So long Harvey Korman

We've learned that comic actor Harvey Korman has passed away. He was 81 years old.

Korman is known best for his long stint in the Carol Burnett show. I liked him best in Blazing Saddles as Hedley Lamar. ("That's Hedley"--not Hedy.)



"...bull dykes..." ?

Something amiss in the DFL?

The Star Tribune reports how some notable DFLers have openly expressed concern regarding a sexually-explicit satirical article Al Franken wrote for Playboy in 2000. I have no comment on whether the article does or should prevent a problem for Al Franken. (I'd have to read it first.) But I think it's noteworthy that Reps. McCollum, Walz, and Ellison have expressed different amounts of concern.

Associated Press reporter Frederic Frommer notes: "McCollum, Ellison and Walz are up for reelection in the fall."

But is that what this is really about?

It makes me wonder if something is amiss. Can we assume that McCollum and her congressional colleagues know something we don't? McCollum tells the Associated Press she hasn't urged Ciresi to get back into the race and notes she hasn't endorsed anyone since Ciresi left.

That doesn't rule out whether Ciresi has told her he'll jump back into the race. It also doesn't rule out whether another candidate will jump in before or after the upcoming DFL convention. McCollum herself has been suggested as a candidate (as well as Walz). I still think that's unlikely. But maybe they know or hope Ciresi or someone else will challenge Franken.

Keep your eyes open!

Second couple arrested for online "baby for sale" posting

A second couple were investigated and the father arrested, but not charged, for putting their child "for sale" online. The parents say it was a hoax.

The story begs some questions.

• Should authorities check out a case where a baby for sale ad is put on the Internet? Yes.
• Is it a stupid thing for a new parent to do? Yes.
• Should the appropriate response be to put the child in temporary protective custody and arrest one or both of the parents? No!

If you see a baby for sale on eBay or Craigslist, it's probably a hoax.

Bringing a newborn home can be a pretty stressful time for new parents. Posting a nearly-obvious fake ad is probably a way to blow off some steam, albeit not the smartest way to blow off steam.

But do authorities really need to take the child away in protective custody? Do you need to drag the new parent down to jail?

It is unfortunate that police were forced to waste resources to investigate this fake ad. The scrutiny that comes from a visit from the police and the ensuing publicity is probably enough to dissuade a repeat offense. Why arrest and separate a week-old from their parents?

McCain running mate thoughts

We all know that McCain hosted Charlie Crist, Mitt Romney, and Bobby Jindal and guests this weekend. A flurry of commentary followed on whether this was the short list.

Obviously not. I think we can take that these three may be under consideration, but McCain is still probably considering others.

One name that has been up on the top of various lists is Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty. The youthful, but experienced governor would appeal to social conservatives without alienating mainstream voters. Minnesota is allegedly a swing state.

Still, there's an argument against Pawlenty.

I remain doubtful Minnesota will truly be competitive, and I don't think that Pawlenty would help much here or any other swing state. Who knows who McCain will pick, but I think its less likely everyday that it will be the Minnesota governor.

Not worth the paper it's printed on

I feel for professional writers who work for newspapers, especially those with regular columns. You have to come up with something new or novel to write ALL THE TIME. We can't expect each piece to be a winner. There are going to be some dud columns.

But where do our standards lie? Is there a point where something is so pointless it shouldn't be printed or posted online?

The current issue of the Star Tribune's Withering Glance provides a test case. It is a weekly feature by Rick Nelson and Claude Peck, where they "dispense unasked-for advice about clothing, relationships, grooming and more."

This week's topic: Same-sex marriage in California

The column is simply a long stream of worn-out stereotypes about gays and lesbians. Seriously, why should a trusted daily newspaper like the Star Tribune feel it makes sense to print this tripe? It's not that it is offensive; it's just dumb.

• Withering Glance: Gay marriage, California style

Quote: Joe Biden

Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) said this on national television on the Today Show:

“Twenty percent of our party really is anti-war almost under any circumstance, just like 20 percent of the Republican Party is probably ready to go to war on any circumstance."

It's probably not the most politically savvy thing to say--and right before Memorial Day to boot--but I'd guess he isn't too far away from the truth. I may even suggest the number is a little higher on both sides.

The more things change

One will find widespread agreement to the assertion that the Republican Party of today is a very different beast than the one of 100 years ago during Teddy Roosevelt's era. The same could be said of the Democrat Party.

And yet, here's a snippet from the beginning of the Democratic Party Platform in 1908:

We rejoice at the increasing signs of an awakening throughout the country. The various investigations have traced graft and political corruption to the representatives of the predatory wealth, and laid bare the unscrupulous methods by which they have debauched elections and preyed upon a defenseless public through the subservient officials whom they have raised to place and power.

The conscience of the nation is now aroused to free the Government from the grip of those who have made it a business asset of the favor-seeking corporations. It must become again a people's government, and be administered in all its departments according to the Jeffersonian maxim, "equal rights to all; special privileges to none."

"Shall the people rule?" is the overshadowing issue which manifests itself in all the questions now under discussion.

Thank goodness we no longer have to worry about politicians making government "a business asset of the favor-seeking corporations" and we can have faith that we are free of "debauched elections."

Oh wait a minute.

The platform goes on to address:

• the Republican mismanagement of the economy
• the abuse of power of the Republican Speaker of the House
• the federal budget deficit under Republican rule
  
• Republican misuse of patronage
• campaign finance reform
• the rights of states
• tariff reform
• trusts reform (a call to break corporate monopolies)
• railroad and banking regulation
• calling for the federal income tax
• labor and legal injunctions reform (including "We favor the eight hour day on all Government work")
• the merchant marine
• the Navy
• the right of U.S. citizens abroad
• civil service
• pensions
• the establishment of a federal health bureau
• the establishment of agricultural and mechanical colleges
• the popular election of Senators
• Oklahoma is welcomed as a state
• support for the ongoing Panama Canal
• regulations of federal grazing lands
• federal management of navigable waterways
• federal aid for maintenance of post roads
• regulation of the telegraph and telephone industries
• conservation of natural resources ("the enforcement of which Mr. Roosevelt has vainly sought from a reluctant party")
• the Philippines ("We condemn the experiment in imperialism as an inexcusable blunder which has involved us in enormous expense, brought us weakness instead of strength, and laid our nation open to the charge of abandoning a fundamental doctrine of self-government.")
• "Alaska and Porto Rico"
  
• Pan-American Relations
• Asiatic Immigration ("we are opposed to the admission of Asiatic immigrants who can not be amalgamated with our population")
• Foreign Patents

Hey, with just a couple minor changes, the Democrats can reuse this 100 year-old platform for 2008!

Getting what you pay for

Bridge collapse report critical of transportation agency

We can take several lessons in the aftermath of the 35W bridge collapse. One of which is that keeping taxes low and starving government can have negative implications. The independent report suggests that the funding situation at the Pawlenty/Molnau Department of Transportation was part of the blame with mistakes in the inspection process and tainted decision making on what to do with the substandard bridge.

This is what the no taxes, smaller government argument gets you. Governmental agencies incapable of performing vital tasks for the welfare of the people. Is there government waste? Hell yes. But the more constructive discussion is over what spending is important, where is the waste, and how can the revenue be properly and fairly raised? You can't get something for nothing with government too.

Remember, the reason Pawlenty put his Lieutenant Governor in charge of the Department of Transportation in 2003 is that he had made "cutting waste" at the DOT a priority in his campaign. Retrospectively, we can see this was an ill-advised policy that had a role in a major disaster.

Clinton's numbers

Clinton says she has the popular vote lead.

First, the popular vote doesn't matter. The party uses delegates. This is another clear attempt to change the rules not even mid game, but in the closing seconds. It's like if a losing basketball team says seconds before the buzzer, "Wait! we shouldn't count points, but number of baskets."

Second, the so-called popular vote win includes Florida and Michigan (where her opponent wasn't even on the ballot), and it excludes Iowa, Nevada, Maine, and Washington! Because caucuses don't count! (See the breakdown here.)

So when Clinton recently said that the nomination shouldn't be determined by 48 states, what she secretly meant is that it should be determined (with new rules) by 46 states.

Making currency accessible

The United States is alone in the world with it making all paper currency the same exact size. Naturally, this makes it difficult for the legally blind to distinguish bill sizes. The District of Columbia Federal Circuit Court has ruled this amounts to discrimination.

Court says money discriminates against blind people


The Treasury Department could go ahead and change bill sizes, but that would probably be the most expensive option and would entail a huge outcry from the people with the habit of getting bent out of shape over unimportant things. Other solutions that have been suggested entail having raised numbers, having rounded or cut-off corners (smaller bills would have more missing corners so you wouldn't be able to "convert" $1 bill to a $100 by ripping off corners), or notches on the top or bottom edge (with the same principle as the corners).

I don't know how blind people see these options and whether any seem much better. I would think that the notches seem the most attractive. It should be easy to implement. With the corners, one would have to be careful that a worn-down bill simply hasn't had a corner folded over.

It could work like this:

• $1 bill - 4 notches on top left edge
• $2 bill - 3 notches on top left edge
• $5 bill - 2 notches on top left edge
• $10 bill - 1 notch on top left edge
• $20 bill - 3 notches on top right edge
• $50 bill - 2 notches on top right edge
• $100 bill - 1 notch on top right edge

This assumes there is a way to feel what the front of the bill is. It still works if the bill is upside down (it's just the reverse and on the bottom). Another possibility would be to have different type of notches on the right and left; perhaps the left is a 'V' notch and the right is a curved, 'U' notch, or the left has thin notches and the right has wide notches.

Perhaps this could be simplified by eliminating the $1 bill (and even $2 bill). It would take an act of Congress, but we should switch to a $1 coin. The Canadians have $1 and $2 coins, and their money is even more valuable than ours these days.

We're number 60! We're number 60!

Twin Cities' airport ranks last in customer satisfaction

I'm sure this has nothing to do with the fact that it is the hub for Northwest Airlines.

Sometimes you have to go for broke

I'll first start with the acknowledgment that one should be careful to not put too much stock into poll results, especially 6 months before an election. Even so, Al Franken's continuing lag behind Norm Coleman should give DFL delegates pause before endorsing him. Consider today's Star Tribune poll. You can see the overall trend from all public polls at Pollster's Minnesota Senate page.

Why should we think these polls should have bearing on this fall?

Usually, six months before the election you have people largely undecided and not really paying attention to the election. Many people who will end of voting don't even know the names the candidates. This year we have a very attentive electorate, both for the presidential and congressional races. Minnesotan voters generally pay attention to campaigns more closely. Lastly, a very high number of voters know who Norm Coleman and Al Franken are, and have probably made up their minds about both candidates. Voters will be swayed in different directions between now and November, but I suspect the number of persuadable voters is narrower than usual in this match-up.

I don't think Franken's tax troubles will blow over too much. Two years ago Keith Ellison was battling his problems on parking tickets and campaign finance reports up to election day despite the news coming out months earlier. (Yes, Ellison did win the overwhelmingly Democratic seat, but it did damage him at the polls.) Franken's tax problems are more serious and will be used by 527 groups and party committees to run television and radio ads throughout the campaign.

This is not to say Franken can't beat Coleman, but it is an uphill battle. This should be a good year for Democrats nationwide, but Minnesotans are a contrary bunch. When Democrats swept the nation in 2006, Pawlenty was elected in Minnesota. Two years after Rod Grams won the Senate seat in Minnesota, Paul Wellstone won reelection for his seat. Meaning: Thousands of Minnesota voters voted for Wellstone and Grams, just two years apart. Those two men were very different politically. It is quite possible, and perhaps most likely, to have Minnesota go strongly to Obama in the presidential race, but reelect Coleman by a comfortable margin.

If I were a delegate to the DFL convention, right now I'd be considering if there is a candidate that could do better than Al Franken against Coleman. I'd want to think creatively. Here are some people I'd consider:

Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer: The only other candidate in the race now and going for the endorsement. Nelson-Pallmeyer is behind Coleman in the polls even more than Franken, 15 points, but he is not yet the well-known figure that Franken is. Delegates need to keep in mind that anyone who gets the endorsement will get lots of media coverage and that voters over the summer will start to pay attention. If it isn't someone they don't already know, many voters will approach the candidate with an open mind. Nelson-Pallmeyer is a good campaigner. While he is a liberal (or progressive), he has sincerely held positions that match up well with voters. Nelson-Pallmeyer can claim he is of the Paul Wellstone mold more than just about any other candidate or likely candidate. (Even some of the people who voted for Coleman last time around have positive views on the late Senator.)

Mike Ciresi: Has dropped out of the race, but is almost as close to Coleman as Franken. Ciresi is not as well-known as Franken obviously, but he has run for statewide office before (unsuccessfully). It is hard to see him impressing a majority of voters. He's not an inspiring campaigner, he has yet to show he can put together a decent campaign, and he comes off as too politicky. (He panders a lot.)

Rebecca Otto: The current state auditor is one of the DFLers who has recently successfully won a statewide election. As a current elected official and someone who was on the ballot two years before, voters are somewhat familiar with her,. But she's the state auditor, i.e. Otto is a fresh face. Otto is a good campaigner. She knows how to talk to middle-of-the-road voters. She has a lot of energy. Her burgeoning political career has been built on focus on responsible and competent government. It's not sexy, but it is a way to sway some important swing voters this year.

Mark Ritchie: The current secretary of state also was a successful DFL statewide candidate two years ago. He had the small scandal involving appropriating a public list in sloppy way, but I don't think that will hurt him too much. The biggest mark against Ritchie (and Nelson-Pallmeyer) is that he lives in Minneapolis.

R.T. Rybak: Talk arises now and then of Rybak seeking higher office. My guess is that he wouldn't be interested. Rybak is a dynamic person and would run an energetic, and well-funded, campaign. If Ritchie and Nelson-Pallmeyer's problems are they are from Minneapolis, the mayor of Minneapolis would run into some problems with both suburban and rural voters.

All these candidates are a bit more of an unknown than Al Franken when it comes to their prospects for the general election. But when things aren't looking very good for the leading candidate, perhaps the answer is to shake things up and go for broke? Somehow Paul Wellstone got elected by Minnesotans twice. (And I believe he would have won in 2002 had he lived.) You don't need a Wellstone clone. You do need to consider that going with a lesser-known, obvious under-dog is not necessarily giving up. It might be the better way to go. You also need to consider that you don't need to be a centrist to win in Minnesota.

If I were to bet money, at this point I'd guess Franken is probably going to lose to Coleman by about the 7 points he is currently behind in the polls. If the candidate were Nelson-Pallmeyer, Otto, or one of the others, I don't know what I'd predict. It could be a 15 point win--in either direction. Not super encouraging, but better than a most likely loss.

Question to readers: If the DFL candidate isn't Al Franken, who do you think it should be? Why?