Subscribe


August 2008
S M T W T F S
« Jul    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Categories

Archives

« Older Home
Loading Newer »

The Worst Economy In…….

Published by Gary Gross July 25th, 2008 in Al Franken and Economy. 0 Comments

Every couple years, Democrats trot out the line about the Republican economy being the worst economy in whatever amount of time. In 1992, it was the worst economy in fifty years. In 2004, it was the worst economy since 1932. This year, it’s the worst economy in eighty years. It’s getting rather old. It has the same impact as saying “Liberal, liberal.” Here’s the opening paragraph of the DFL post:

Today, Minnesota DFL Chair Brian Melendez held a press conference to present a new report entitled: “The Cost of Coleman: A Report on the Effects of the Bush–Coleman Economy on Middle-Class Minnesotans.” As gas prices skyrocket, wages fall, and the economy continues to worsen, the DFL Party issued the report to highlight Republican Senator Norm Coleman’s support of failed Bush and Republican policies that have generated the worst economic circumstances for the middle class in 80 years.

Chairman Melendez is pretending that the skyrocketting gas prices are Sen. Coleman’s fault, which they clearly aren’t. It’s becoming apparent to everyone that the current escalation is driven by Speaker Pelosi. Even the Washington Post takes her to task in this editorial:

WHY NOT have a vote on offshore drilling? There’s a serious debate to be had over whether Congress should lift the ban on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf that has been in place since 1981. Unfortunately, you won’t be hearing it in the House of Representatives; certainly, you won’t find lawmakers voting on it anytime soon.

I can’t blame Chairman Melendez for pretending like the high gas prices are Republicans’ fault. If I were the state party chairman who had to defend obstructionists like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, I’d be forced into full spin mode, too. People are noticing that Reid and Pelosi are obstructing a vote that would drop the price of gas.

What Chairman Melendez characterizes as the failures of the Bush-Coleman economy can be laid directly at the feet of the current Speaker and Senate Majority Leader.

“Times are tough, and we owe it to the people of Minnesota to debate the serious issues that affect them daily. But while Al Franken has toured Minnesota this week to promote fresh, specific ideas for actually helping middle-class Minnesotans improve their lives, we have seen Senator Coleman and his surrogates, including special-interest front groups, do everything that they can to avoid talking about the issues that Minnesotans care most about.

Chairman Melendez obviously wants to ignore Sen. Coleman’s bill that would increase energy production and shrink people’s energy bills. If I had to defend the least qualified candidate in Minnesota history, I’d want to ignore Sen. Coleman’s common sense legislative agenda.

It’s Coleman Vs. Franken

Published by Gary Gross July 14th, 2008 in Al Franken. 0 Comments

According to this CNN article, we now know that this year’s Minnesota Senate race will be between Sen. Coleman and Al Franken. I wouldn’t have been surprised with either decision but I had a hunch that Jesse wouldn’t jump in. I thought that Jesse’s ego couldn’t tolerate losing, which is why he didn’t run for re-election in 2002.

Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura has decided not to run for U.S. Senate in that state, he told CNN’s “Larry King Live” Monday night. Ventura, a former professional wrestler, had said last week he was weighing whether to run. The deadline to file for the race is Tuesday.

Ventura said he was “close” to running against incumbent Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, but he decided against it because he didn’t want to submit his relatives to the kind of media scrutiny they endured when he was governor.

As an independent, Ventura won a single term as Minnesota governor in 1998. He beat Coleman and Hubert Humphrey III, a scion of a Minnesota Democratic dynasty.

The only thing that’s standing in the way of a certain Coleman vs. Franken race is Franken’s primary challenge:

“An attorney from a well-known family in Minnesota legal circles says she will challenge Senate candidate Al Franken in a Democratic primary. Priscilla Lord Faris says she will file the paperwork to run in the September primary.

Lord Faris is the daughter of retired federal judge Miles Lord, who remains active in DFL politics. She is managing partner of a personal injury law firm.

Lord Faris says she has given money to Franken but isn’t persuaded he can take the seat away from Sen. Norm Coleman, the Republican incumbent. She says a primary campaign will sharpen the Democratic candidates and give Coleman a tougher challenge in November.”

I don’t know what kind of candidate Ms. Lord-Faris is but her dad is a longtime Hubert Humphrey associate.

At any rate, Jesse’s announcement marks the start of a very uphill climb for Mr. Franken. That’s verified by this SurveyUSA-KSTP poll:

Incumbent Republican Senator Norm Coleman thanked supporters after officially filing for office Monday. And he’s got a reason to be optimistic.

Our exclusive SURVEY USA/KSTP Poll shows Coleman with a 13-point lead over Franken, 52 to 39 percent. The margin of error is 3.9 percent. Eight percent is still undecided.

Don’t hold me to this but I don’t think that Franken has cracked the 40 percent barrier in quite awhile. It goes without saying that a candidate that can’t top 40 percent faces major obstacles between now and Election Day.

Heres’ the breakdown of the poll:

Q: Minnesota will elect a United States Senator in November 2008. If the election for United States Senator were today, and the only two candidates on the ballot were Republican Norm Coleman and DFL candidate Al Franken, who would you vote for?

Overall:
Coleman 52 percent, Franken 39 percent

Men Only:
Coleman 55 percent, Franken 38 percent

Women Only:
Coleman 50 percent, Franken 41 percent

It’s a bad sign anytime that a Democrat can’t crack 50 percent with women. That’s because Democrats almost automatically lose the men vote.

The other impressive thing from this poll is that Norm tops 50 percent with every age group. That’s a significant accomplishment that must rattle the DFL. Rest assured that Brian Melendez won’t be out spinning this poll.

Which Is It?

Published by Gary Gross July 10th, 2008 in Uncategorized and Al Franken. 0 Comments

Al Franken has an advertisement that suggests that lobbyists are to blame for high gas prices. Meanwhile, the STrib’s Nick Coleman has gotten out his crayons and scribbled a column that says that we’re screwed in terms of high gas prices at the pump. First, here’s Franken’s money quote from yesterday’s press conference:

“Right now hundreds of former Senators and Congressman are lobbying for big oil and special interests in Washington,” Franken tells viewers in the TV spot, “No wonder gas is at $4 a gallon.”

According to the gospel of Franken, special interests and unethical politicians are why gas is expensive. Let’s see what Mr. Coleman has to say about high gas prices:

We think we could solve our troubles if we started drilling on the outer continental shelf. Then we might be able to lower the price of gas to $3.98 gallon. Twenty years from now.

That’s because oil is priced in a global market, where the extra production would amount to a tiny drop in the world’s bucket, about 200,000 barrels a day. Whoopee.

Contrast that miniscule difference with what might be achieved by improving fuel efficiencies for cars and light trucks.

According to the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research, the United States could cut consumption by 3.3 million barrels a day (16 times the effect of expanded drilling) if the average auto fuel efficiency was 32 miles per gallon.

It sounds like Nick Coleman thinks it’s more of a supply and demand thing. While Mr. Coleman’s ‘facts’ sound like they’re straight from the liberal mantra songbook, it’s impossible to say that this isn’t a supply and demand problem. In other words, Nick Coleman is closer to the truth than Al Franken.

It’s a sad day when Nick Coleman is closer to the truth than a US Senate candidate. That isn’t to say that Nick Coleman is right. His statistics are flimsy at best. Suggesting that opening the OCS would add “200,000 barrels a day” to world oil production is plain irresponsible. It’s obvious that Saint Nick’s factchecking team didn’t bother running that through the truthmeter. Continue reading ‘Which Is It?’

Franken’s ‘No-Solutions’ Solution On Energy

Published by Gary Gross July 8th, 2008 in Al Franken. 0 Comments

Al Franken talked with the Bemidji Pioneer’s Brad Swenson about his supposed solutions to high gas prices. Frankly, it’s the closest thing I’ve seen to a non-solution solution. Here’s Franken’s solution as reported in the Bemidji Pioneer:

In the short term, Franken would look to a windfall profits tax on Big Oil, with the money going to alternative energy research and in tax breaks to low-income and middle-income families struggling with energy bills, probably by adding more money to the Low-Income Heat and Energy Assistance Program.

He’d also end government subsidies to oil companies. And he wants to study the effect of speculation on oil futures trading, which some say are driving prices up.

There isn’t a self-respecting economist that would take this so-called plan seriously. It does nothing to bring down prices. As for the profits that speculators are making, the only solution is increase oil production.

We didn’t hear a peep about speculators in the late 1990s when approximately 9 million more barrels of oil were produced daily than was consumed. That’s because there wasn’t anything to speculate about. That’s because people knew that the market could absorb a little shock.

The cushion between what’s being used and what’s being produced is 1.5 million barrels a day. That’s a tiny margin. Now there’s a rational explanation for speculators bidding up the prices. Speculators drive prices up anytime Ahmadinejad threatens Israel. Speculators drive prices up anytime dictator Chavez talks about cutting production. Speculators drive prices up anytime a tropical storm develops in the Gulf.

That’s a structurally unstable pattern to maintain. Simply put, that’s a recipe for disaster.

I’ve said before that this answer could’ve come from any Democrat. It’s like they’re wind-up dolls. If you wind up the Franken doll, this is the answer it’s programmed to transmit. If you wind up the Klobuchar doll, you’ll get the same programmed reply. If you wind up the Tinklenberg doll, he’ll spew the same non-solutions solutions as the Klobuchar or Franken dolls said. For that matter, you’d get the same rehearsed lines from the Walz doll, too.

Compare that with Sen. Coleman’s proposed legislation. Here’s what Sen. Coleman told a group of Rochester business leaders:

U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman told a group of Rochester businessmen Wednesday that the United States can bring down the price of gasoline by opening up the Outer Continental Shelf to oil exploration as part of a broad mix of energy options.

Coleman, a Republican who is seeking a second term in the U.S. Senate, also predicted that the clamor from a public battered by the soaring price of gasoline, now hovering at $4 a gallon, will lead to a bipartisan consensus on the need to drill off the nation’s coasts.

“Right now, we’re being held hostage to Saudi sheiks and thugs and tyrants like (Venezuelan President Hugo) Chavez and (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad, because we don’t have the options. It’s like fighting a fight with one hand tied behind your back,” Coleman said.

Based on that reporting, I think it’s justifiable to say that Coleman isn’t restricted by the environmentalist lobby’s every demand. I can’t say that about Franken and Klobuchar, Walz and Tinklenberg. They can’t march to their own drummer. They’re restricted to what the environmentalist lobby limits them to.

That’s why I disagree slightly with Sen. Coleman when he says that “$4 a gallon [gas] will lead to a bipartisan consensus on the need to drill off the nation’s coasts.” I think they’d (Democrats) agree that that’s needed in private but I don’t believe that they’d say that in public for fear of having the enironmentalists drying up their campaign contribution spigot.

There’s one last thing I must say before finishing this post: Increasing the tax burden on oil companies won’t bring prices down at the pump. Ending government subsidies to oil companies won’t bring prices down at the pump, either.

David Schultz: Franken, Coleman Just Posturing

Published by Gary Gross July 5th, 2008 in Al Franken and Economy. 0 Comments

According to this article on WCCO’s website, Hamline professor David Schultz thinks that Sen. Coleman and Al Franken are posturing for the voters on the issue of high gas prices. Here’s what Schultz said:

Professor David Schulz of Hamline University said both candidates are posturing.

“Can either of these candidates do anything in the next few weeks? No, absolutely nothing. They’re not going to have any impact on gas prices. A lot of this is about symbolic politics. What would I do if I were king, or something like that,” he said.

However, Schulz said both the candidates do clearly have different views on this issue.

And while much of the campaign so far has focused on matters, like Franken’s past writings, tax problems and just this week Coleman’s living arrangements in Washington D.C., Schulz said this debate on energy policy could mark the start of the real campaign, one where issues and substance make up the headlines.

I respectfully disagree with Schultz’s characterization. The difference between Franken and Coleman is that Franken is pushing a tax increase while Sen. Coleman has proposed a solution. That isn’t posturing. Let’s examine Franken’s solution first.

Franken said that he supports a windfall profits tax, with the money being “invested in renewable energy sources.” The economy is fragile as it is but Franken is proposing a tax increase on the oil companies. This raises their production costs. It also passes that production cost onto consumers.

This is nothing more than populism dressed up as a solution. It’s what I’d call an anti-solution. It doesn’t solve anything; it just makes things worse.

Now let’s look at Sen. Coleman’s proposal. Sen. Coleman introduced a bill that would increase oil production by opening up more leases on the OCS. It also would allow for the building of nuclear power plants.

During the blogger conference call, Rep. John Peterson said that it wouldn’t take nearly as long as Democrats are telling people to get production going. He said that there are some rigs off California’s coast that were placed offlimits that could be fitted with new technology that could start producing oil “within months.” Rep. Peterson also said that exploration that’s done near existing oil fields would come online faster because it wouldn’t take long to connect with existing infrastructure.

The other great thing about tapping into the OCS is that there’s huge amounts of natural gas out there. That’s what I’d call a solution. I definitely wouldn’t call that posturing.

WCCO does its watchers a disservice by treating an anti-solution with the same merit as a solution. Perhaps that’s why the people are voting with their fingers to opt for the New Media’s appraisals instead of the analysis of the WCCO’s and Stribs.

Rest assured that I will be pointing out the differences between Franken’s gimmicks and Sen. Coleman’s solutions.

Was Franken Lying Then? Or Is He Lying Now?

Published by Gary Gross July 2nd, 2008 in Uncategorized, Al Franken and Economy. 0 Comments

I was prepared to say that this Coleman for Senate press release called Al Franken’s energy positions into question. Then I realized that isn’t a harsh enough rebuke of Franken’s energy policy. Here’s what his website says about “gas prices”:

Let’s not fall for gimmicks and false promises. A “gas tax holiday” would take billions of dollars out of our already-under-funded national highway trust fund and hand that money directly to the oil companies, and it wouldn’t reduce the price at the pump. And although I’m not categorically opposed to off-shore drilling if it’s environmentally sustainable, Senator Coleman’s proposal wouldn’t increase production at all in the next decade, and thus wouldn’t be any help to consumers at the pump. And the oil companies it would benefit already have plenty of drillable areas that they’re not using. We need real solutions, not thinly-veiled giveaways to Big Oil.

Here’s what Mr. Franken said during his appearance on Don Shelby’s show just 2 weeks ago:

Shelby: Okay. Now let’s talk a little bit about energy. The President of the United States now has reversed himself in saying that $4 a gallon gasoline ought to be incentive enough to go and reserve himself on his policy against allowing offshore drilling in the OCS, the outer continental shelf. The Democratic presidential nominee says no he still doesn’t like that. Do you think that there is anything in that policy that would bring the price of gasoline down below $4 if we allowed that?

Franken: I very much doubt it. I’d certainly like to see what the environmental, the potential environmental impact of something of that would be. And I imagine that’s why we haven’t been doing it.

Let’s first examine this Franken statement:

I’m not categorically opposed to off-shore drilling if it’s environmentally sustainable.

Whether he is or isn’t, what’s certain is that he thinks it wouldn’t help gas prices. It’s obvious that the first question he wants answered is whether it’s environmentally safe. If he knew more about drilling on the OCS, he’d know that it’s ecofriendly. When Hurricanes Katrina and Rita ripped through the Gulf, the rigs were down for awhile but there weren’t any spills reported.

SIDENOTE: Sen. Coleman already did his homework on that. Sen. Coleman wouldn’t have put his legislation together if he wasn’t certain of the construction safeguards.

When Franken says “the oil companies it would benefit already have plenty of drillable areas that they’re not using. We need real solutions, not thinly-veiled giveaways to Big Oil”, is he saying that increasing oil production is a giveaway to ‘Big Oil’? That’s what it sounds like to me. The truth is that Mr. Franken has a problem with capitalism until it benefits him. Then he’s Mr. Capitalist.

By comparison, Sen. Coleman isn’t an on-again-off-again capitalist. Sen. Coleman knows that we need to expand our energy supplies. Logically, that means oil companies have to increase production, which will help their bottom line. Unlike Mr. Franken, Sen. Coleman knows that you can’t increase oil production without ‘Big Oil’ companies.

It’s telling that Al Franken hasn’t stopped debating himself on energy policy. It’s telling that Sen. Coleman has a multi-faceted, thoughtful plan that will increase energy production, which will lower energy prices to consumers.

As an energy consumer, I’ll vote for Sen. Coleman’s plan because it’s logical whereas Mr. Franken’s plan is still ‘evolving’.

Another Attack Dog Destined for Utter Annihilation

Published by Gary Gross June 22nd, 2008 in Al Franken and False Attacks. 0 Comments

We’re already seeing the Franken camp’s plan for victory. It’s apparent that Franken will go negative. I realize that that isn’t news. It isn’t news that they’ll use the Bush-Cheney card, either. That’s why this SC Times editorial from SD-14 chair Buzz Snyder is easy fisking. Look at this opening spin:

Senate Republicans are doing more than their part to assure that public approval of the Congress does not rise above 20 percent.

Last week, in again blocking advancement of legislation to help the American people, they have cemented their new GOP moniker: Graveyard Of Progress. And our own Norm Coleman is pitching inasmuch as calculations of his own political survival will allow.

In Mr. Snyder’s world, Republicans are to blame for preventing Democrats from getting virtuous things done. That’s spin so bad, it’d make a Clinton flinch. What’s funny is Mr. Snyder’s proof:

Republicans excused Senator Coleman (and two other incumbents in tough re-election contests) from joining them in blocking a vote on S-3044, a bill to provide energy price relief to Americans and hold oil companies accountable for their price-gouging actions regarding skyrocketing energy prices.

I decided to check which bill that was. Here’s what I found: Continue reading ‘Another Attack Dog Destined for Utter Annihilation’

Franken on Energy

Published by Gary Gross June 20th, 2008 in Al Franken and Economy. 0 Comments

Listening to Al Franken talk about energy is like listening to any other Democrat on energy. Wind them up, then listen to them spew the same nonsense. Earlier this week, Don Shelby interviewed Franken on Shelby’s WCCO radio program. Here’s a noteworthy exchange:

Shelby: Okay. Now let’s talk a little bit about energy. The President of the United States now has reversed himself in saying that $4 a gallon gasoline ought to be incentive enough to go and reverse himself on his policy against allowing offshore drilling in the OCS, the outer continental shelf. The Democratic presidential nominee says no, he still doesn’t like that. Do you think that there is anything in that policy that would bring the price of gasoline down below $4 if we allowed that?

Franken: I very much doubt it. I’d certainly like to see what the environmental, the potential environmental impact of something of that would be. And I imagine that’s why we haven’t been doing it. You know, this administration basically blew it about 7 and a half years ago when it immediately said we’re gonna withdraw from Kyoto, we’re going to not regulate CO2 as he said he would do during the campaign. And they suppressed science on global warming. We should’ve been years and years ago now remember the Republicans have controlled Congress since 95 and um we should’ve been raising fuel efficiency standards. We should’ve been anticipating this. And there’s been a tremendous opportunity cost in not addressing this earlier. Japan now is leading the world in solar, we should be. Denmark in wind, we should be. The wind turbines we get, the business end of them

My first question for Mr. Franken would be why he thinks increasing production wouldn’t drop prices much, especially considering the effect the Saudi announcement that they were increasing their oil production by 300K barrels a day has dropped gas prices by a dime a gallon already. Imagine what would happen if we increased production by 2+ million barrels/day instead of just 300K barrels/day. Wouldn’t that have a significant impact on a gallon of gas?

Franken’s answer is more diatribe than policy. Notice this accusation:

And they suppressed science on global warming.

I’d be interested in hearing what Mr. Franken is basing his accusation on. Is his opinion based on verifiable proof? Is Mr. Franken’s accusation based on his dislike of Republicans?

I’d further suggest that the alternative energy products that Mr. Franken rattled off are things that Sen. Coleman supports, too. In other words, the biggest difference between Sen. Coleman and Mr. Franken is that Mr. Franken is beholden to the environmental extremists whereas Sen. Coleman prefers an ‘all of the above’ strategy of reaching energy independence.

Ben Lieberman of the Heritage Foundation writes that “Good energy policy is easy to distinguish from bad energy policy: Good policy leads to more supplies of affordable energy and bad policy leads to less.” That makes sense to most Americans because they understand the principles behind supply and demand.

Based on Franken’s answer, it’s obvious his policy fails that test miserably. While it’s true we want to conserve, it’s equally true that we should increase energy production, too.

Franken touts himself as a wonk but I haven’t seen proof of it. Franken is proof that looking like a nerd doesn’t mean you’re a wonk.

COLEMAN FOR U.S. SENATE PRESS RELEASE: “COLEMAN FOR SENATE CAMPAIGN RELEASES FIRST TV AD OF 2008″ #2

Published by Michael B. Brodkorb June 11th, 2008 in Uncategorized. 0 Comments

Here is the new ad release by Coleman’s campaign.

COLEMAN FOR U.S. SENATE PRESS RELEASE: “COLEMAN FOR SENATE CAMPAIGN RELEASES FIRST TV AD OF 2008″

Published by Michael B. Brodkorb June 11th, 2008 in Uncategorized. 0 Comments

SAINT PAUL – At a news conference, Coleman for Senate Campaign Manager Cullen Sheehan today unveiled the campaign’s first television advertisement of the 2008 election.  Entitled “Working Together,” the new ad spotlights Senator Coleman’s bipartisan approach to problem solving.

"Throughout his 30-year career of public service in Minnesota, Norm Coleman has brought people together to get things done,” said Cullen Sheehan, campaign manager. “As Mayor of St. Paul, Norm created 18,000 new jobs, brought the NHL back to Minnesota and revitalized a city.  As senator, Norm has been a champion for renewable fuels, rooted out billions in government waste, delivered the benefits our veterans deserve and put partisanship aside to get things done for the people of Minnesota."

"Our first ad of the campaign highlights Norm’s tremendous ability to work with people who want to move America forward. As he says in the ad, it’s not enough to criticize: you have to be willing to work to find solutions," Sheehan added.  

The ad can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/colemanforsenate

"WORKING TOGETHER"

Senator Norm Coleman: 

"The key to making a difference is to focus on a shared vision. 

"The tough work is pulling people together- at times bridging a partisan divide.

"It's not good enough just to criticize- not good enough to tear something down.  

"The business of serving the people is about making a difference, and about doing something- not just fighting about it but doing something about it.

"I'm Norm Coleman and I approve this message."

 

###

Latest

RSS