This article from the Owatonna (MN) People's Press appeared in the print edition on Sunday June 8, 2008:

The Steele County DFL [Democratic-Farmer-Labor party] Central Committee will meet at 6:30 p.m. on June 12 in the Gainey Room at the Owatonna Library. Please note that at this meeting we will be electing a new Secretary and Director to the Executive Committee. The secretary position is open to a member of either gender and the Director position is to be filled by a person of the male gender. If you or anyone you know is interested in screening for either of these positions, screening will take place from 6-6:30 p.m. in the Gainey Room on June 12.

It's not just Hillary supporters who have reason to believe that Democrats discriminate against women in their party politics.

Full disclosure: I, Janet, am the current Chair of Minnesota's Second Congressional District Republican Party organization. Owatonna is less than an hour down the road from my home.

Labels: Democrats, DFL legislature, elections, Feminists

On June 7, Minnesota's Democrats (DFL = Democrat-Farmer-Labor Party) held their state convention in Rochester, MN. They endorsed Al Franken as their candidate to the United States Senate, to oppose incumbent Norm Coleman.

For those of you new to this story, Mr. Franken has had a number of financial issues, all blamed on his accountant and others in the past few months. Among them: non-payment of state income taxes in 17 states for several years; non-payment of workers' compensation insurance in NY; and receiving a seven figure salary while his New York Employer stiffed a Boys and Girls Club charity for a"loan."

By Friday, June 6, it became known that Mr. Franken had made "jokes" about rape and bestiality. That doesn't show much class let alone sensitivity towards women, the backbone of the Democrat Party.

In spite of his record, MN Democrats rallied behind Mr. Franken. US Representative Betty McCollum was one of the minority of Democrats who had the courage to disavow Franken because of his poor taste in "jokes." She was booed by convention goers and had to watch as other feminists made nicey nice to Mr. Franken. On Sunday, June 8, Mari Urness Pokornowski, of Cokato, MN, the president of the Board of Directors of the Minnesota Democrat feminist caucus resigned in protest of Franken's endorsement.

Too many of today's feminists :

- whine, moan and complain about their perceived unfair treatment but only by white males outside their political party;
- ignore the real atrocities against women in so many other parts of the world;
- brainwash far too many young women with misleading "statistics;"
- inculcate the belief that women are entitled to safe, secure government and non-profit jobs or private sector executive positions for which there is some supposed "glass ceiling" while dismissing other factors that come into play.

These feminists seem only to want political power. NOW mercilessly trashed Chief Justice Clarence Thomas for alleged verbal sexual harassment. They hounded former Republican Senator Robert Packwood from office for what turned out to be one woman's unwanted "kiss on the lips." But these actions paled by comparison to Democrat Bill Clinton's abuses. No CEO of a corporation would have held onto his position under similar circumstances, but most "feminists" made excuses because Clinton was "their" guy. Using women for sexual favors is wrong, period. These feminists are hypocrites when it comes to political parties. If a Republican acted like Al Franken, they and the press would pound away incessantly. Yet, when one of their own behaves in a slimy, condescending, sexist and abusive manner towards women, they simply ignore the behavior and support him - "he's really on our side."

But such political opportunism is short-sighted. As the editor of Feministe, Jill Filipovic said yesterday in the Washington Post, "Mainstream liberal Democratic guys don't have to take feminism seriously because they know that, at the end of the day, we're going to be there." Filipovic supports Obama, but recognizes that "most of the time, appeasement is not the solution."

At least two of Minnesota's female Democrat leaders, Rep. Betty McCollum and Mari Porkownowski, had the courage and integrity to say that Al Franken went too far to warrant election to the Senate. I applaud their actions.

Equality comes when you are equally qualified, work equally hard and are held to the same standards. When all women can take a stand against nasty and stupid behavior by men such as Al Franken, we will have made major strides.

The Democrat "feminists" have no moral authority until they are willing to hold their own men accountable to the same standards they piously assert for those outside their party.

Labels: Democrats, Feminists

I've not commented on the Obama craze the past few months. I'm happy to let the Democrats duke it out among themselves. But, this San Francisco fundraiser displays such an incredible example of the hypocrisy of what the Democrat Party says it is that I decided to post.

The Democrats bill themselves as the party of the working man. I've even seen the old bumper sticker with words to the effect: I can't afford to be a Republican. I've got news for you - the billionaires are overwhelmingly Democrat - you can't afford to be a Democrat.

Most media moguls, Democrats;
Dot-com mega-millionaires and billionaires, Democrats;
Stock market honchos, Democrats.

These people, most of whom earned their mega-fortunes, have now decided they are smarter and better than the rest of us. They have their fundraisers at multi-million dollar mansions with their mega-rich friends, and agree with the condescending, snide remarks made about the rest of us peons.

What made America great was our environment that fostered, encouraged, and supported new ideas as well as the knowledge that with enough intelligence, hard work, and sometimes a few breaks, people could create and earn more than they ever dreamed. Most of these incredibly rich Democrats earned their money in our free-market system.

What happened to their attitude once they became so wealthy that money no longer meant anything to them? Did they put their efforts to encouraging others to repeat their successes? No.

Obama's behavior is that of a privately schooled, east coast educated elitist. He was at home with the San Francisco mega-money crowd. He and his super rich supporters do not understand that we Americans are capable of making our own decisions and we don't want others telling us what to do or how to think. This elitist attitude may well have cost him Pennsylvania tonight.

I don't want their money, I don't want their houses, and I surely don't want their arrogant, elitist attitude. What I do want is the continued opportunity to support the nation that gives people a real chance.

There will always be elitists - it's just that too many of today's elite Americans are far too socialistic minded. They are totally out of touch with the very people who buy their products and made them wealthy beyond belief.

Labels: Democrats, Obama

A local DFL activist and Wellstone! award winner writes about the Democrats she knows as being charitable:

The Democrats I know live and promote the value of personal responsibility. They believe in hard work, honesty, persistence and self-reliance.

But the Democrats I know also understand the value of social responsibility.

They know that there are many areas such as transportation, public education and police and fire protection where responding as a community for the common good is more effective and efficient than only responding individually.

I can't remember who said this last week, but it bears repeating: Do you ever notice that when liberals want to justify government spending they always go to transportation and police and fire? At least Pat includes public education, for which there are private substitutes. K-12 education in MN consumes 39.9% of a $34.5 billion state budget; public safety only 5.4%. Transportation comes out of a different fund. Tell you way, Pat, let's make a deal. You restrict us to police, fire and transportation and even K-12. How about that part called "health and human services"? Ready to privatize that?

But I digress. What does it mean for her to be socially responsible?

These Democrats also know that for many in our society, the playing field is not level, and that if we believe in our democratic principles, we must live the value of social responsibility.

The failure of a market-driven health care system is one example where all of this comes together.

Personal responsibility alone will not solve that mess.

When you hear "level playing field", what you should translate that to is "egalitarianism", and often we are talking about ex post egalitarianism. I have more than you, so that's not right. And there's plenty to that the person alone could do. Bob Collins notes that 87% of people in a survey by the Northwest Area Foundation said they agreed that "I would like to do more to help people struggling in my community", to which Bob wonders, well, what's stopping you?

It would seem that if the 87% who would like to do more, actually did more, then not quite as many people would be struggling. Armed with only anecdotal evidence, I'm going to theorize that 87% of the people are not going to do more and a sizeable number aren't doing that much now.

...A closer look at the survey shows that a large percentage said they would be willing to get together to talk about ways to help. Others said they would be willing to talk to an elected official. Seventy-eight percent said they would take part in a church project to help someone. A somewhat smaller group said they would adopt a family temporarily if they were struggling. About the same number said they would pay another $50 in taxes.

Times are tough for a lot of people, of course, but could it be different if we did as we say? As individuals, what's stopping us, aside from our belief it won't make a difference? And what do you consider to be a definition of doing something?

I suspect for most of them it's the opportunity to get together and talk about someone else doing something. Learned Foot makes the point well:

...why on earth would someone volunteer time, money and / or effort when they can just vote for [someone] who will make them feel as altruistic. The only effort required is 5 minutes at a polling station, a pull of the lever for your local machine Democrat, and then you can go forth and proclaim to the world how compassionate you are. Giving feels good. To the feeble minded and selfish, feeling like you gave while doing nothing feels just as good.

And let's face it: in most cases that compassion is going to be extracted forcibly from someone other than yourself.

The takeaway from all this, I think, is that people are well-meaning, but lazy.

We refer to this as "self-interest", Foot. And the statements like those of Mrs. Welter are simply "cheap signaling". Anyone can be generous with OPM: Other People's Money.

Mrs. W then doubles down by assaulting the church-goers while reviewing the evidence of Arthur Brooks' study Who Really Cares?:

Conservative people are a percentage point or two more likely to give money each year than liberal people, but a percentage point or less likely to volunteer. And while conservative people do give more to charities and churches, when religion is factored out, charitable giving between liberals and conservatives is not distinguishable.

This shows only the most shallow reading of Brooks' work. He notes that religious people are more charitable towards non-religious charities than the secularist population. "A religious person is 57% more likely than a secularist to help a homeless person," he writes. And the last sentence seems to suggest that the only thing a religious person gives to is a church, and thus for reasons involving his or her own salvation, not to help the poor. There's nothing about conservatism or religiousness that would necessarily encourage one to go to the Red Cross, but according to Brooks' estimates, the amount of blood banked in America would rise 45% if liberals gave blood as much as conservatives do.

If they ever figure out how to tax blood, Heaven help us!

Labels: Democrats, Minnesota, politics

This afternoon, which is totally gorgeous, I was driving to meet a friend for coffee. The mini-van next to me had three political stickers on its rear bumper:

Klobuchar - DFL Senator elected in 2006
Sarvi - DFL candidate to take on Congressman, John Kline of MN's 2nd Congressional District

and the winner...... Bush Must Go.

Don't know about the awareness of the van owners but Bush has less than nine months, by law.

Oh, well.....

Labels: Democrats