What's this about? Last week in a nasty shareholder dispute in a Texas marine company, one of the many lawsuit charges against the majority shareholder and Norm Coleman friend involved a $75,000 payment to the insurance company that employs the Senator's wife as an independent contractor. Neither the Senator nor his wife have been sued or even directly accused of wrongdoing. The Colemans deny the allegations. The Coleman campaign immediately accused the Franken campaign of orchestrating the whole thing, which defies credibility. Franken rightly swung back and accused Coleman of lying to the people of Minnesota by saying Franken was responsible.
The Democrats are not to be out down, so the DSCC ran the above ad. So we don't need to worry about presumed innocence or the lack of evidence so far. While there very well may be something to these accusations (I put nothing past Norm Coleman), with the current facts this ad amounts to unsubstantiated character assassination. The Senator running away from reporters without answering questions presumes guilt. (Even though Coleman did respond to reporters quickly to vehemently deny any wrongdoing.)
Is Franken responsible? Not directly. His campaign legally has nothing to do with the DSCC. But both Franken and Coleman have been responsible for the dirty, vindictive tone of this race. They should both be blamed when their allies follow their lead.
I've been considering to vote for Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley for months. I like where he stands on most issues. The only problem is that he is unlikely to win (though he's polling in the upper teens) and that the stakes are high. It makes me sick to think of Coleman representing Minnesota for another six years. The improbable, but still possible, Democratic capture of 60 Senate seats cannot occur without a Democratic win in Minnesota. One Senate seat could be decisive on a number of vital issues, including on Supreme Court nominations.
The Democrats are not to be out down, so the DSCC ran the above ad. So we don't need to worry about presumed innocence or the lack of evidence so far. While there very well may be something to these accusations (I put nothing past Norm Coleman), with the current facts this ad amounts to unsubstantiated character assassination. The Senator running away from reporters without answering questions presumes guilt. (Even though Coleman did respond to reporters quickly to vehemently deny any wrongdoing.)
Is Franken responsible? Not directly. His campaign legally has nothing to do with the DSCC. But both Franken and Coleman have been responsible for the dirty, vindictive tone of this race. They should both be blamed when their allies follow their lead.
I've been considering to vote for Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley for months. I like where he stands on most issues. The only problem is that he is unlikely to win (though he's polling in the upper teens) and that the stakes are high. It makes me sick to think of Coleman representing Minnesota for another six years. The improbable, but still possible, Democratic capture of 60 Senate seats cannot occur without a Democratic win in Minnesota. One Senate seat could be decisive on a number of vital issues, including on Supreme Court nominations.
1 comment:
Turtle, I respect your reasoning and philosophy but I have to disagree. A hand slap to the people behind this reprehensible ad may only backfire as a slap in our own faces if we are stuck with Coleman for another 6 years; it's just not a risk worth taking. The vote is for a candidate, not the DSCC. These are not Franken's tactics, and he will not bring them into office with him.
In a perfect world, our votes should be for the candidates we like the best, but until instant-runoff voting is a reality and 3rd party candidates aren't relegated to the cheap seats by the reigning major parties, thinking voters have a responsibility to vote strategically. Empirically, Franken is simply the better of the two "winnable" candidates. I'm not certain how you ended up voting, but I sure hope Franken wins even if many took a moral stance against the DSCC and voted for Barkley.
Post a Comment