotal- sharing that her nephew who is graduating with an MD from Johns Hopkins doesn't want to move to Minnesota because he's "worried" about the brain drain and our health care system. Poor little Johns Hopkins grad! She contradicted herself too when she hinted that a special session was needed to "negotiate" and then said "I agree" when an attendee stated "there should be no special sessions" and got a round of applause. She also told a story of how she "stood up" in front of her caucus to deliver a "no tax" message -- that she wasn't hearing from people in her district that they wanted tax increases even adding "there were witnesses!"-- but then said she later was told by constituents that they wanted new taxes, that "everyone should share the pain". Say, what? Maria- some free political advice-stand up like the liberal you are and OWN those tax hikes. Don't try to play both side of the fence it will bite you.

She talked about cuts to welfare throughout the event and said "her heart" was in the General Medical Assistance Care program- she got applause when she said that cuts to the program reflected a "change in Minnesota values"....although the applause was fewer people doing it louder, as it came after the other round of applause- sort of a "we've got spirit, yes we do, how bout you" move.

Ruud may be a nice-enough person, but she's very weak on facts and surprisingly not strategic at these types of public events. She's all-over-the-place. I only hope she holds more of these meetings.

So, I'm rambling- back to the Governor. There are many good candidates on the GOP side- State Senator David Hann and Representative Marty Siefert would be my favorites. Night and Day in their delivery of the GOP message- the former is cerebral, highly articulate and always calm in his persuasion- the latter is just downright funny and entertaining. I really like Representatives Paul Kohl and Laura Brod too- big fans of both, but I think they're both pretty young. Of course if Hann decides to run it will open up all sorts of fun in our local political landscape.

As I've said- I think we have people on the side of smaller government- at least on the side of questioning the judgement of big-government liberals. I also see activists chomping-at-the-bit to work for principled candidates and try to steer the ship off the course of mealy-mouthed mediocrity- if only the party can figure out how to harness that energy....the time clock is ticking.

Off the Top of My Head

My blogging is light these days- newborn twins combined with a Minnesota summer.

Also, I have so much to say and yet nothing to say- does that make sense? I can't seen to get my thoughts together. This is all I can offer:

Obama's Date Nights- Dude you're the President of the United States, not some suburban dad. Quit being so arrogant (shutting down streets in NYC to see a play and eat in The Village) and your safety is critical to our nation (taking a Gulfstream jet?)

Tim Geithner being laughed at by Chinese students. He's a joke here and abroad.

The proposed Government-ownership of GM 67% of Americans oppose it. Want to save U.S. Automakers? Get rid of CAFE standards and let them build cars that people want to buy. Personally I'd like something that's not a mini-van or a huge SUV, but can still seat 6 people, haul stuff and look cool. Even the Prius is touting that "it's larger"-- I LOVE their new commercial ("Harmony" Ad Campaign- brilliant) and sing along to it every time it's on.

Conan O'Brien's now hosting "The Tonight Show" (I'm up feeding babies) Juvenile- the show no longer has an ounce of the sophistication and wit of Johnny Carson...I feel very old at 35.

More soon.