Friday, October 13, 2006
Nobody prevented you from nominating pro-life candidates like El Tinklenberg. You made that choice. Nobody but your party chose not to permit the people to vote on the marriage amendent. Are you implying that a community of church-going people cannot lay out a set of positions and then hold an event to decide which candidates agree with them? Do people in a church community have lesser First Amendment rights? And if so, what differentiates this event from the one held a few weeks ago, where even the Great Sander showed up?
No DFL Party candidates attended. Some offered notice of prior commitments, but District 15 DFL Party Chairman Scott Wells was on hand to offer a news release from the DFL's District 14 and 15 organizing units decrying the forum as "a partisan event supporting Republican candidates."
"The forum is sponsored by an organization which has, sadly, become partisan in nature, the Minnesota Family Council," the news release stated.
What does it matter if one of the candidates was a member of that church, or that another's daughter helped organize the event? Are none of your candidates members of the Chambers of Commerce at which they debate (or not)? How about the League of Woman Voters? Any of your candidates current or past members of LWV? Your argument is piffle, sir.
And while I have your attention, if you're going to come out to an event where it is announced that no taping is permitted, you could have helped discourage the young man who was sitting in the fifth row from the back trying to tape Senator Bachmann. Not to worry, we cleaned up that mess for you.