Norm Coleman, rather oddly, has decided to take a day job:
Norm Coleman (R) has taken a job with the Republican Jewish Coalition while contesting Democrat Al Franken’s lead in the Minnesota Senate race, his campaign confirmed Thursday.This makes little sense if you (i) are at all concerned about public sentiment, or (ii) think you have any chance whatsoever of actually prevailing in the recount. It reminds me a little bit of Mike Huckabee, already mathematically eliminated from the Republican nomination, went on a speaking junket to the Caribbean while ostensibly still seeking the presidency, a clear sign that he was staying in the race merely for the free media that would help him to build his brand for 2012 and beyond.
In what could be seen as a sign that Coleman thinks his bid to return to the Senate may be lost, he has signed on to do consulting work for the group, which is comprised of a number GOP leaders.
“The senator needs to earn a living while the contest is going on,” said Coleman spokesman Mark Drake, who said the job does not at all affect Coleman’s bid to win reelection.
But what is Coleman's angle here? Increasingly, I think this is being driven by John Cornyn and the RSCC, and that they've given up on beating Franken but merely want to bloody him, casting doubt over the legitimacy of his election in order to make him a focal point for Republican angst. If this were a generic Democrat instead of Franken, in other words, I think the Republicans might already have given up. But because Franken has the potential to be a polarizing figure, there is more incentive for them to fan the flames a little bit; the recount merely provides the pretense for them to do so.
112 comments
By "winning" the election, I think that Franken is over the biggest hurdle of his political life. He's pretty obviously a smart fellow and his politics match rather well with the state of Minnesota. The main issues he had were some comedy-related gaffes (in the political sense) in times past. If he goes to Washington and serves for five-plus years, and serves the state well in the mold of Paul Wellstone, and is seen as an effective Senator, people will forget the election and what came before it.
The Senate, with six year terms, lets a lot get forgotten by the time there is another election. In the case of Al Franken, as long as he serves his constituents well, this can only help him.
good will? common good? are these words and concepts even remotely familiar to Coleman and the other obstructionist.
Go Al-you show them what it means to be a public servant and a valuable citizen!
What are the chances that the MNSC will end this on Monday? Please oh please let it end !
@ Latte-Can MNSC end this on Monday?
This is a cynical attempt to get Franken and the DNC to dump money on fighting Coleman in the Courts.
It reminds me of people that will file numerous 'nuisance' lawsuits against a hated enemy, none of which stand even a chance of success, because the lawyer's fees and legal costs will drive their opponent into debt.
In the end this will only harm the people of Minnesota, who now have only half the representation in the Senate of any other state, and whose Courts are now clogged with Coleman's suits, and cannot move on to any real concerns which affect the state of Minnesota.
It's disgraceful, cynical, and shows the Coleman never cared about Minnesota. He has only cared about himself. And he is willing to 'punish' Minnesota for having voted for his opponent.While Cornyn no doubt has proposed this idea to Coleman, it's Coleman's greed for power and self-promotion that suspended the voice of his conscience, which would have directed him to step down for the good of his state.
While this whole ugly mess drags on and is damaging to Minnesota, it can at least be said that Coleman has shown his true nature to the world, and to Minnesota. Minnesotans can at least take heart in the fact that they now have proof positive that Coleman was and is a disaster, and they are better without him.
At this point I would be shocked if Coleman ever conceded in any form other than saying, "The courts say its over".
They are going to spend the next 6 years trying to say that Franken is not a legitimate Senator, but that is ok, because in a few days/weeks/months his votes will count the same as the other 99 senators.
The Senator has disclosed every gift he's ever received.
The Senator has disclosed every gift he's ever received.
The Senator has disclosed every gift he's ever received.
Cornyn can throw a royal fit and try to have Franken blocked from being seated. But this would test his political muscle to the absolute limit. If Cornyn tries this bullshit, he's basically claiming power over all 98 other Senators, and I doubt either caucus will be too keen on the idea that - if they step out of line - they could be the next focal point of his ire in the next election race. On the flip side, if he loses, he's wasted just a bit more political capital for nothing.
Whomever ends up assassinating Obama should cripple Franken first.
If Franken was unable to serve, who would serve in his place?
Coleman is toast and he knows it. When even right wing orgs are lampooning his legal team, then there is no real support left for him.
Frankly, the MN state gov needs to bill Coleman for all court costs incurred by them for this farce.
Typical Republican strategy. Such givers they are--always putting country over party*.
*=On Opposite Day only.
Also, I think rays242's comment really needs to go. Where do you get these commenters, Nate?
rays242
Don't be surprised when the Secret Service shows up at your door asking about your last comment.
Nate wrote: "This makes little sense if you (i) are at all concerned about public sentiment, or (ii) think you have any chance whatsoever of actually prevailing in the recount."
I'm sorry, but I fail to see the logical train of thought here.
First, the votes have been cast, so public sentiment about his taking a job won't affect the outcome of the election.
Second, I doubt public sentiment will be negative. Coleman took a job with the Republican Jewish Coalition. He's not out there clubbing baby seals.
Third, he needs income even if his chances of winning the judicial recount were excellent. The court case(s) likely will take months to resolve, followed by a possible U.S. Senate inquiry if he should be declared the winner. With kids in college and a mortgage that exceeds the value of his home, Coleman cannot just sit around twiddling his thumbs. He isn't a wealthy man.
Gee Rays242, that's charming. Are you in favor of killing everybody the voters pick if you disagree with the result? Or do you hope some are only winged, to teach them a lesson?
Ignore the troll, also ignore Coleman.
What is taking the FBI so long to come down on Coleman for his attempt to smuggle money through his wife?
billbg nailed it on the head. The Strib recently reported that the house he bought in 1994 is mortgaged beyond belief. The original note was for ~175,000. He now owes ~$750,000 on it. The guy has got to pay his bills.
Off topic (but maybe not so much considering Coleman's FBI problems).
Here is a great picture of Blago getting an autograph from his #1 hero and mentor.
"rays242
Don't be surprised when the Secret Service shows up at your door asking about your last comment."
Asking about what?
"Gee Rays242, that's charming. Are you in favor of killing everybody the voters pick if you disagree with the result? Or do you hope some are only winged, to teach them a lesson?"
I am in favor of splitting the country into two: one for Democrats and one for Republicans, since each side hates the other side.
rays242: You have been reported to the Secret Service, again.
Between now and the time they contact you and begin prosecution, I'd recommend avoiding further incriminating yourself on this, or any other site.
@JM- That's just silly:)
lol...prosecution? for what?
Man the creepy Republicans have come out of the woodwork lately. For as much as I *hated* Bush and Cheney, I never wished them to be assassinated. Yeesh. I would hope people like that are investigated at the least, as you can't threaten another person's life legally.
On this topic, from what I hear from the Minnesotans that I know, Coleman has lost basically all of his public sentiment except for those hardcore party liners who would have voted for anyone as long as they are a Republican.
His first strike was coming out immediately after the election and stating that it was ridiculous that Franken would ask for a recount because the voters had obviously spoken. I have talked with two people that voted for Coleman who said they hoped he lost because he clearly didn't want to find out if he won fairly or not. This was the same time that he made his, "If I was in the same situation, I would concede!" statement which has come back to haunt him too.
His second major error was how he handled the removal of the contested ballots. Unlike Franken's camp, which did everything first, Coleman's camp had to be asked time and time again, and still submitted far more than Franken while winning many less of them, which was also negatively viewed.
The third was challenging the legitimacy of counting the disputed ballots. It's a hard PR battle to say that you shouldn't count all of the available votes, and Coleman did just that, still winning him less support.
Finally, after the recount finished, he did everything wrong at once. He did not stop challenging what is now essentially frivolous court cases like he said that he would. He challenged the camps to bring in even more votes then before, including ones which had been deemed properly tossed, even after agreeing to the terms before, and he has tried to taint the win as much as possible.
Other than the hardcore Republicans that would have voted for anyone-but-Franken anyway, this recount really doesn't hurt Franken at all, and in fact may bolster his credibility in the future. It helps when you get to be on the positive side of the PR at every turn, and as someone else said, the fact that he serves for six years instead of just two means that he will have more than enough time to prove to the citizens of Minnesota that he is a great representative for the state.
His comedy and his talk radio shows did hurt him because he was a polarizing figure, but he won by far the biggest battle with this first election, and he is looking at having a lot to gain once he finally gets seated.
Statler N Waldorf wrote: "This is a cynical attempt to get Franken and the DNC to dump money on fighting Coleman in the Courts."
First, Coleman and the RNC also must dump money fighting this out in the courts.
Second, in Minnesota, the loser of the election contest pays the costs of the contest. Since Franken most likely will win, that means Coleman/RNC probably will have to pay Franken/DNC's costs.
I'm a Franken supporter, but I also think it's good for the democratic process if every reasonable effort is made to properly count every legal vote. The election contest trial is part of this democratic process.
I just wish the democratic process had had an opportunity to play itself out in Florida in 2000.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I am not threatening his life. It is likely someone will assassinate him.
Besides, I reallhy doubt Obama is reading the comments section of a random website and going "Oh, noes! I am in trouble now!"
Then again, Obama is an asshole anyway, so anything is possible.
Hey Goat,
Have you ever noticed that the party that's so quick to proclaim that they have the moral high ground on respect for life issues is the first group of people that will propose killing somebody as a solution to their problems?
What kinda 'pro-life' attitude is it that allows for cheering on the assassination of public officials, the execution of prisoners, and declaring preemptive war with little or no proof of any kinda threat being posed?
I thought a respect for life meant you don't wanna kill anybody, since killing is kinda pro-death, not pro-life.
Huh. I guess it only applies to people you don't like. Republicans are exempt from their own principles, and just use that sham morality of theirs to flog their opponents.
I thought Harry Reid said they were planning to seat Franken regardless, given that the Constitution gives the Senate power to decide elections of its members.
The Dems need to start showing some balls. Obama already has--all the niggling, petty sniping by the MSM since the election has been answered by him with a blithe refusal to get into their bug-tussles. Reid should call a vote to seat Franken, Franken should be seated, weather the crybabies with perfect equanimity then go on to the business that needs doing.
@SBG
billbg nailed it on the head.
Well, his third point hit it on the head. For his first two points, I think he got the wrong idea about which part of the public sentiment Nate had in mind. It wasn't about whether taking this job was honorable but rather about whether he still is serious about the Senate seat, whether he still has a chance, whether the lawsuits should be taken seriously, etc. 1) Although the voting is over, the courts are nonetheless more atuned of public sentiment than they are ideally supposed to be. 2) He is angling for a do-over and the public thinking, "It's a done deal, lets move on," won't help him. 3) He and the Repubs want to discredit Frankin as much as possible. Making a show of giving up won't help that effort any.
@fred and Latte- What exactly will the MNSC be hearing on Monday and if they decide in Franken's favor will that bring a complete end to this thing? It seems that Franken has taken at least two approached to getting seated ASAP:
1) Ask the MNSC to reject Coleman's suit out right
2) Order a provisional certificate of election which can be repealed if necessary.
Are these both in play right now? If so which one is in front of the MNSC on Monday?
Billbg,
I had not realized Minnesota had that arrangement. Here in Louisiana, you bear all the costs, whether you win or lose, so that kinda 'sue em till you break em' kinda thing happens alot. It's kinda cool you folks found a way to stop that nonsense.
Now, I have found another thing about Minnesota I admire, besides Prince and Al Franken.
Anyway, if they're going to count em all, then let's get it over and done with. As somebody that has invested heavily in Al Franken, I have the confidence that he can prevail in a full recount. I would like to see him or somebody (even Dean Barkley-I'm sure he wouldn't mind filling in temporarily) in that Senate seat in the immediate sense. The country simply can't be put on hold until this recount debacle is resolved, and Minnesota needs the representation in the Senate. Leaving that chair vacant for now benefits nobody.
Looks like the trolls have caused Nate to re-institute the "blog-owner approval" screening for posts. It's always the Republicans that, when they don't get their way, start immediately thinking about murder and torture. Come to think of it, they do that even when they do get their way...
One very nice unsung outcome of the Inauguration is that Rick Warren has now been completely marginalized. In dealing with bigots, one of the most effective neutralizing tactics a powerful person can employ is giving the ranter center stage, and then making no subsequent comment regarding him whatsoever. Sometimes, as in this case, it works like a charm. Warren had not one damned thing to say Tuesday, although that didn't stop him from continuing to flop around in hopes of stumbling across some phrase that might be memorable. The silence that greeted his performance says all anyone needs to know about his relevance going forward.
Thanks to O, Warren's fifteen minutes are up for good.
Hmmm--the blockade has been lifted again.
Must be a drag monitoring posts to keep the trolls out...
wv entem: If you click your heels three times while saying "There's no place like home" she will suddenly appear in your kitchen.
JMNorris wrote: "...I think he got the wrong idea about which part of the public sentiment Nate had in mind. It wasn't about whether taking this job was honorable but rather about whether he still is serious about the Senate seat, whether he still has a chance, whether the lawsuits should be taken seriously, etc."
So, are you suggesting that if Coleman twiddled his thumbs instead of taking a job, then this would show he is more serious about the lawsuits and his chances of winning a Senate seat?
I'm sorry, but I fail to see the connection. In the past, lots of employed people have filed serious court cases.
Billbg...you keep describing this as "a" job. He's hired on with a lobbyist, at the same time he claims to have a right to be among the lobbied. In his new job, he will be buttonholing those whom he believes will continue to be his colleagues. Conflict of Interest, anyone?
"It's always the Republicans that, when they don't get their way, start immediately thinking about murder and torture. Come to think of it, they do that even when they do get their way..."
Fail...that retad Sunsara Taylor protested outside a liberal's speech about the "illegal war," even though liberals are more sympathetic to her lunatic way of thinking.
@ Statler N Waldorf -- I'm a pretty moderate person most of the time, however I've noticed time and time again that Republicans are extremely hypocritical about *tons* of issues.
Pro-life, but generally also pro-war and anti-others.
Pro-Constitution, but obsessively pro-Christian.
Pro-Small Government, but somehow always running up the national debt versus it slowing, stopping or decreasing under Democrats.
It's why although I like what they tend to do for small business owners better -- I own one as a sort of "hobby" and Republican legislation usually does work better for small businesses -- that I can never find a way to feel comfortable with voting for them. I like the people who are very honest about what they feel about things and why, and are willing to stand up behind those beliefs.
It's why I've been really closely following the Senate race, as I randomly found one of Franken's books and decided to pick it up to see just how much of a blowhard he was. Unlike the standard Republican talking heads, he had a lot of sources that he cited and really backed up what he was saying. Then I liked him even more when he decided to run for Senate because unlike the regular blowhards, he was truly backing up what he said.
I think he is going to be an excellent, excellent Senator because of it. And it is the intelligence on the side of the Democrats that will continue to make me vote for them I'm sure.
Please reinstitute the blockade and hold it for a few days/weeks/however long it takes before the troll starves to death or gets investigated
Statler N Waldorf wrote: "The country simply can't be put on hold until this recount debacle is resolved, and Minnesota needs the representation in the Senate."
It might seem like a crisis, but it really isn't.
The country is still functioning, even without 100 Senators. And Minnesota still has one representative in the Senate.
Vacancies in the U.S. Senate have occurred in the past and will happen in the future. When Senators die or resign, for example, their seats sometimes go unfilled for several months.
Life goes on.
goatdan...
Good points. I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I've been an Independent for thirty-odd years, and in earlier years witnessed about an equal number of kooks and crackpots in both parties. But something definitely seems to have happened to the GOP recently--it's almost as if they were possessed.
I've said it before and it is worth repeating. If someone ever founds a new conservative party based on conservative principles that are acted upon solely via civil political discourse, the GOP would dry up and blow away like last year's leaves.
"Please reinstitute the blockade and hold it for a few days/weeks/however long it takes before the troll starves to death or gets investigated"
And what are they gonna investigate?
Why I know Obama is a scumbag?
That is obvious.
Goat,
I agree. I kind of miss the Old Republicans, like Eisenhower or Roosevelt. The ones that stood up to big business, generally kept their religious beliefs to themselves (Lincoln famously refused to declare what his religion was at all-and praised a preacher whose sermon he sat through and found that the preacher did not attempt to say anything about politics whatsoever), were concerned about reducing the federal deficit and limiting spending while at the same time preserving the environment.
The word conservative used to mean that you were trying to conserve something. Conservationism has it's roots in that same kind of conservatism. It meant not spending what was valuable to obtain some cheap, temporary thrill. That's why Roosevelt stood up to the major corporate trusts like Standard Oil and why Lincoln created nature preserves, why Eisenhower tried to contain the military-industrial complex from gaining too much power and influence.
I do believe the Old Republicans would scarcely recognize the GOP as it stands today. It has become a weird religious cult that tells its followers that God wants them to be selfish and greedy, and that personal liberties are trivial things of no importance, that responsibility means nothing, and that nature is to be bound, gagged and raped whenever the urge strikes for immediate gratification.
I do believe Lincoln would express horror at this GOP.
It is telling that most Democratic wins now are more because of votes directed against the GOP than in their favor. I think alot of those votes come from people like me, that find it disgusting that people like Sarah Palin would compare themselves to Roosevelt or Lincoln. And what would Eisenhower have to say about Bush and his 'War Presidency'?
How sad and pathetic the GOP has become. They have no principles left, only cheap platitudes and misplaced self-righteousness.
gjdodger wrote: "He's hired on with a lobbyist, at the same time he claims to have a right to be among the lobbied."
Coleman is not a sitting Senator. Nor, as far as I know, is he claiming to be one.
gjdodger then wrote: "In his new job, he will be buttonholing those whom he believes will continue to be his colleagues. Conflict of Interest, anyone?"
Coleman's new job is not that of a lobbyist. That, indeed, would be a violation of ethics laws.
I suspect Coleman's role will be that of an advisor. Unlike you, however, I won't make this assertion with full certainty.
I'm not a Coleman fan, but I try to look at the situation with some objectivity.
Billbg,
According to Roll Call, Coleman refuses to vacate his Senate office. It's gone 'semi-dark' meaning he is barred from using it for Senatorial business, but how many lobbyists do you know with an office right inside the Hart Building?
And yes, it is unethical for any legislator to work for a lobbying firm. It ought to be illegal to ever do so. As it is, it's shady in the extreme to do that when you still occupy your Senate office.
"that find it disgusting that people like Sarah Palin would compare themselves to Roosevelt or Lincoln. And what would Eisenhower have to say about Bush and his 'War Presidency'?"
I find that disgusting, but I also find it disgusting to have Obama compared to those two as well.
goatdan wrote: "...I've noticed time and time again that Republicans are extremely hypocritical about *tons* of issues."
Sadly, we Democrats also can be hypocritical.
Not so long ago, Franken was urging that care be taken to ensure every legal vote is properly counted. Today, not so much.
Eight years ago, most of us Democrats wanted the Florida courts to be actively involved in resolving legal concerns in the presidential election. Today, many Democrats don't want the Minnesota courts to do the same in the senatorial race.
rays242-
You threatened Obama with death yesterday, personally delievered. That is more than enough for a Secret Service visit.
I have quit prediciting the MNSC after their horrendous decision surrounding the absentee ballots, allowing the campaigns an inappropriate role.
Off-Topic:
I don't know why anyone would think Obama is going to be assassinated when, so far as I know, there wasn't even an attempt on the life of his predecessor.
On-Topic:
Coleman continues because this one is personal and conclusive. His career in politics is effectively over once the MNSC rules against him. I remain confident that the fact that his campaign agreed to the rules by which it was decided which absentee ballots had been wrongly rejected is fatal for his contest. Those rules gave both campaigns and the responible county officials a veto over counting any and all, if they so chose, absentee ballots that had not been previously been counted. End of story if not argument.
Statler N Waldorf wrote: "According to Roll Call, Coleman refuses to vacate his Senate office."
That's an interesting spin. According to that article: "In the meantime, Coleman said Reid has allowed him and his staff to return, pack up casework and transfer files to Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)."
In fact, the U.S. Senate unanimously approved an agreement to keep Coleman's offices open until Feb. 4.
Statler N Waldorf then asked: "...how many lobbyists do you know with an office right inside the Hart Building?"
None. And since Coleman is not a lobbyist, there still are none.
Statler N Waldorf then noted: "And yes, it is unethical for any legislator to work for a lobbying firm. It ought to be illegal to ever do so."
Do you think it's unethical for a former U.S. Senator to work as a receptionist for a lobbying firm? As a spokesperson? As an advisor?
Yes, it's unethical for them to work as a lobbyist. In fact, it already is illegal for them to do so for the first two years after they leave office.
loner-
It might be fatal to the contest, but it might also not be as if the case goes to the SCOTUS it could be argued that the inappropriate involvement of the campaigns in absentee ballot selection created a per se unfair election where some ballots were excluded based on something other than the merits and the law.
I hope not...but...
loner wrote: "I remain confident that the fact that his campaign agreed to the rules by which it was decided which absentee ballots had been wrongly rejected is fatal for his contest."
On Dec. 18, the MN Supreme Court ruled the only absentee ballots that could be counted during the administrative recount (by the Canvassing Board) were those that the counties and campaigns unanimously agreed had been improperly rejected.
That's because the Canvassing Board is not the proper forum to hear testimony, subpoena records, etc.
In its Jan. 5 decision, the MN SC ruled that disputed absentee ballots should be brought up at the judcial recount phase (i.e., the election contest trial), where evidence can be properly presented.
The fact that Coleman agreed to count some absentee ballots at the administrative recount phase doesn't preclude him from contesting other absentee ballots during the judicial recount.
@ billbg - "Not so long ago, Franken was urging that care be taken to ensure every legal vote is properly counted. Today, not so much.
Eight years ago, most of us Democrats wanted the Florida courts to be actively involved in resolving legal concerns in the presidential election. Today, many Democrats don't want the Minnesota courts to do the same in the senatorial race."
Actually, Franken completely kept his word. He wanted every vote counted, and the courts ruled that they would be counted in a certain way, which was that both parties had to agree to which ones would be counted.
The Franken camp originally said yes to them all, but the Coleman camp refused to do that, instead trying to cherry-pick what they thought would be good for them. Franken's camp did the same thing to keep any statistical advantage that Coleman could have used at bay.
Every available vote was legally counted in the way set forth by the state. When those votes were complete and agreed upon by both parties, they were counted and Franken won.
At this point, Coleman is trying to redefine the rules that both he and Franken (begrudgingly for Franken) agreed to.
Unlike the Flordia election, where other than the concession and then repeal of the concession, the Gore camp never stopped fighting for the exact same things, Coleman was the one to put all these restrictions into place initially, while Franken kept saying, "Lets just count them all? Is that good with you?" Coleman kept saying that wasn't good enough, and now he has totally changed his mind.
The Coleman challenges do not make sense based on his rhetoric, nor are they expected to make any change in the ultimate results. He doesn't have any proof of a lot of his challenges (double counted ballots), and he has continually provided differing positions throughout the recount on various parts of the recount.
Because of this, while I agree that the courts should still hear his arguments, they should do it soon and should dismiss them shortly thereafter. As the Franken campaign person says, Coleman's camp has a theory, but nothing to back it up. It is time for him to put up or shut up, as the votes were all counted not the way Franken wanted them counted, but the way Coleman wanted them counted -- with his restrictions on them.
You can't have your cake and eat it too, and Coleman can't keep challenging in different ways until he finds a way to count more of his votes than Franken's votes. It's over, completely legitimately (unlike Flordia) and Fraken has won.
Housekeeper and Taxes Are Said to Derail Kennedy’s Bid
The NY Times reports that
"Problems involving taxes and a household employee surfaced during the vetting of Caroline Kennedy and derailed her candidacy for the Senate, a person close to Gov. David A. Paterson said on Thursday, in an account at odds with Ms. Kennedy’s own description of her reasons for withdrawing."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/nyregion/23caroline.html?hp=&pagewanted=print
In spite of the expense and time that would be wasted in such an endeavor, I do kind of hope that Coleman wins and all the absentees are counted, as they should have been originally. Given that even the cherrypicked absentees went for Franken, it seems quite likely that a full count would just increase Franken's margin of victory. Which would be hilarious.
fred—
I was only speaking to the likely outcome in state court. Hopefully, nothing will induce the federal courts to become involved, but, should they, I have to think that if the process for deciding a contested election in Minnesota doesn't pass muster then nothing currently does.
billbg—
Coleman can challenge whatever he likes. His campaign agreed to the process by which it would be decided which rejected absentee ballots would be counted and that process allowed his campaign, the Franken camapign and the county officials responsible to veto any or all ballots. What difference does it make that the responsible county officials exercised their veto power (at their own disgression) first?
goatdan wrote: "...the courts ruled that they would be counted in a certain way, which was that both parties had to agree to which ones would be counted."
That's a common misperception. See my explanation to "loner", above.
goatdan also claimed: "Every available vote was legally counted in the way set forth by the state."
There still are outstanding disputes. For example, Coleman believes some votes were counted twice. He also claims uniform standards weren't used to determine which absentee ballots should be counted.
At this point, we don't know if every legal vote was properly counted. Hopefully, the election contest trial will settle these disputes.
goatdan suggested: "At this point, Coleman is trying to redefine the rules that both he and Franken (begrudgingly for Franken) agreed to."
Those were the rules for bringing absentee ballots before the State Canvassing Board (i.e., the administrative recount body). Now, the election has moved to the election contest trial (i.e., the judicial recount body), where Coleman can contest the disputed absentee ballots and other issues.
goatdan asserted: "It's over, completely legitimately (unlike Flordia) and Fraken has won."
It's not over; it's in the judicial recount phase. Franken is ahead, but he hasn't won yet. It's very likely he will be the eventual winner, though. Thank goodness.
To Nate and those of you hammering down on Norm Coleman for sticking this out to the bitter end, ask yourself this one question: How would you feel if it everything was exactly the same except that Franken was down a couple hundred votes at this stage in the game.
Would you be saying the same thing? Would you be this upset? Would your response also be, "WTF is he doing? Why doesn't he just concede and save face, as well as saving Minnesota time and grief"?
Or would you want Franken to go down in a blaze of glory as well trying to fight for a victory or do everything he can to at least delegitamize in some way a Coleman victory?
If you can honestly say you'd be equally as frustrated with the process were Franken behind and yelling for his concession, then I tip my cap at your consistency and integrity. If not, and if you'd still be right there behind Franken every step of the way, urging him to continue, then I call you the worthless hypocrite that you are.
billbg said: "Do you think it's unethical for a former U.S. Senator to work as a receptionist for a lobbying firm? As a spokesperson? As an advisor?"
Actually, yes. Even if you are not acting as a lobbyist in contact with other Senators, you are receiving a paycheck in the employ of a lobbying firm. This is a conflict of intrest and opens the firm for preferential treatment.
I don't think Franken is trying to prevent every vote from being counted... I think he is saying that once every vote has been examined two or three times, it's time to say they've all been counted already and get on with it. Yes, there may still be a few errors here and there, but they are clearly not enough to alter the outcome.
I have thought all along that the contest wasn't really Norm's idea, but rather the Senate Republicans. However, I think it's less about Franken than about math: once Franken is seated, the Dems will only need one Repub to break a filibuster instead of two. Nate has written before that this may not matter, but Cornyn isn't taking any chances. I think this matters more than any "doubt" they may cast on Franken, which will be forgotten six years from now.
Meanwhile, Norm is deep in debt and needs paying work from somewhere...
@Edge: naturally I have some difficulties telepathically contacting my doppelganger in the parallel universe where it is Franken in the situation where Coleman is now, but... I am reasonably certain my feelings would be "Good fight, but it's over, forget it."
It can't be over now- there's still the 341 absentee ballots that one party rejected, plus any Minnesotan can challenge his/her absentee ballot being rejected.
Unfortunately, the way that the MNSC ruled earlier pretty much requires the side that's losing to file suit, whether he wants to or not. I can't blame Coleman for that.
And yes, I'm a Franken supporter.
loner wrote: "What difference does it make that the responsible county officials exercised their veto power (at their own disgression) first?"
You misunderstood my point. It doesn't matter if the county officials excercised their vetoes first.
What matters is that the process you mentioned only applied to which ballots could be considered by the State Canvassing Board. The processes did not apply to which ballots could be considered by the election contest trial.
When you get a chance, you might want to read the MN Supreme Court's Dec. 18 decision.
It says the county officials don't have the authority to determine which absentee ballots were improperly rejected on election day and should be recounted by the State Canvassing Board. The only absentee ballots that could be counted by the Canvassing Board were those that the county officials and the campaigns unamimously agreed upon.
Now the dispute is before the courts. The election contest judges do have the authority to determine which absentee ballots were improperly rejected on election day. They don't need the consent of either campaign.
As I explained previously: The fact that Coleman agreed to count some absentee ballots at the administrative recount phase doesn't preclude him from contesting other absentee ballots during the judicial recount.
I hope you now have a better understanding.
@ billbg -- "Those were the rules for bringing absentee ballots before the State Canvassing Board (i.e., the administrative recount body). Now, the election has moved to the election contest trial (i.e., the judicial recount body), where Coleman can contest the disputed absentee ballots and other issues."
Right, but the fact that Coleman didn't agree to just including them all which is what Franken proposed but is now fighting to have them included is hypocritical and bad form. Had Coleman come out and said, "Lets count them all!" and then later argued that there was another 5,000 that should have been counted, I would be totally on his side. I can't be when he says, "Let's limit what we vote! Now let's include more!"
@ Edge -- "If you can honestly say you'd be equally as frustrated with the process were Franken behind and yelling for his concession, then I tip my cap at your consistency and integrity. If not, and if you'd still be right there behind Franken every step of the way, urging him to continue, then I call you the worthless hypocrite that you are."
I will stand up and say that I think that the Flordia situation from 2000, although not fully resolved, got as far as it needs to get. I also have said (and had to sleep on the couch for it) that Democrats need to stop whining about the fact that they lost the 2000 election because had Gore been a better candidate, they would have won.
The reply has been that they did win because Gore won the popular vote.
My reply to that is that if anyone believes that popular vote is how our President is determined, they don't know much about politics.
So, overall, I think I'm a pretty consistent person and would have been annoyed if Franken had continually pushed the issue if his original points had been addressed and he had still come up short. I don't expect him to manufacture votes, I expect the system to determine if he won or not.
cudubh wrote: "Even if you are not acting as a lobbyist in contact with other Senators, you are receiving a paycheck in the employ of a lobbying firm. This is a conflict of intrest and opens the firm for preferential treatment."
You need to draw reasonable limits. Coleman could open a D.C. bakery and receive preferential treatment.
You need to draw reasonable limits. Coleman could open a D.C. bakery and receive preferential treatment.
You need to draw reasonable and valid analogies.
A bakery has the same power that a lobbying firm has on capitol hill?
nikip5555 wrote: "I think he is saying that once every vote has been examined two or three times, it's time to say they've all been counted already and get on with it."
First, not every vote has been examined two or three times. Coleman's claim of double-counted votes, for instance, has properly been set aside by both the Canvassing Board and the MN Supreme Court for review by the election contest trial.
Second, speed isn't the primary concern for a recount. Accuracy is.
Of course, it is impossible to perfectly count every ballot. But an election contest trial certainly can improve the accuracy of the results, which is why state statutes provide for it.
new thread
Um... Isn't "Republican Jew" an Oxymoron?
In my Reform Synagogue it is.
As for Franken being "Polarizing"... Isn't that the term used by Republicans when they don't have a Congressional majority to stuff their "Bi-polarized Agenda" down non-Republican throats.
As for those who would welcome the death of the POTUS: So when did you decide the "Rule of Law" was unimportant and decide that you would join our enemies?
David wrote: "A bakery has the same power that a lobbying firm has on capitol hill?"
Nope. Nor does a lobbying firm receptionist have the same power as a lobbying firm lobbyist.
You have to draw the line somewhere. Currently, the U.S. Senate has drawn the line at lobbying for two years after leaving office.
Currently, Coleman has every right to work at a lobbyist firm as long as he does not lobby. So do many other former senators...from both parties.
@mhz,
sorry, meetings all day, missed all the fun.
afair, and sorry if this is irrelevant, next Monday the case will go in front of the Alan Page (MNSC) appointed 3 judge panel, not MNSC itself. MNSC is scheduled to hear Franken request to force Ritchie and Pawlenty to sign off on the election certificate in early February, afair, Feb. 5th. In delaying the case for 3 weeks +, MNSC de facto made a point that it would prefer to rule on the certificate when the issue becomes moot. Clearly, MNSC is hoping (hopefully with some reason) that by then the election contest before the 3 judge panel will be resolved.
Now, yesterday, the 3 judge panel had heard from Franken on his motion to dismiss the Coleman challenge. I gave that motion zero chance, but hearing it live, Franken side made quite a bit more sense than even that new lawyer for Coleman who is an old time friend and a Dem besides. The panel is yet to make its decision and it is anticipated eagerly. And I am not so sure now the motion to dismiss is such a slam shut no. The down, of course, are the political implication for the panel for tossing out the Coleman challenge.
That panel has been hearing a bunch of new motions as well, including Coleman's sudden urge to revisit all 12,000 rejected absentees AND to send 86 Coleman (?) inspectors. From Strib: "His campaign asked a three-judge panel to have inspectors visit 86 precincts around the state to check ballots for possible double-counting in the U.S. Senate race"
Meanwhile theuptake JUST posted:
"Hearing for summary judgment on Coleman/Franken #mnrecount trial delayed until Noon tomorrow in #mncontest."
This is all I know, fact-wise.
My hunch is that the challenge will be allowed to proceed, but Coleman will have a very short leash. The fishing expeditions will not be tolerated, and the panel will want factual evidence. Thus far, Coleman has been only to produce one election judge who is not sure whether there was or was not double counting in case of duplicate ballots. I do not think that' going to cut it. IMHO.
~ Latte
The goopers should fear his bulldog honesty. He will be divisive... but mostly isolating the crooks. I see him as a Waxman senator, and no corrupt GOP senator will like that.
billbg—
Got it. My point has no bearing with regard to the contest. Thank you.
Latte-
Thanks for your summation -- very informative. WineRev at Kos has you beat on entertainment value though.
Some have asked about the disposition of the motion to dismiss. I don't know anything about how MN court system is set up. But I know that in one federal civil trial, I Judge sat on a motion to dismiss, then in the same ruling that he ruled on the motions in question, he dismissed the motion to dismiss as no longer relevant. So, assuming the MN court has the same prerogative, then they would not be required to rule on the motion to dismiss at any particular time.
To get back to Nate's point, it is a jarring contrast to see Franken all but sworn in (with Reid planning to do "something" to make it official) and hear Coleman's taken a job in DC. If Coleman were to win his goal of a re-vote, it seems that wouldn't play all that well with the overwhelming majority of Minnesota voters who don't live in DC, aren't Jewish and might want Coleman sort of focused on the supposed task at hand. Then again, that assumes anyone would be more upset by this than the mere fact Coleman refuses to go away. Or that Coleman is capable of thinking about the long term implications of anything he does.
Personally, I'm just upset Coleman's not pulling a Burris and storming the Capitol. With Blago now all but boycotting the Senate impeachment trial (with occassional ridiculous statements) I was hoping for an equally dysfunctional circus in Minnesota for comic relief. Oh, well.
It has been, as of today, 2.5 months since the November 6 election.
It is taking entirely too long to count the ballots.
Whatever decision is made, make it soon.
Some of us are just tired of hearing about this bullshit, and want to move on.
Berk,
I too share your thirst for chaos. Which is why I hope Governor Paterson appoints Blagojevich to be the Senator for New York.
If he arrives in DC riding an elephant painted to look like a circus tent that a jewelry store threw up on, I'll be even happier.
Let the bullshit begin!
For the record, I don't like Franken very much, but I think Coleman should give it up. For the good of Minnesota. For the good of the country.
I just don't have enough of a vested interest in that particular race to care very much, though.
Berkeley Bear in Illinois wrote: "If Coleman were to win his goal of a re-vote, it seems that wouldn't play all that well with the overwhelming majority of Minnesota voters who don't live in DC, aren't Jewish and might want Coleman sort of focused on the supposed task at hand."
1. Coleman's goal is to win the election through the courts...not through a new election.
2. I doubt many non-Jewish Minnesotans object to Coleman working for the Republican Jewish Coalition. Most knew he was Jewish when he was elected in 2000.
3. Both Coleman and Franken have hired teams of lawyers to "focus on the task at hand." Neither of them have actually appeared before the State Canvassing Board or the courts.
Statler N Waldorf wrote: "It has been, as of today, 2.5 months since the November 6 election."
Actually, it's been closer to 2.6 months, but who's counting.
Statler N Waldorf continued: "It is taking entirely too long to count the ballots."
The primary objective of recounts is not speed but rather accuracy. I think Minnesota has done an excellent job so far. I think Florida and Ohio demonstrated what happens when you rush things.
Statler N Waldorf concluded: "Some of us are just tired of hearing about this bullshit, and want to move on."
The solution is simple: just move on. Nobody is forcing you to pay attention to the Minnesota election contest.
Statler N Waldorf said...
It is taking entirely too long to count the ballots.
Speed or accuracy?
It's one or the other in a lot of cases, Statler. And in the Minnesota Senate recount, this is one of those cases.
Your constant whining and complaining about 'Baby Boomers' (yes, since I am a Baby Boomer, I notice that constant refrain from you) and your constant whining and complaining about the lack of speed in the Minnesota recount show that you have NOT learned the lesson about patience. You are also showing your age - rather your lack of such (and I'd wager that your emotional age is less than your chronological age).
When you learn patience, Statler, you should be a much better citizen than you are displaying on these pages.
@ Mike in Maryland -- I agree about the speed vs. accuracy argument, but the problem wasn't with the speed of the recount which happened over a period of about a month, but the time at the end to file and start lawsuit proceedings.
To me, it doesn't make sense at all that Coleman would need to have weeks to start a proceeding, as if he was going to do this his team should have been gathering the data to make the lawsuit during the recount itself, so at this point it would just be a matter of him stepping up and saying that his problems were a, b and c.
Instead, the big delay makes it seem like he is manufacturing problems instead of examining what should have already theoretically been found and objected to during the recount proceedings.
@billbg
So, are you suggesting that if Coleman twiddled his thumbs instead of taking a job, then this would show he is more serious about the lawsuits and his chances of winning a Senate seat?
I'm sorry, but I fail to see the connection. In the past, lots of employed people have filed serious court cases.
Sorry to take a while to get back to you.
I don't know. On one hand, he has a sufficiently lost cause that it really doesn't seem to matter any more. On the other hand, lawyers and politicians like to posture as if (excuse the pun) perception is nine tenths of the law. At any rate, the issue would not be thumb twiddling v. doing things. Rather, it is between looking like a Senator (and so not needing to fine work) and looking someone who needs to find work because the Senator thing is a lost cause. Still, you're right about it being rather far-fetched that this could have any affect.
I guess the test as to whether Coleman would think that the perception thing could have any affect is to ask whether he would have taken this job if he didn't need the money so badly. Of course, we don't know the answer to that.
PS. I liked your last sentence. :-)
Oh Mike,
It would be easier to listen to your elderly wisdom if it were not for the fact that your generation fucked everything up in a self-indulgent drive first in the sixties where you swallowed any pill you could get your hands on and fucked int he middle of the road and then in the eighties when you acted like moralizing fuckwads and elected Reagan who allowed gay people to die of AIDS without doing anything because you were nice and moral christians but gay people weren't.
Then you voted for both Bushes.
Pro peace when you're eligible for the draft. Pro war when you age out of that. The word hippie was a contraction for hypocrite.
Mike, your twenty year old self would kick your ass if he could see you now. And I'd help.
I predict that the MNSC will dispense with Coleman's suit as quickly as possible. His argument is essentially to roll back everything that has been done by the recount and court decisions already made, and then re-attack the situation in such a way that a subsequent outcome would be favorable to him.
I disagree that the issue at this point is that every vote has to be counted. "Every vote must count" was the issue only up until the canvassing board issued its opinion as to who won the election. MN has a recount process to insure as scrupulously as possible that all votes have been accounted for, and that process has run its course. Coleman's subsequent court challenge is rather like trying to back a battleship up in a narrow channel, when what needs to be done is for it to move forward.
Ironically, the more Coleman ruins his public image by acting like a petulant infant, the less in-demand he will be as a lobbyist. Nobody wants to be represented by Donald Duck.
goatdan wrote: "...the problem wasn't with the speed of the recount which happened over a period of about a month, but the time at the end to file and start lawsuit proceedings."
Huh? MN statutes require that the lawsuit be filed within 7 calander days after the recount ends. Coleman actually filed it in one day.
goatdan continued: "To me, it doesn't make sense at all that Coleman would need to have weeks to start a proceeding, as if he was going to do this his team should have been gathering the data to make the lawsuit during the recount itself..."
His team couldn't gather much of the data during the recount. Until the election contest judges allow it, they cannot depose election officials, view machine tapes, check precinct sign-in logs, etc.
goatdan concluded: "Instead, the big delay makes it seem like he is manufacturing problems instead of examining what should have already theoretically been found and objected to during the recount proceedings."
Apparently, that's how you want to see the situation. I try to view things slightly more objectively.
The argument that we need to redo the recount could conceivably be used again and again. While I am a fan of accuracy and want every vote counted, I also see this thing stretching on well into the middle of next year if Coleman decides he wants to be spiteful. Or until he runs out of money.
Maybe it was easier for my younger self to rail against Bush in 2000 for not letting the recount conclude, because I was rooting for Gore. Maybe it seems harder now that my guy is the one who would benefit from hurrying things along. I won't pretend I'm not tempted by that. I'm resisting it as best I can, though :)
It's also because I don't really see how Coleman can win it, since most of the uncounted ballots are going to be Franken votes if all of the ballots are counted and Coleman doesn't get to cherry-pick. Most of the internet buzz suggests the same thing, which has me thinking that Coleman is being sneaky. The fact that I don't like Coleman doesn't help, either. Part of me just wants to be suspicious of him. He switched parties for political expediency, he's got used-car-salesman hair, and he hates gay people. Not the sort of guy I want hanging around unwatched. I'm still on this sort of 'Stop the Republican Menace' trip too, even though the election's long over. Part of me is so upset with the GOP that I have a hard time saying the words President Obama, because I've become so used to wincing whenever I said President anything for the last eight years. I have to kinda retrain myself not to wince at the mention of the White House now.
So yeah, I'll admit, there's alot of distrust and suspicion driving my impatience. If you've sat through any of my rants, you already know the whole litany of reasons why I'm anti-GOP and anti-Norm. I want Franken to win because he's like the antithesis of the neocons and he makes me laugh, and government up until now has only made me want to vomit.
I want the recount to be done accurately. I just wish it wouldn't take until the middle of Franken's term to seat him.I still say Minnesota will suffer a little with half the representation, and the Senate as a whole suffers with a vacancy.
Pragmatus wrote: "I predict that the MNSC will dispense with Coleman's suit as quickly as possible."
They had an opportunity to do that. Instead, they opted to delay the hearing until Feb. 5.
Pragmatus asserted: "'Every vote must count' was the issue only up until the canvassing board issued its opinion as to who won the election."
Just like the election-night count (which put Coleman ahead) was not the conclusion of the election, neither was the Canvassing Board's count. MN statutes provide for an election contest trial. Once that is complete (and appeals settled), then every legal vote will have been properly counted...at least as far as MN is concerned. The federal courts and the U.S. Senate also could have their say.
Pragmatus wrote: "MN has a recount process to insure as scrupulously as possible that all votes have been accounted for, and that process has run its course."
Not quite. The Canvassing Board's recount was an administrative recount. They did not have the legal authority to investigate alleged double counting or to unilaterally determine which absentee ballots were improperly rejected. They are not an evidentiary forum where witnesses can be deposed, records subpoenaed, etc.
To handle evidentariary issues that need resolution, MN law provides for an election contest trial (i.e., a judicial recount).
Pragmatus opined: "Coleman's subsequent court challenge is rather like trying to back a battleship up in a narrow channel, when what needs to be done is for it to move forward."
Coleman's court challenge is a legitimate part of the election process and is specifically provided for in MN election laws. It is moving the process forward. The election night count was the first step. The Canvassing Board's administrative recount was the second step. And the election contest trial's judicial recount is the third step.
The "Canvassing Board's recount"? There's no such thing. The canvassing board did not order the recount, nor oversee it. Its job was restricted to settling disputes over rules and then certifying the outcome of the recount, which was conducted by each county independently.
MN law does not provide for "legal challenges" subsequent to any recount, as you imply. It simply states that if these arise, they must do so within a certain time frame. So any "legal challenge" is part of neither the election nor the recount process.
I repeat my contention that Coleman will get nowhere in his court challenge, because the important issues surrounding this election have already been resolved. He's trying to fish in sterile water.
A summary:
1. The election was held according to the law.
2. The recount was held according to the law.
3. Legal questions as to counting absentee ballots were resolved in court, and they were counted according to stipulations laid out by the court.
4. The result of all this was that the Canvassing Board declared Al Franken the winner.
Coleman filed suit to block this result, but he will have to prove in court that there is something wrong with processes 1, 2 or 3 in order to have any hope of changing the outcome. I can't see any possible chance he will prevail.
According to the Minneapolis Star Tribute:
Franken's request to dismiss Coleman suit is denied
The three-judge panel that will hear the case also rejected Franken's bid to narrowly limit the review.
Pragmatus wrote: "Legal questions as to counting absentee ballots were resolved in court, and they were counted according to stipulations laid out by the court."
No. In its Jan. 5 decision, the MN Supreme Court ruled that an election contest trial was the proper forum to resolve outstanding disputes over counting absentee ballots.
As well, both the Canvassing Board and the MN Supreme Court ruled that disputes over alleged double-counted ballots also should be resolved by the election contest trial.
Pragmatus also asserted: "The result of all this was that the Canvassing Board declared Al Franken the winner."
Sorry, but the Canvassing Board merely certified the results of the election. They went out of their way to specifically state they were not declaring anyone the winner.
billbg
You argue Coleman's case very well.
Can you explain why he has hair that makes his head look like Max Headroom with a graying mullet?
That is not Congressional hair. The Courts will recognize this, and order him to get it styled or drop the suit.
Statler N Waldorf said...
your generation fucked everything up in a self-indulgent drive first in the sixties where you swallowed any pill you could get your hands on and fucked int he middle of the road
Excuse me, but what some did does NOT mean that everyone did.
then in the eighties when you acted like moralizing fuckwads and elected Reagan
Excuse me, but what some did does NOT mean that everyone did.
As a matter of fact, I was wearing "Impeach Nixon" buttons in 1973, way before most Americans had ever heard of Watergate, even though Watergate occurred in 1972.
As a matter of fact, I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976.
As a matter of fact, I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1980.
As a matter of fact, I voted for Walter Mondale in 1984.
because you were nice and moral christians but gay people weren't.
During the 1960s, I was a member of a church, one of the few denominations that provided attorneys for war and draft protesters. I stopped going to church at the end of the 1960s for a couple of reasons - the denomination didn't have a church where I then lived, and I became thoroughly disgusted with the holier-than-thou attitude of most [so-called] Christians.
Oh, and I'm gay myself.
Then you voted for both Bushes.
As a matter of fact, I voted for Michael Dukakis in 1988.
As a matter of fact, I voted for William Clinton in 1992 (and in 1996).
As a matter of fact, I voted for Al Gore in 2000.
As a matter of fact, I voted for John Kerry in 2004.
Note: I stated I voted 'for' the candidates. It was not a ballot cast in favor of the lesser of two evils, it was an actual vote FOR the candidate.
Pro peace when you're eligible for the draft. Pro war when you age out of that.
I was pro peace from before I was eligible for the draft, and in fact, if I had been drafted (I had a student deferment, and might have been deferred for medical reasons), I would have 'joined' as a conscientious objector. After the draft ended, I still was pro peace, and I still am.
The word hippie was a contraction for hypocrite.
The only hypocrites around here are the jack-ass trolls, and the idiots who ascribe the attributes (or lack thereof) of some members of a generation to the entire generation.
You, Statler, are described in the second part of the preceding sentence.
Not every member of the Baby Boomer generation was a hippie.
Not every member of the Baby Boomer generation was pro peace when the draft faced them, then pro war after they were too old to be drafted. Many were pro peace when they faced the draft, and after they no longer were affected by the draft.
Not every member of the Baby Boomer generation supported Ronnie Ray-gun.
Not every member of the Baby Boomer generation supported either of the Bushes.
Are you forgetting that President Clinton was a member of the Baby Boomer generation? I'd love to see you say to his face that ALL Baby Boomers supported both Bushes. The only question would be if he'd laugh at you for your stupidity, or punch in the face for your stupidity.
You see, only a STUPID hypocrite ascribes to an entire generation the attributes (or lack thereof) of a portion of a generation.
Aha! So you are a smart hypocrite, and therefore better than a stupid hypocrite.
Clinton, hmm.....oh yeah! The DOMA guy! and DADT too. And then he gutted AFDC. Yeah, Clinton. Hmm.
Listen, I grew up in the shadow of a generation that refuses to let go. The movies int eh theaters are largely remakes of sitcoms from your youth. Music that reminds you of your 20's clogs the airwaves. Everyone talks in terms of -gates, because the only scandal that defines everything is Watergate, and they all talk about who the new Kennedy is, instead of judging Obama as being great in his own right, and not someone that merely emulates the guy from the past.
Your past, your ever present past that never goes away. Mick Jagger staggers across the stage with a walker because there's no room for us on that stage when it's so crowded with Boomers. Every body wants it to be 1968 again.
You get to own everything. We have to wait till you die to be in charge.
Some of us just want to be young and enjoy our youth in the present, and not have everything be a footnote to 40 years ago.
Gramps, when someone my age gets dramatic and histrionic, it,s normal. When you do it, it's pathetic. Got any of that maturity you preach about all the time?
Or did that stop getting manufactured in 1968 too?
I don't want to hear about the good old days anymore. Your halcyon days are gone. Would it be so much to ask for you to let me enjoy mine in peace?
Did the WW2 generation choke out your youth like you're choking out ours?
By the way, exactly how many times can you type the phrase "As a matter of fact" at the front of every sentence, anyway?
Probably alot. Hey, I read all the time about how you guys used to say "don't trust anybody over 30" and how you used to try to make a place for your own generation to express itself, artistically, politically.
Why is it that the same generation that did that has such a hard time getting out of the way and letting the next generation through?
Or was it just about you all along? From cradle to grave, the whole fucking world has to just sit there and focus on you. We can never focus on our own lives, we just have to pretend that everything that ever happens must be seen through the lens of 1968, even if we were not alive in 1968, have no memories of watergates or kennedys or vietnams or nixons.
Because everything we do is so fucking inferior to those goleden days, isn't it? Our music is inferior, our art is inferior, our politics are inferior.
You don't want us to grow up and find our own voice. You want us to mimic your voice.
Well, fuck you, I'm speaking in my own voice and my own context, and you can take 1968 and go shove it up your self-righteous ass.
Like it or not, you can't be in charge of everything forever. Eventually you're going to have to retire and let us have a chance at it.
The sooner the better if you ask me.
Jealous or what, Statler?
You speak of Mick Jagger. For your information, I didn't like Mick Jagger when I was growing up, and I still don't like him.
As to the music from the 60s and 70s 'contaminating' your generation, when I was growing up, I had to listen to the music of my parents' parents generation, and then later to my parents generation. Not just at home, but on the radio, in the elevators, in the stores - everywhere.
Guess what? I survived, and so will you.
Statler -
Grow up and face it that EVERY generation blames all the current ills of the world on the previous generation. My generation did. My parents generation did. And my grandparents' generation did.
Eventually, you'll find out that it wasn't the entire preceding generation that was the cause of all the (perceived) current ills, but just some of that previous generation were the real fuck-ups. And you'll find that many of YOUR generation are fuck-ups just as some in the previous generations were. Some generations have more fucked-upped people than other generations, but you'll learn that EVERY generation has at least more than a nominal number.
Oh, and if it wasn't for some of the Baby Boomer generation fighting for gay rights, police would still feel free to go into any and every gay bar in the US, beating up and arresting your sorry ass, just because you were in a gay bar.
If it wasn't for some of the Baby Boomer generation fighting for civil rights of ALL people, there would still be segregated facilities in most states.
But it wasn't just the Baby Boomer generation that gave you some of the privileges and rights that you now have. My generation got inspiration from some of the previous generation, and the generation before them, and the generation before them.
Many of the gay civil rights that now exist can be traced back to the work performed by members of the Mattachine Society, founded in 1950. Adults started the Mattachine Society, so that means the founders were NOT the Baby Boomer generation.
The ACLU got it's start as the National Civil Liberties Bureau (NCLB) in 1917. The founders were the Baby Boomers' grandparents' generation, or even their parent's generation.
So stop your blaming each and every ill you perceive on the Baby Boomers. Eventually you'll be mature enough to realize that your generation owes much to previous generations; that sometime in the future members of your own generation will deservedly earn your scorn; and eventually you'll hear the next generation bitch and complain about your own generation.
That's life, so get prepared to get used to it.
Hey guys, take a break from arguing and go vote.
FiveThirtyEight.com is up for awards in several categories in the 2009 Bloggies (a different contest from the award it just won) - in Best Political, Best New Blog, and Blog of the Year. Plus you can spread the love to some other blogs as well.
The NY Times says it definiely is Gallibrand in NY.Will be announced 12:00 noon today,EST.
Coleman should have conceded. When Coleman challenged the recount with no way to win, his career in politics ended. He will forevermore be Norm Sore-Looser-man.
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Norm Sorelooserman
Grampa Mike,
Are you shaking your cane at me?
Those darn kids! Whatsamatta with the kids these days? Why in my day, we used ta walk uphill to school, both ways. Shoes? We were lucky if we could afford feet! I tella ya, these kids.... they just got no respect for their elders. They wanna go off and do things on theior own, create art of their own, run for office on their own ideas. Don't they see we already thought of everything back when I was a kid? There are no new ideas or things to explore. We found em all! Those impudent little bastards should just shut up and write about the sixties, because that's all that matters.... kennedy...watergate...nixon....vietnam..... there was nothing after that.
Who cares that all my heroes are dead? The nursing homes will soon be filled with bitter aging hippies, getting high on geriatric acid and tripping out on the elevator muzak. Social security's gonna be there for them, but by the time they're gone there won't be anything left.
In traditional societies the elders assume an advisory position in return for no longer having to toil the fields. They're respected because they don't try to drive the ox-cart after they're too blind to navigate the road. We all age, inevitably. And part of aging is letting those who come after you have a chance at taking the reigns.
You,re not a child anymore gramps. You can stop acting like one now.
Statler,
I know children. I've cared for and raised children. Mike is no child. You are talking out of your ass and all I can imagine is you are doing it out of a childish need for attention, because whining is the only way you know to get an emotional response.
I could have simply said "troll" but I figure I'd spell it out for anyone else who maybe doesn't get it.
Oh shit! another aging hipster.
Listen, do we really want this forum to degenerate into a flame war between myself and the older users of this board? I mean, I can if that's what you like. We'll just go back and forth posting little snipes on each other endlessly, and drown out any serious discussions on the thread's topics.
You see, when you post a personal attack on me like that, I don't have any incentive to just sort of meekly submit and go *sob* you're so right. Baby Boomerz are so cool. I'm just pathetic like you said.
No, I'm more likely to post some sort of 'fuck you you old bastard' post and spell out in detail precisely how it is that I want you to fuck off.
And we can go back and forth like that forever, each of us trying to get the last word in.
In the end, since I have the advantage of being younger and therefore have more time than you do left on this earth, I'll win when you die of old age. You'll be all huddled over your keyboard, trying to press the keys to type out your final Fuck You to Statler N Waldorf, and right as your eyes gloss over and you start to feel death coming on, my reply telling you to fuck off will be the last thing your eyes behold before death.
Sucks, don't it?
You could just spend your Golden Years doing something more fun, like attending an art program put on by some my age. Who knows, if you gave it a try, you might like the stuff we do. You might even like some of our music, too.
Unless you'd rather sit in your pity pot trying to recapture lost youth for the rest of your life. You could wall yourself off and pretend it's 1969 forever. Except now you look more like Max Yasgur than anybody else at Woodstock, and you sound more like Spiro Agnew.
@Tripp-
I do not know if there is an official/consensus definition of troll-but please do not call SnW a troll on this site. Yep sometimes I skip his posts, ignoring the name calling and the pissing contests- but he contributes a lot to this site including some great informative and funny links.
SnW is fully capable of defending himself. It is just that
there is an ugly troll problem on this site that should be dealt with (imho), and SnW is not part of it.
Hello billbg,
Your comments are on the money -- Nate should consult with you before he posts. Also, I should mention that your email is not working. You may review your profile.
Statler N Waldorf wrote: "You argue Coleman's case very well."
I'm not arguing anyone's case. I'm actually a Franken supporter.
What I'm trying to do is look at the situation somewhat objectivity. It's easy to let wishful thinking prevent us from seeing reality.
And, please, let's hope nobody orders Coleman to drop trou.
@ billbg -- "Huh? MN statutes require that the lawsuit be filed within 7 calander days after the recount ends. Coleman actually filed it in one day."
Right, but (in my opinion) in which case the court proceedings need to start happening sooner than later. What this seems to be is a "limit the term of Franken by filing never-ending court cases" which I'm sure isn't the intent of the law. Again, in my opinion, there should be some sort of limit imposed on exactly how soon these will start.
Honestly, it's the exact same thing that happened in Flordia with the 2000 election, and why I was and still am fine with the Supreme Court decision just ending it all.
To me, it all comes down to this -- our elected leaders need to be in place so that they can lead. While the Senate and House are a little different because there are so many people, I would apply this the same way that I would to a mayor election -- if a city completely counted the votes, and neither of the top two vote-getters were certified the winner due to continual court cases, what happens to the local government? Does the previous mayor just sit until one is certified? Does the office go dark?
To me, the heart of the matter is the answer to that question needs to be the same for all public office, which would set a deadline for resolving the recount and subsequent lawsuits, as well as a process to start those lawsuits sooner.
The 2000 example wasn't perfect because the courts ended the recount well before they needed to. It could have played out until the end of December. But I don't fault them for shutting it down, and I would like to see a similar thing applied here because otherwise what is to stop the Republican party from filing additional suits related to the first to keep this tied up in the courts for months or years?
"Apparently, that's how you want to see the situation. I try to view things slightly more objectively."
I am looking at it objectively, and the longer that lawsuits are filed, the worse it looks for Norm.
As for your contention that they couldn't do most of this work until they were allowed to, is it not true that election lawyers were at each location watching the every move of every election official? Because that is how I saw it on the news. And, if those lawyers didn't see any problems which they could have documented and immediately filed suits about, what will they find in a second time around? And even if they legitimately find stuff that should have been included, how does it not look like it was manufactured?
That's all I'm saying. Like I said, I'm not being hypocritical or looking at this non-objectively, as I do feel the same way about the stuff that happened in 2000 as I do about this.
Billbg, you have yet to answer the question of why Coleman insists on a haircut that looks like he uses a metric ton of aqua net every morning before he gets out of bed.
Which leads me to suspect that you, while possibly being a Franken voter, are in fact
Norm Coleman's hairdresser!
(cue suspenseful music)
But even you cannot defend that hair! I dare you to plead the case for that objectively!
If you can.... hairdresser!
Statler N Waldorf said...
Oh Mike,
It would be easier to listen to your elderly wisdom if it were not for the fact that your generation fucked everything up in a self-indulgent drive first in the sixties where you swallowed any pill you could get your hands on and fucked int he middle of the road and then in the eighties when you acted like moralizing fuckwads and elected Reagan who allowed gay people to die of AIDS without doing anything because you were nice and moral christians but gay people weren't.
Then you voted for both Bushes.
Pro peace when you're eligible for the draft. Pro war when you age out of that. The word hippie was a contraction for hypocrite.
Mike, your twenty year old self would kick your ass if he could see you now. And I'd help.
Wow, classic bitter old queen, only younger.
The instinct to attack Democrats is merely instinctive.
Republicans cannot hope to make any serious attack on Franken now.
He's going to have 6 years to establish his identity as a United States Senator, and let the people of Minnesota and the US see him in action.
Six years is a long time to wait to make the case against someone.
By then his record in office will be vastly more important than the nature of this election. This is to say nothing of the fact that sitting US Senators are very hard to defeat in any case.
Personally I believe the only reason why Coleman is contesting the election is that he is being paid to do so by Republicans. He needs money desperately for his upcoming corruption trial and I suspect this is how he is getting it.
Also, Nate, why do you allow a poster who advocates assassinating our President?
Speaking of haircuts, I got mine cut last Wednesday, the day after the Inauguration, in the Senate Barber Shop in the basement of the Russel, (before and after pics are here: http://silencedmajority.blogs.com/silenced_majority_portal/2009/01/nyc-goes-to-the-senate-barbershop.html ), on my way over with a friend to pop in on Hillary's confirmation vote and one of the Protocols in the shop is to have a framed 8x10 of each Senator who currently has a seat on the wall.
I got my hair cut in Cindi's chair which was just under the pics from Minnesota are and I am here to report that Norm Coleman's is no longer up on that wall.
Just so you know, and you can read it into that what you will.
I think you meant 'pretext' not 'pretense.'
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,約定金生,約定金生,情趣,情趣商品,約定金生,情趣網站,跳蛋, 約定金生,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,約定金生,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,約定金生,情趣內衣,約定金生,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,約定金生,自慰,打手槍,約定金生,潮吹,高潮,後庭,約定金生,情色論譠,影片下載,約定金生,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,約定金生,音樂下載, 約定金生,約定金生,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套, 約定金生,約定金生,做愛,約定金生,減肥,美容,瘦身,約定金生,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車, 約定金生,手機,來電答鈴, 約定金生,週年慶,美食,約定金生,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計, 約定金生,室內設計, 約定金生,靈異照片,約定金生,同志,約定金生,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,約定金生,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍, 約定金生,無名破解,av女優, 約定金生,小說,約定金生,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,約定金生,討論區,痴漢,懷孕, 約定金生,約定金生,美女交友,約定金生,交友,日本av,日本,機票, 約定金生,香水,股市, 約定金生,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,約定金生,免費影片,醫學美容, 約定金生,免費算命,算命,約定金生,姓名配對,姓名學,約定金生,姓名學免費,遊戲, 約定金生,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,約定金生,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,約定金生,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片, 約定金生,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表, 約定金生,線上電視,約定金生,線上a片,約定金生,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,約定金生,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車, 約定金生,約定金生,法拍屋,約定金生,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,約定金生,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,約定金生,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, 約定金生, G點,性感內衣,約定金生,情趣內衣,約定金生,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,約定金生,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,約定金生,後庭,情色論譠,約定金生,影片下載,約定金生,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,約定金生,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,約定金生,軟體下載,約定金生,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,約定金生,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片, 約定金生,同志,聊天室,約定金生,運動彩券,,大樂透,約定金生,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍, 約定金生,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,約定金生,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢, 約定金生,懷孕,約定金生,美女交友,約定金生,交友,日本av ,日本,機票, 約定金生,香水,股市, 約定金生,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,約定金生,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命, 約定金生,姓名配對,姓名學, 約定金生,姓名學免費,遊戲,約定金生,好玩遊戲,約定金生,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,約定金生,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視, 約定金生,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯, 約定金生,購物車,身分證製造機,約定金生,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網, 約定金生,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,約定金生,六合彩,整型論壇,整型論壇,珠海,雷射溶脂,婚紗,網頁設計,水噹噹論壇,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,
豆豆聊天室 aio交友愛情館 2008真情寫真 2009真情寫真 aa片免費看 捷克論壇 微風論壇 大眾論壇 plus論壇 080視訊聊天室 情色視訊交友90739 美女交友-成人聊天室 色情小說 做愛成人圖片區 豆豆色情聊天室 080豆豆聊天室 小辣妹影音交友網 台中情人聊天室 桃園星願聊天室 高雄網友聊天室 新中台灣聊天室 中部網友聊天室 嘉義之光聊天室 基隆海岸聊天室 中壢網友聊天室 南台灣聊天室 南部聊坊聊天室 台南不夜城聊天室 南部網友聊天室 屏東網友聊天室 台南網友聊天室 屏東聊坊聊天室 雲林網友聊天室 大學生BBS聊天室 網路學院聊天室 屏東夜語聊天室 孤男寡女聊天室 一網情深聊天室 心靈饗宴聊天室 流星花園聊天室 食色男女色情聊天室 真愛宣言交友聊天室 情人皇朝聊天室 上班族成人聊天室 上班族f1影音視訊聊天室 哈雷視訊聊天室 080影音視訊聊天室 38不夜城聊天室 援交聊天室080 080哈啦聊天室 台北已婚聊天室 已婚廣場聊天室 夢幻家族聊天室 摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室 520情色聊天室 QQ成人交友聊天室 免費視訊網愛聊天室 愛情公寓免費聊天室 拉子性愛聊天室 柔情網友聊天室 哈啦影音交友網 哈啦影音視訊聊天室 櫻井莉亞三點全露寫真集 123上班族聊天室 尋夢園上班族聊天室 成人聊天室上班族 080上班族聊天室 6k聊天室 粉紅豆豆聊天室 080豆豆聊天網 新豆豆聊天室 080聊天室 免費音樂試聽 流行音樂試聽 免費aa片試看免費a長片線上看 色情貼影片 免費a長片 本土成人貼圖站 大台灣情色網 台灣男人幫論壇 A圖網 嘟嘟成人電影網 火辣春夢貼圖網 情色貼圖俱樂部 台灣成人電影 絲襪美腿樂園 18美女貼圖區 柔情聊天網 707網愛聊天室聯盟 台北69色情貼圖區 38女孩情色網 台灣映像館 波波成人情色網站 美女成人貼圖區 無碼貼圖力量 色妹妹性愛貼圖區 日本女優貼圖網 日本美少女貼圖區 亞洲風暴情色貼圖網 哈啦聊天室 美少女自拍貼圖 辣妹成人情色網 台北女孩情色網 辣手貼圖情色網 AV無碼女優影片 男女情色寫真貼圖 a片天使俱樂部 萍水相逢遊戲區 平水相逢遊戲區 免費視訊交友90739 免費視訊聊天 辣妹視訊 - 影音聊天網 080視訊聊天室 日本美女肛交 美女工廠貼圖區 百分百貼圖區 亞洲成人電影情色網 台灣本土自拍貼圖網 麻辣貼圖情色網 好色客成人圖片貼圖區 711成人AV貼圖區 台灣美女貼圖區 筱萱成人論壇 咪咪情色貼圖區 momokoko同學會視訊 kk272視訊 情色文學小站 成人情色貼圖區 嘟嘟成人網 嘟嘟情人色網 - 貼圖區 免費色情a片下載 台灣情色論壇 成人影片分享 免費視訊聊天區 微風 成人 論壇 kiss文學區 taiwankiss文學區
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment