While such straw polls mean little in terms of consequence, they can lend early credibility to campaigns and serve as a thermometer for different interest groups.  Today’s results show us that, while the right-wing base adopts increasingly radical rhetoric, none of their leaders threaten the status the quo.  We see this both in the winner, Mike Pence, as well as the runner-up Mike Huckabee.  Mike Huckabee himself holds a very liberal record on illegal immigration and economic issues, but he maintains a tight relationship with Evangelicals.  While Mike Pence has built a conversative record by supporting the Bush tax-cuts and supporting the ban on partial birth abortion, he also sits on the Congressional Task Force against Anti-Semitism and authored a back door amnesty bill. 

The fact that Mike Pence and the Republican Congress passed highly touted tax cuts yet didn’t utter a word about spending should be notice enough for serious conservatives.  The fact that he proposed immigration “reform” that would let illegals go home for a week and then return should be the nail in the coffin.  Do not be surprised if this new crop of “conservatives” push through big glitzy reforms that add up to buncombe.  As well, as war with Iran is aggressively agitated for, watch “anti-semite”  come to mean anybody who takes a reasonable stand against it.

Chances are the million dollars will not be restored, nor the credibility of charter schools in Minnesota.  The key detail of this case is that it was one million dollars over the course of five years.  That means he stole $200,000 a year on average and it took five years before anyone figured it out.  This was no overnight job.  While he obviously is guilty of theft, we wonder if anyone on the board of directors will be charged with negligence?

The state and supporters of charter schools make pretenses to strict oversight and efficiency, but empirical evidence suggests that such claims are hogwash.  Just yesterday the Star Tribune ran an article about TCF bank Chairman Bill Cooper double-dipping on oversight.  Cooper runs two charter school oversight programs, Friends of Education and Student Achievment Minnesota.  While these organizations have different names, the former bankrolls the latter and they have the exact same board of directors.  Beth Topoluk ,the chair of Student Achievment Minnesota, is an employee of Friends of Education and paid by TCF bank.  It is clear that Bill Cooper has merely doubled his clout with a front organization and this went unnoticed by the state Board of Education.

Article XIII section 1 of the Minnesota Consitution demands a “general and uniform system of public schools.”  Charter schools are exceptions to the rule, recieving public money but avoiding public oversight.  The curriculum of charter schools may be vastly different from an adjacent public school.  While one may argue that they provide a better education, they might be at a loss to explain why such a privelege should be available only to a small percent of students.  Taxpayer money doled out for private interests to manage is a recipe for corruption and, in this case, charter schools are no exception.

The full article can be found here: http://www.startribune.com/local/north/101616878.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiacyKU7DYaGEP7vDEh7P:DiUs

However, the endorsement  of Independence Party candidate Tom Horner by the public health figure Dr. Michael Osterholm is news indeed.  Dr. Osterholm spent nearly 25 years in the Mn Department of Health and currently serves on the U of M board for the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.  According to the Mn Campaign Finance Board, the only public contribution Dr. Osterholm has made was to Stillwater resident Ted Thompson, DFL senate candidate for district 56 in 2000.  Thompson, like Horner, works in public relations and graduated from St. Thomas University.  He unsuccessfully challenged Republican Congressman Mark Kennedy in 2004. 

In an earlier post we touched on the class divide in the DFL primary, where endorsed candidate Margaret Anderson Kelliher fared better in upper income suburbs while Mark Dayton performed best in outstate and blue collar areas.  Dayton may be reaping a subtle blow back from his “tax the rich” rhetoric.  Though he recieved the endorsement of the SEIU, in reality it was his to lose.  Now, he may be alienating some of the educated upper income liberals who benefit from government spending but are hurt by tax increases. 

Considering Dr. Osterholm’s long and lucrative tenure as a government employee, it certainly wouldn’t behoove him to support a candidate like Tom Emmer who favors a significant reduction of state spending and a reduction of state departments.  However, Mark Dayton’s income tax increases would hurt people like Dr. Osterholm the most. People like him rely on a higher income salary rather than family trusts and investments like Dayton.  When one considers that nearly 60% of DFL primary voters did not pick Mark Dayton, he may be susceptible to this developing fault.

1.http://wcco.com/local/Union.backs.Dayton.2.1876375.html

2. http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/cbreiter2/january-12-2010/unions-and-american-workers-part-i.html

3. http://www.cfbreport.state.mn.us/dyncfb/Main.php?do=resultAction

The campaign of 2008 was against a backdrop of uncertainty.  As the economy generally stalled, certain financial institutions and industries seemed to collapse overnight.  Obama campaigned as the cool consensus builder, an international man who would reverse the Bush doctrine of unilateralism and bring people together for solutions.  In contrast, the McCain-Palin ticket was seen as too bellicose and unprepared.  McCain was too much like Bush to liberals, and too little like him to conservatives.  Among other confusing policies, he would have pursued Bush’s war, but dropped his tax cuts.  What carried Obama was his simple, arbitrary message of “hope” and “change.”  This twin thrust united the various constituencies that would give him surprising wins in states like Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana.

The famous red and blue poster of Obama embodies the duality of his message.  The cool blue message of hope played out to the shocked suburbanites who had been layed off and seen their retirement plans crash.  Bush had spent eight years as the “decider,” a man of unilateral foreign policy and domestic polarization and his policies were blamed for unraveling suburban tranquility.  Obama’s positive image as the international and “post-racial” reformer seemed to embody the bourgois values of equality, stability and prosperity. 

“Change” was depicted with the hot color of red.  This was a dog whistle both to the Liberal intelligentsia as well as the working class and minorities.  These two factions can be symbolized by Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright.  These are the groups that benefit the most from government spending such as student loan grants, infrastructure stimulus, extended unemployment checks, and government provided health insurance.  Here, his candidacy was blatantly racial.  With 96% of the black vote he symbolized a radical change for minorities as well as liberal elites.  “Change” to them meant that Obama was finally going to deal with the “rich white people” who supported George W. Bush.

It was the ability to channel the frustrations of the scared upper classes and the angry lower classes into a coalition that really made the 2008 campaign historic.  Now, as the words are translating into action, it is becoming clear that the middle class does not fit in well with the classical left.  It is at their expense that health insurance is mandated and tax-cuts expire.  His political capital has been strained with the health care bill and another bold legislative step could see him lose the middle-class for good.  On the other hand, if he moderates too much he will lose the energy and support of the left. 

While polls provide a general assessment of the mood, it is the mid-term elections that will give us insight into how far these allegiances have shifted .

1. http://wcco.com/national/Obama.poll.rating.2.1866109.html

Earlier this year, Tom Emmer ran an insurgent campaign against the establishment-friendly candidate Marty Seifert.  Casting himself from the beginning as a no-compromise 0utsider, Tom Emmer withstood accusations that he lacked specific plans or that his persona and DWI record made him too rough for the general election.  As minority leader, Seifert had spent previous years building ties with the College Republicans, black Republicans, his southwestern district and TCF bank.  Tom used his strictly conservative legislative record and emphasized his persona as a red-blooded, hockey playing reformer.  In the end, Tom came to the endorsing convention with the strength of central, and exurban Minnesota winning 53% on the first ballot.  He sailed through yesterday’s primary and is heading to the general election with a platform of cutting and restructuring government to grow business.

The DFL contest this year was far more complicated.  While the GOP went to the caucuses with a choice of two viable candidates, DFLers had a crowded field of prospective nominees.   House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher was the favorite and Minneaopolis mayor R.T Rybak, while state senator John Marty and representative Tom Rukavina split the rest of the votes.  Neither John Marty, the progressive’s progressive, nor neutered urbanite Rybak could claim the mantle of “Angry White Man.”  At the DFL Convention, it belonged to the Iron Ranger Tommy Rukavina, who registered a mere 18% among delegates.

However, the primary challenge presented a different landscape.  Challenger Matt Entenza cast himself as the “poor boy from Worthington” but his appeal was geared towards minorities and progressives.  He tapped black anchorwoman Robyn Robinson, focused his message on inner-city schools, and worked the various ethnic communities in St. Paul and Minneapolis.  Margaret stood on her legislative credentials as someone who beat Governor Tim Pawlenty and has the experience to lead.  Mark Dayton’s message of skinning the rich played on top of his name recognition and support amongst senior citizens to edge past MAK and DFL activists.  Ironically, it was Dayton’s popularity on the Iron Range that ended up tipping the race his way.

When one compares the results from different parts of the state, it is easy to see the demographics at work.  House District 14b, for example, covers the small towns west of St. Cloud and is 98% White.  The major industries include Dairy Farming, Granite processing, a Gold ‘n Plump plant, and the Cold Spring Brewery.  In 2oo8 it supported John McCain with 54% of the vote while re-electing DFL representative Larry Hosch with 67%.  In the primary, Mark Dayton pulled out 45% to MAK’s 36%.

On the other hand, District 41B in Bloomington gave Margaret 51% of the vote while St. Paul’s inner city districts divided up nearly into equal thirds.  Wealthy precincts such as North Oaks or Sunfish Lake gave Margaret some of her strongest showings with over 50% and 60% of the vote respectively.  By breaking down the results regionally, one can see that Mark Dayton and Tom Emmer won their party contests by drawing on elements of a similar demographic.  Now, in the run up to the election, the question will be which candidate and vision middle and working class whites will stand behind.

Directions may be found here: http://www.goodhuecountyfair.com/id1.html

We here at the Minnesota Council of Conservative Citizens believe that Jihad has become a little too mainstream for our tastes.  We  have local mosques recruiting soldiers [2], the terrorist-funded CAIR harrassing our public schools [3], and who can forget the radical muslim charter school in Inver Grove Heights? [4]  The cultural battle is in front of our faces.  We recommend this simple course of action: end all immigration from radical or hostile nations, eliminate economic subsidies to muslim institutions, and prosecute active terrorist suppliers as traitors or enemy combatants.

1.http://kstp.com/news/stories/S1684330.shtml?cat=127

2.http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/11/24/2009-11-24_eight_yanks_tried_to_recruit_for_qaedalinked_group__feds.html

3. http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/07/09/cair-st-cloud-somali-vandalism

4.http://www.thevoicemagazine.com/blog/culture/tv-news-crew-attacked-for-investigating-islam-at-public-school/

This case is the most recent incident of the judicial branch interfering with public policy.  Here in Minnesota our legislature was called into a special session this spring to rework the budget.  Ramsey County Judge Kathleen Gearin placed a restraining order on spending cuts enacted by Governor Pawlenty after the legislature failed to pass a balanced budget in 2009 [1].  The judge’s pet concern was that these spending cuts would affect a school lunch program in St. Paul.  The legal argument was that Pawlenty could not make cuts for an entire budget cycle without re-convening the legislature.  This belies the fact that the legislature had a proper amount of time to set the budget in the first place, and failed to balance it by the time their session ended.  After being forced into an expensive special session, the legislature ended up passing a deal that was not radically different from what Pawlenty ordered in the first place.

Last week, with far more significance to our nation, a Federal Judge in Arizona gutted key provisions of S.B 1070.  Arizona Senate Bill 1070 was passed in April and set a series of reforms to increase enforcement and limit the affect of illegal immigration in the state.  Judge Susan Bolton took out the most critical enforcement measures stating that “Federal resources will be taxed and diverted from federal enforcement priorities as a result of the increase in requests for immigration status determination that will flow from Arizona.”  It is a novel argument for the Federal Government to abandon one of its chief constitutional duties on the grounds that it’s pockets are empty. 

Whether it usurps the power of the executive as in Minnesota, the legislature as in Arizona, or of the people outright in California, judicial activism serves as a tool whereby a minority of one may trump the will of the many for the benefit of the few.  The Ramsey County Judge and DFL legislature in Minnesota wanted to keep the money flowing into programs for their inner city constituents at the expense of the state.  Similarly, Democrats see illegal immigrants as future union members and Democratic voters. 

Quixotically, Judge Vaughn Walker is a Republican appointed by the Californian Ronald Reagan.  He declares in his ruling that California has no vested interest in not offering marriage to homosexual couples.  Yet where is the compelling interest in forcing an institution against the will of the public?  To be clear, it is not illegal to be a homosexual, look like a homosexual, or act like a homosexual.  Homosexuals have numerous laws protecting them from ”hate speech” or being fired from their jobs and can get married in numerous churches.  So why are millions of dollars spent to win the token prize of state sanctioned marriage?  They, of course, will receive tax breaks and healthcare benefits intended for child-producing families as well as public acknowledgement.

We are in troubling times that un-elected judges may freely overturn the decisions of the people and their representatives.   Law, as the binding force of a society, must be held commonly and objectively.  It is rooted in the contract of the society and not the whim of an official.  Any Republic or Democracy must decide critical moral and civil questions as an expression of popular will.  As these judges declare their word law, they weaken our republic and the law itself.  As they stand in the way of urgent budget and border crises, they cannot expect the public to accept their edicts indefinitely.

1. http://www.timberjay.com/stories/Judge-Pawlenty-overstepped-his-authority,6363

2. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/28/judge-blocks-key-parts-ariz-immigration-law/

With the war in Iraq nearly seven years long, it is hard not to scoff at the suggestion that any troop withdrawal is “on time.”  However, blame for that rests squarely on president George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.  President Barack Obama is attempting to make good on this campaign promise and we here at the Minnesota Council of Conservative Citizens hold out hope that American soldiers will finally be able to return home. 

While the expected chorus of Ne0-c0ns will attempt to score points on this, the decision to withdraw troops from Iraq is not just the reasonable course of action, but an urgent necessity.  It is simply too expensive to maintain an occupation force in Iraq in light of the economic situation at home and war in Afghanistan.  On top of that, there is no compelling reason to believe Iraq will be anymore stable than it is now if we were to stick around another 5, 10, or 100 years.

If the plan goes as expected, Barack Obama will obviously score some points back with his liberal base but it would satisfy most reasonable individuals.  That is, if the troops come home safely and permanently.  Another elevation in troop levels in Afghanistan would be a disaster for a slew of reasons, but it would ultimately nullify any good done by leaving Iraq.  As well, we should hope that we are not cleaning our hands of Iraq in order to stick them into Iran.

It should also be mentioned that 50,000 residual troops will be left in Iraq.  We can only hope that they will not linger too long, outnumbered and undersupplied, waiting to be swept up in a greater Middle Eastern Conflict.