Flattery

A 29 year old man serving as a Republican delegate was allegedly drugged and robbed while in Minnesota the other week.  He was robbed of a watch worth about $30,000 and about $20,000 of other items.

Now, it would be tempting to make fun of the Republican and use the incident to make all sorts of political points.  I'm not going there.  I genuinely feel bad for the guy, even though he's a 29 year old Republican delegate.  He's been the victim of a crime.

What gets me is something he told the reporter: "As a single man, I was flattered by the attention of a beautiful woman who introduced herself to me. I used poor judgment."

I don't know anything about this guy except some basic things about his politics and that he is an attorney.  I don't know what he looks like, what he sounds like, or his personal grooming habits.  But it is difficult for me to imagine that a 29 year old lawyer walking around wearing a watch worth 30 grand, as well as other expensive items, would not customarily be the recipient of attention.  He's not even from a place like New York or L.A. with thousands of other rich young guys to compete with--he's a young, wealthy lawyer from Denver, Colorado.

The sad thing is that he may be a late bloomer who has finally recognized that he can appeal to women, but now has had an experience that may prevent him from trusting women.

More Al Franken sloppiness blown out of proportion

A little over a week ago, Minnesota Republicans publicized that Al Franken's company did not pay corporate income taxes in California and owed a bunch in back taxes. It appeared at the time that Franken neglected to officially dissolve the corporation in California when he moved it to New York. I wrote at the time this did not merit the coverage it received, unlike his previous problem with workers' comp insurance in New York.

The Star Trib does a more lengthy piece today on the subject, with little additional information or insight. It still looks like that it is a case of failing to dissolve his corporation when he moved it to New York (and we assume paid taxes there).

The Republicans say, "But he did some paid appearances in California--he's still doing business there!" Well, I don't know California tax law, but my understanding is that those earnings would go through the New York-based corporation and which would be paying federal and New York state taxes. I could be wrong, but maybe the Strib should figure this out before printing a long piece of unsubstantiated allegations.

There are lots of people who should be taken to task on this story:

• The Star Tribune and writers Kevin Duchschere and Patricia Lopez for giving such attention to these allegations without getting to the bottom of the story. They're doing little more than parroting the Republican smear machine.
• Al Franken's accountant who seems to be blamed for a lot of these mistakes.
• Al Franken himself, but not for the California tax allegations. He's a dufus right now because he has had over a week since this story first arose to get to the bottom of it and provide answers.
• Al Franken's company for relying on an accountant's advice and not hiring a corporate tax attorney when moving his corporation from one state to another.

And what about the Minnesota Republicans? I can't really blame them. They successfully took a small matter and got some political hay out of it. That's what happens in politics. Their argument about him doing business in California seems a little disingenuous, but at least they aren't lying.

Franken and California tax returns? Whatever...

I was critical of Al Franken following the discovery that his company had not been paying workers' comp insurance for a number of years in New York. A $25,000 fine was levied against his company by the state of New York.

Now, the Republicans have found that he didn't pay owed state taxes in California. Bad day for Al Franken.

Is this a real controversy? Does it matter?

I had a problem with the New York state matter, but the more recent discovery does not rise to the same level. It appears that Franken got bad advice and did not submit a filing dissolving the corporation in California when he moved it to New York in 2002. (We assume he paid taxes in New York.) It a sloppy mistake, but an excusable one. Not paying legally-required workers compensation insurance for several years, that is pretty big deal in my book.

Lots of corporations let their registration lapse and don't file dissolution papers. A quick search of Minnesota corporations with "Minnesota" in their name reveal 23 of 40 corporate entities (or trademarked names) on the first page that are "inactive." Inactive means they haven't filed registration renewals or officially dissolved. It's a common oversight.

This is not worth the news coverage it's received.

Pawlenty irritates Coleman

The A-P tells us that Republican Senator Norm Coleman has expressed disappointment over Pawlenty's line item veto of Central Corridor light-rail funds this week.

Normally, I'm pretty cynical about anything Coleman does. Especially in an election year. Mr. Votes-the-Republican-Line is trying to be seen as an independent and moderate voice for this November. Most of his actions should be viewed through that lens.

But I don't think his light, but helpful, criticism of the governor is for his own personal political objectives. I would say it is genuine. Certainly, there are other Republicans Coleman can publicly disagree with in order to be seen as independent minded. Expressing disagreements with the most popular, and influential, Republican in Minnesota probably doesn't help politically. So, good for him.

Sly in Mpls, George in St. Paul

File this under why Minneapolis has better stuff than St. Paul. On the same day it's announced that Sly Stone is allegedly to appear at First Avenue, we hear George Michael is coming to St. Paul's Excel Center. Minneapolis has good restaurants and a nightlife, St. Paul has this. However, St. Paul is hosting the Republican National Convention this year. On the other hand, Minneapolis is not.

In all fairness to my friends over in St. Paul, I'm really not a Minneapolis snob. I do find reason to go there on occasion and rarely get lost on the confusing streets anymore.

And despite George Michael's pathetic personal problems, I'm not a George Michael hater. I can admit that I rather like "Faith." I'm not shelling out $52 to $177 for a ticket to see him though. I have YouTube...

DFL SD 62 convention

Yesterday's DFL Senate District 62 convention was an exercise in patience, but it did afford many opportunities in humor. I've always seen myself as this extremely lefty progressive. Then I moved into this neighborhood and met real crazy liberals that make me feel like a raging conservative.

That might be a slight exaggeration, but not by much. I got a lot of laughs out of the implausible resolutions we voted on for inclusion in the DFL constitution or platform. One was to have a three month waiting period for Congress to declare war. First, such a change would require an amendment of the constitution. Second, the Iraq congressional vote was some months before military action, so such a waiting period wouldn't have made a difference there. Third, it would just make the party look clueless, radical, and out of touch--even more so than the city council of Berkeley, California.

The endless debate about rules and process weren't as endless as they have been at similar gatherings in the past. My favorite was the proposal and debate to amend the rules to change the time allotted to non-statewide campaigns from 2 minutes to 1 minute. At that point, we had already had two two-minute speeches and were in line two get just another two or three over the course of the day. The proposal was debated and defeated. Another thing I learned is that all you have to do is label something "undemocratic" to immediately get a sizable portion of the room to oppose something. No listening or critical thought required!

Then comes the sub-caucusing part. Out of a group of 848 delegates, a subcaucus needed to have at least 31 members in order to elect a delegate to the state and congressional conventions. Initially a full 54 different subcaucuses were named. Less than half would ultimately survive. Some seemed a bit repetitive.

The list of initial subcaucuses:

1. Clinton-Franken
2. Franken-Environment
3. Obama-Franken-DFL Victory
4. Franken-Gay Marriage
5. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-End the War
6. Uncommitted-Justice for Palestinians
7. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Stop Global Warming
8. Franken-Pro-Choice
9. Uncommitted-Pro-Endorsement
10. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Single Payer Healthcare
11. Obama
12. Franken-Universal Healthcare
13. Uncommitted-Stop Foreclosures and End the War
14. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Obama-Change
15. Obama-Students and Young Voters
16. Ciresi
17. Uncommitted-Labor-Steal-proof Elections and Let's Hear it for the Middle Class
18. Obama-Ellison-Anti-War
19. Uncommitted-Defeat Norm Coleman
20. Franken-Healthcare
21. Uncommitted for Senate-Obama
22. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-The America I Believe in Does Not Torture
23. Franken-Ellison-Get Out of Iraq
24. Franken-Labor
25. Uncommitted-End No Child Left Behind
26. Uncommitted-Save Neighborhood Revitalization Program
27. Uncommitted for Senate-Universal Single-Payer Health Care for All
28. Uncommitted-Paid Family Leave-Childcare
29. Obama-GLBT Equality
30. Obama-Education-Poverty
31. Uncommitted for Senate-Clinton-Take Back America
32. Uncommitted-Immigration Issues
33. Uncommitted-Environment-Stop Global Warming
34. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-GLBT
35. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Health Care for People Not Profit
36. Uncommitted-Peace Activists for Minnesota Veteran Benefits
37. Franken-Ellison-Champions for Labor
38. Obama-Instant Runoff Voting
39. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-More Trees Less Bush
40. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Save Neighborhood Revitalization Program
41. Uncommitted-Labor-Economic Justice
42. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-For Environmental Sustainability
43. Obama-Franken-Protect Civil Liberties
44. Uncommitted-U.S. Constitution-Mother Earth-All Citizens Equal-Common Sense
45. Obama-Franke-Ellison-Human Rights
46. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Full GLBT Equality
47. Uncommitted-Global Responsibility
48. Franken-Sustainable Living-Elder Care
49. Clinton-For President
50. Uncommitted-Minnesota Great Outdoors and Heritage Amendment
51. Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer-Neighborhood Revitalization Program
52. Uncommitted-Strong Economy
53. Obama-Franken-Single Payer
54. Franken-Let Al Speak*

* This last one was proposed as a rhetorical point to allow Al Franken to address the convention even though a surrogate had used the alloted five minutes time. A compromise was proposed, debated, and voted on and Franken was able to speak.

I went undecided and subcaucused with the Undecided-Beat Norm Coleman. I left before the final subcaucusing and am not sure about the final tally of delegates. One conclusion, Ciresi wasn't very strong in this group.

I've not been to a Republican caucus. If I may take some creative liberties, I'll suggest that if the room was full of Republican activists there would fewer subcacuses. Perhaps it would be the following:

1. Save Marriage, Save Our Families
2. Save Embryos/Fetuses, Save Our Families
3. Lock 'em Up, Send 'em Home, No More Immigrants, Save Our Families
4. No More Taxes, Save Our Families
5. Fight the Terrorists in Iraq, Stay the Course
6. Fight the Islamo-fascists in Iran-John McCain
7. Home Schooling-No More Dept of Education!-Teach Intelligent Design

This is just guessing on my part. I'll have the opportunity to see Republican activists from around the country when the Republican National Convention comes to town.

Stupid idea from Kos

The grand master of the left side of the political blogosphere, Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos, has suggested a dumb idea to Michigan Democrats for today's primary: mess up the Republicans by voting in the Republican primary and propping up Romney.

Michigan has an open primary, so no need to be registered to vote for a party. You decide which party's primary when you walk in that day. Since the Democrat side is of no consequence, there is added incentive for Democrats to make their votes "count" by voting on the Republican side.

I doubt a substantial enough number of Democrats in Michigan would do this with any sort of consistency to make a real difference, but with this suggestion Moulitsas gives the Republicans a great talking point about those unethical, menacing Democrats.

So, from a political perspective, it's stupid; and I don't use that word lightly here. It's also highly unethical. I think it is perfectly fine for someone who identifies with one party to choose to vote in the other primary if they have a genuine preference within that race. But to "mess with" or "embarrass" the other party breaks rules of simple fairness.

I'm not a regular reader of Daily Kos, but when I do look there I'm rarely impressed. Here's another strike against that overrated site.

More Presidential Primaries Predictions

Okay, so it was several days ago, but I must admit that I was a bit off in my predictions of the Iowa caucus results. At least on the Democratic side. As we know, Clinton did NOT win by a double-digit margin but came in a close third place. So, I got it backwards. On the GOP side, I was right about Huckabee, but that was no real surprise.

Still, I'm going to barrel ahead and make predictions for tomorrow's primary in New Hampshire. I've only heard a little of the polls and some of the coverage. That won't stop my half-informed self from prognosticating though.

As the cable news channels tell us, the key in New Hampshire is the independent voters who can vote in either primary. (It's an open primary state.) I saw one poll last week that claimed that 60% of independents would vote in the Dem primary. If true, that should help Obama and harm the "moderate" Republicans.

Here it goes!

Democrats
Obama will win New Hampshire by at least 5 points. Edwards will be lucky to break 10%. Edwards will probably not drop out of the race yet. Richardson will have to withdraw after New Hampshire. It will be interesting to see who Richardson or Edwards will endorse, if anybody, after they withdraw. And no, I'm not going to even bother talking about Dennis Kucinich.

Republicans
Who the heck knows? It's all in flux. Either Romney or McCain will win. Whichever one wins here becomes the Republican front-runner in a three way race with Huckabee and Giuliani. McCain won the primary in 2000 with the help of lots of independent voters. Unfortunately, many of those independents will be voting Democrat, or could be pairing off to support Giuliani, Thompson, and Paul. Still, I'll predict McCain will win New Hampshire narrowly over Romney. Romney will stay in the race but his time is about done. Giuliani needs to come in 3rd or a narrow 4th to look competitive going into other states. My guess is that Giuliani, Paul, and Huckabee will be clustered around 10 percent each and Thompson will be less. One hopes that Thompson will end the charade and drop out after New Hampshire.

Another item on the horizon is whether high-profile independent Michael Bloomberg jumps in the race. If the Republican nominee appears to be Huckabee, I think that gives Bloomberg a great opportunity. If it is Giuliani or McCain, that is less possible. If he does enter, I think it could be as early as Monday, February 11th: one week after Super Tuesday. I remain doubtful that Bloomberg candidacy would amount to anything more than a spoiler candidate.

Presidential Predictions

I do enjoy making political predictions, but can't claim to have a great track record. I think I somewhat accurately called the results of the 2006 election, and I knew (like everyone else) that 2004 was going to be a close one. I also remember confidently declaring a few days before the 2002 election that Tim Pawlenty would come in third in the three-way gubernatorial race in Minnesota. Gov. Pawlenty is currently serving is second term.

I was all but avoiding the presidential politics up to just a couple of months ago. Not having poured over polling data or anything like that, I still have suspicions on how the race is going to go based on my appraisal of the candidates, conventional wisdom, and gut feeling.

How I think the Iowa Caucuses are going to go down on January 3rd:

DEMOCRATS
Clinton will win the Iowa caucus. Her name recognition, near-solid campaigning, and ability to deal with the electability question will get her to the top. Obama and Edwards will trail in the 5-15 point range, with Obama squeaking into second place. Even if I'm off by a bit here, it will all likely remain a three-way race after Iowa. My guess is that all other Democrat candidates besides these three (and Kucinich and other fringe candidates) will drop out before February 1st. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards will all stay in the race into February at least.

That being said, I can't see Edwards winning the nomination. I think he'll have an impact on the contest between Clinton and Obama. Already, he and Obama are splitting the anti-Clinton vote (whatever amount of the Democratic electorate that is). Endorsements usually don't mean much, but an endorsement from Edwards could make a difference at a key moment in the race.

Early on, I thought Richardson would do better than he has. He might be a good running mate pick. A Latino, western governor with foreign policy experience is a good combination for either Clinton or Obama. Though the Dems may be skittish if it looks like the Republicans are going to make this race about immigration since they have no other issues.

REPUBLICANS
The polls say Huckabee. And maybe they're right. He may win Iowa, but he's not going anywhere beyond that. As has been the conventional wisdom the last few months, the contest for the Republican nomination is between Giuliani and Romney. McCain has new strength in his campaign and may very well be a contender again, which certainly surprises me. Quick question: Who has bent over backward the most to appease leaders of the religious right: Romney, McCain or Giuliani?

So, I think Huckabee is the most likely winner in Iowa. Romney will be second by a range within 15 points of Huckabee and McCain will trail as a close third. Giuliani will come in fourth. If McCain comes close to Romney (say, within 5 points), that will boost him significantly in New Hampshire. All four of these candidates will stay in the race after Iowa, but Huckabee will be the first to bow out after a presumed poor showing in New Hampshire (and South Carolina if he gets that far).

I've long said that I couldn't see Rudy Giuliani getting the nomination. Not only does he have the wrong positions, the wrong constituencies, and personal skeletons in his closet, he is a thoroughly unlikable guy. That being said, I'm surprised he's made it this far, and he'll stay in the race into February unless he does horrible in New Hampshire by coming in a distant fourth place or worse.

Romney is still the most likely Republican nominee. I guess McCain isn't out of the picture though. Huckabee might be a reasonable running mate pick for a nominee needing to shore up cred with the religious right.

There you have it. I'll be out of touch next week right after the caucus, but will return to the subject at some point to see how right or wrong I am.

Quote of the day: "the most arrogant, incompetent administrations"

Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) is retiring next year and is feeling free with what he can say.

Though, he's always been independent-minded, he's still a Republican.

Mr. Lott retires

Former Republican Senate majority and minority leader, and currently number 2 in the Senate GOP caucus, announced today his retirement. It is effective by the end of the year.

Much has been made of the comments five years ago at Strom Thurmond's birthday that got him booted from the leadership by his former and eventual friends George Bush and Bill Frist.

What I think is more noteworthy is Lott's past in the Clinton impeachment mess and his ties to white supremacist groups throughout his career, into the 1990s. In 1998, there was a lot of attention paid to his ties to the Council of Conservative Citizens, which has been described by some as a successor to the KKK or also the "uptown KKK." Unfortunately, most of the media and public's attention was on Bill Clinton's personal flaws for the entire year.

The Southern Poverty Law Center documented Lott's and other Republican ties to the CCC in 1999. FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) documented Lott's career in race relations in 2006 when he returned to the Republican leadership.

Lott has reportedly been frustrated with the Bush administration's continuing boggling of the Katrina aftermath. (He lost his own home on the Gulf Coast.) But he claims they're all good friends and he is departing 1 year into his 6 year term because it is simply time.