Kevin Diaz and the Minneapolis Star Tribune are doing what he can to help the campaign of lame duck Minnesota Governor and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty. Pawlenty's problem is that he's uncharismatic and doing really, really poorly in presidential straw polls. When I say really, really poorly, I mean that he can't climb out of the lower single digits. So Diaz spins the latest really, really bad news as something positive.
In Diaz's opinion, Pawlenty is a stealth candidate.
Yes, Pawlenty is so stealth that most Republicans across this country don't know he's running and even when they do know who he is they prefer just about anyone else to him. But this isn't going to stop Diaz.
Largely unknown in the early primary state, Pawlenty still packed a room with curious journalists this week at the St. Regis Hotel in Washington, two blocks from the White House he's eying for 2012. The New Hampshire poll, released Wednesday, is only the latest indicator of Pawlenty's weakness as a potential GOP nominee. But there are more subtle indicators that suggest the governor may be in an uncommonly strong position to be just the kind of candidate the GOP may want: a relatively mild-mannered Midwesterner who won't bring controversy or baggage of his own when he shifts the focus on President Obama.
In a strong position or not, Pawlenty says he's not worried. "A, I haven't made a decision whether I'm even going to run or not, and B, I continue to have not much name ID or awareness in some of these other states," he told reporters on Wednesday in St. Paul.
Pawlenty strategists and outside observers say he has plenty of time to stir the public, which has not connected with him nearly as much as with the journalists and party insiders who are looking for the GOP's next leader.
Can we talk about that "stirring the public" business?
What is with the Minneapolis Star Tribune? They dropped the ball on another national story about Rep. Michele Bachmann. Jeremy Herb wrote an online article yesterday afternoon, but the editors deemed it not newsworthy enough to print in the dead tree edition.
In a video released yesterday, Bachmann stated that if the Republicans win back the House, they will do nothing but issue subpoenas to investigate the Obama Administration and attempt to repeal everything Obama accomplished. I'm paraphrasing because the way she said it sounds really crazy. Considering that Bachmann is running for reelection, you'd think it would be their duty to inform the public about this.
Not if you read the dead tree edition.
No reporter at the Strib would speak to me on the record and stand-in editor Pat Doyle (Editor Nancy Barnes is on vacation) refused to comment.
I believe that there is a pattern at the Strib of ignoring and downplaying Bachmann's connections to the national evangelical movement, her lying, her insane statements and her bigotry.
With Bachmann, Strib reporters have chosen to ignore her more insane statements and blatant lies. They never ask probing follow up questions. Her lies are merely accepted at face value. And not just recently. They've been doing this since Bachmann first appeared on the political scene in 2001.
Furthermore, Strib reporters never ever analyze the truth of what she says or verify that what she claims is factual. When I have pressed Strib reporters, the best I have ever gotten out of them is that their article wasn't an appropriate venue to analyze what she said. You will never see anything like the St. Petersburg Time's PolitiFact, WCCO's Reality Check or the better-late-than-never PoliGraph from MPR at the Strib. Is real investigative journalism beneath them?
The pertinent question with the Strib journalists and their editors is when will the truth about Michele Bachmann ever be pertinent and how crazy does she have to sound to be newsworthy enough to prominently feature in their paper.
Eric Roper of the Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote an article today about the fundraising of Michele Bachmann and Tarryl Clark. Once again, the Strib glosses over Bachmann's insane conspiracy theories, lying and bigotry. The strongest language Roper uses is "outspoken" and polarizing."
Bachmann certainly is these things, but when will the Strib EVER provide any analysis of what she actually said? When will it ever be appropriate to discuss her insane statements, lies and bigotry?
It's not like Bachmann doesn't provide enough material or do so often enough. It's simply a matter of the Strib has ALWAYS glossed over her insanity, lying and bigotry.
Will Roper and et al ever ask Bachmann any tough questions? Will they ever examine the truth of what comes out of her mouth? Are Roper and company averse to reporting the truth about her?
Personally, I'm not holding my breathe for any investigative or analytical political journalism to come from the Star Tribune anytime before November ... or ever, actually. Their journalistic standards are just so low.
What was most infuriating about the Star Tribune publishing Michael Gerson's attack on Sen. Al Franken? Could it be that a really excellent speech pointing out the truth about our Supreme Court was completely misrepresented by George W. Bush's former speechwriter? Could it be the Strib's limited coverage of politics? Could it be they failed to cover a really excellent speech by Franken? Could it be they've always had it in for Franken?
Let's start with Gerson. He wrote speeches for Bush from 1999 to 2006. He wrote the speeches Bush gave as he lied us into war with Iraq. He wrote the Mission Accomplished speech. Since resigning from the Bush Administration, he's been attacking anyone who points out the truth about conservatives and telling lies to push the far right's agenda. He's in high dudgeon because someone spoke out against an icon of the far right. His first six paragraphs are simply ad hominem attacks on Franken.
What about the Strib editors? This is the same group who did everything they could to get Norm Coleman reelected. The paper's political coverage is so poor and so slanted rightwards that I would be criticizing their editorial page several times a week if I didn't have better things to do with my life. They almost completely rely on DC pundits to provide commentary on national issues.
So the only way that their readers knew Franken gave a speech is because a far right ideologue attacked him for it on their editorial page. They can't hire any more people to help them cover politics because their reader base is disintegrating and their ad revenue is in steady decline. Who is in charge of covering Franken? Apparently nobody. So they rely on hacks like Gerson.
There is two parts of Gerson's attack piece that are true: Al Franken is a Senator from Minnesota and this quote from the speech:
... The "Roberts court has consistently and intentionally protected and promoted the interests of the powerful over those of individual Americans."
The Star Tribune's choice of headlines lately is very revealing.
When King Timmy signs a bill full of smoke and mirrors, stealing money from schools, guaranteed to worsen the budget problem in upcoming years and forcing local municipalities to pass along the state's tax increases in the form of higher property taxes, the headline reads: "Pawlenty signs bill to erase $3 billion deficit."
Earlier, when the guv was preparing to veto a far more reasonable budget bill, the headline read, "Pawlenty's eager to veto DFL taxes."
The Star Tribune, Kevin Diaz and Eric Roper are still unable to tell the truth about Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). Diaz and Roper characterize her as "volatile." The Strib and it's "journalists" never assess what Bachmann says and tell the truth that Bachmann lies all the time. The MN-06 race is so high profile because Bachmann appears on radio and TV so often and lies so often. Furthermore, what she says is often crazy.
The race to unseat conservative icon Michele Bachmann in Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District is increasingly a national affair.
Reliably provocative, a constant presence on cable TV news, Bachmann's polarizing national profile has energized supporters and opponents alike, turning what would otherwise be an easy romp in Minnesota's most solidly Republican district into a contest being watched around the country.
Provocative? Bachmann "energizes opponents" because her statements are crazed and she lies all the time. Why are Diaz and Roper incapable of the type of journalism that assesses the truth of what Bachmann says?
Because the Strib and it's "journalists" have never done so. Bachmann is in office today because the "journalists" in this state never told the truth about her. They never related her lies and called them lies. The closest they ever come is when Diaz and Roper call her "provocative."
Here's another perfect example of Diaz and Roper's inability to get to the truth:
Time magazine's 2002 Person of the Year, Huffington Post contributor and occasional contributor here, Coleen Rowley submitted a letter to the Minneapolis Star Tribune and they ran it as an op-ed. Great editorial, Coleen.
Really want economic freedom? End the wars.
At her Minneapolis Convention Center and "Tea Party Express" rallies this week, I heard U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., continually lambast the reckless spending in Washington, D.C. Bachmann touted how she clips coupons and buys her family's clothes in consignment shops.
But the three giant luxury buses that carried the Tea Party road show to the Twin Cities, complete with musicians and elaborate production, appeared to be anything but a low budget, grass-roots affair. Each bus was professionally painted with patriotic insignia, photos (including a prominent one of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin) and slogans like "End the Bailouts" and "Restore Liberty: Honor the Constitution."
It's hard to disagree with those sentiments. However, we never heard Bachmann or Palin mention, even once, the elephant in the room: the ill-conceived, costly wars that they blindly support.
Their Tea Party talks conveniently ignore the fact that U.S. occupations are costing trillions of dollars, and that these costs are bankrupting our country.
Bachmann and Palin repeatedly chanted "God bless our freedom," but they seem unaware of the famous observation of James Madison, the father of the Constitution, who wisely taught, "No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
When I opened my Minneapolis Star Tribune to the editorial page yesterday morning, I saw their editorial demanding Congress pass health care reform. I thought it was high time these chowderheads came to their senses. Then I realized that they were up to their usual shenanigans. The gave Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) the space below their editorial to counter their well-reasoned argument with lies, fear-mongering and shameless innuendo.
The blatant disregard for public opinion and the arrogance of this Congress and White House are threatening the integrity of our country with parliamentary tricks and backroom deals under misleading claims of bipartisanship.
This is her opening sentence. In this single sentence I find four lies and two instances of hypocrisy.
Lie #1: ...blatant disregard for public opinion... - public opinion polling by respected polling firms has indicated that a large majority of Americans want health care reform. Polls even showed that a majority of Americans wanted the public option which is not (as of this time) in the bill. There is an outside (very outside) chance that the PO might make it in via reconciliation.
Lie #2: ...the arrogance of this Congress and White House... - Barack Obama, Harry Reid and, to a lesser extent, Nancy Pelosi have tried bipartisanship and Republicans have met it with lies and slander. Death panels and birthers are not honest debate. Furthermore, Republicans have used every trick they know to obstruct health care reform. Only after nearly 9 months of attempting to craft a bipartisan solution are they abandoning it.
Lie #3: ...threatening the integrity of our country with parliamentary tricks and backroom deals... - these parliamentary ploys did not threaten America when the Republicans used them. This is simply fearmongering with no basis in fact.
Lie #4: misleading claims of bipartisanship. - I don't know why Obama and Reid tried to work with y'all on this. You Republicans were never going to negotiate in good faith on this. I'm glad we're scrapping the shabby veneer of bipartisanship and pushing this through on a party line vote.
Hypocrisy #1: ...the arrogance of this Congress and White House... - If any Administration was arrogant, the George W. Bush Administration was. Bachmann calling the Obama Administration arrogant is definitely the pot calling the kettle black.
Hypocrisy #2: ...threatening the integrity of our country... - the Bush Administration truly threatened our country. They got rid of the writ of habeaus corpus, passed the Patriot Act, committed war crimes by torturing prisoners, ran up such a massive debt that our national solvency is still in danger, ran the economy off the cliff ... need I go on?
And this was just the first sentence.
The Star Tribune have always let Bachmann get away with lying. On the one hand they've always printed whatever she submits without the slightest care that the vast majority of what she's said on their pages are lies. On the other hand, they've never asked her anything but softball questions without any follow-up questions regardless of how insane or blatantly false those statements are.
Reps. Tim Walz (D) and Erik Paulsen (R) penned an editorial in today's Star Tribune (surf there at your own risk of malware and other cooties). In it they argue that the moratorium on building new nuclear plants needs to be lifted. I couldn't disagree more strenuously.
I really don't want to do this as I'm a big fan of Tim's and I personally like him a lot, but I have to point out a few things. Despite what I'm about to say, I still think he's a great Representative.
What Tim is doing is validating their tired, old and debunked arguments.
For decades, the debate over nuclear energy has been stalled, largely along ideological lines. During that time, our nation's primary energy sources have drastically narrowed. Our emissions have increased. High and volatile energy prices have become standard. As a result, our nation is heavily reliant on energy sources that come from countries and regions often hostile to our interests.
Stalled along ideological lines, eh? What about stalled because enough politicians have listened to reason? Paulsen and Walz oversimplify by claiming that we either have coal or nuclear power as options. This is the argument that the polluters, the nuclear lobby and politicians like Erik Paulsen have been advancing to prevent any serious investment in green energy technology. And Tim is playing right into it.
You wouldn't know from this op-ed that Tim has worked hard on green energy solutions. You'd think he was a corporate Dem more concerned about his corporate donors interests than the needs of Minnesotans. The opposite is true.
Essentially, Paulsen and Walz argue that we must consider nuclear power because we have to reduce our carbon output. The problem is it's not just about the carbon. The fact that Paulsen oversimplifies the issue is not surprising -- he's bought and paid for by Corporate America. But the fact that Walz agrees with him is not good.
If it's so safe, let's build it upriver from Mankato on the Minnesota river. Then let's build the storage facility in Tim's neighborhood. Oh ... don't like the idea so much now? It's going to have to go upriver from somebody and we'll have to store the spent fuel rods and other toxic by-products next door to somebody.
Next consider that a nuke plant uses more water than any other kind of energy source. Typically around 390 billion gallons per year for your average nuke plant. In addition, the water exiting the plant is often toxic. This water would have to go into a river somewhere and I don't think Tim's neighbors would want it in the Minnesota.
Furthermore, Paulsen and Walz flippantly dismiss wind and solar with "Unlike with some renewable sources, we can count on it (nuclear power) for consistent power -- come rain, snow, sun or clouds." Walz should know that the wind blows pretty much all the time out in western MN and it's plenty sunny.
Paulsen and Walz also fail to recognize the impact that energy savings measures might accomplish. Think of all the people we could employ making existing homes more energy efficient. They fail to recognize the unrealized potential of the combination of wind, solar, geothermal and energy conservation. Paulsen has never wanted it, but Walz? Shame.
Building a new nuke plant will raise everyone's rates. Even if you don't get any of your electricity from the plant. Nuke plants require massive government subsidies to make profits for their owners. Fundamentally, taxpayers subsidize the profits the owners -- nuclear plants are always a bad deal for taxpayers.
Paulsen and Walz want us all to ignore the lifecycle cost of a nuclear plant. Mining uranium is incredibly destructive and expensive. Enriching uranium takes massive amounts of energy plus most enriching facilities are coal powered. Finally, we have no solution to dealing with the waste. We have to store this waste for many, many millions of years.
Paulsen and Walz fail to recognize the true cost and impact of nuclear power plants and want us to ignore the voice of reason on this issue. While this is typical behavior for Erik Paulsen, I am truly saddened that Tim Walz is siding with the polluters, the nuclear lobby and those like Paulsen who oppose green energy solutions.
Normally, I rip on the Minneapolis Star Tribune for poor political coverage, Republican bias and lack of fact-checking. They slashed their political reporting staff to the bone and have recently let go a large portion of their fact-checkers. Which means that things are only going to get worse.
Their problem is, in my opinion, that they are in a death spiral. They have fewer readers so they sell less ads. They sell less ads so they lay off reporters. They have fewer reporters so their coverage of politics in MN is shoddy. Their coverage is shoddy and conservatively biased so they have fewer readers ...
With fewer and fewer people buying their dead tree edition, their future as a news organization relies on their online activities. Of course, their further problems is that their website sucks. It takes a long-time to load and continually eats up your CPU refreshing itself. If they had competent web designers and a better architecture, this wouldn't be a problem.
And now this ...
If you're at work and having trouble connecting to Startribune.com, your web adminstrator may have blocked access due to a malware outbreak Sunday.
Odds are you'd know if you were hit; according to University of St. Thomas admins, "an antivirus software advertisement called Antivirus Soft pops up and cannot be closed."
Strib Digital Media executive director Jason Erdahl says that a "remnant ad" contained the malicious software, which can contain viruses and other nastiness.
The ad - a lower-priced type served up by national networks - was pulled as soon as the virus was discovered, but reports of problems were still trickling in Monday, Erdahl says. "There are still reports trickling in this morning, but they seem primarily to be a reaction to Sunday's outbreak. We are giving this our full attention, however, just in case this is still a problem for our readers."
(MinnPost)
They cannot seem to do anything right lately. So before you visit startribune.com, be sure your virus software is up-to-date.
In the Star Tribune's version of reality, there is always good news to write about for the Republican party. When they do, they most often do it on the front page. Strib stenographer Mike Kaszuba pushed the Republican talking point that the Republicans are really hopeful about the 2010 elections. It seems that whenever the Republican Party has a meme to push, Strib stenographers are always willing. Kaszuba and et al always seem to forget that MN's version of Baghdad Bob, former Party Chair Ron Carey, also always and relentlessly saw the rosy side of things.
Minnesota's Republicans are talking confidently again, hoping to capitalize on a country -- and a state -- they think may already be growing tired of President Obama and the Democrats.
From Rod Johnson, a Cannon Falls auctioneer, to Mike Rolih, a onetime baseball pitcher from Illinois, a new wave of GOP candidates is eyeing state legislative seats and predicting that the worst days Republicans endured over the past two years are behind them.
Buoyed by victories in Massachusetts and at home in Waseca, Minn., Republican leaders are talking openly of building a majority in the Minnesota House, shaving the margin in the DFL-controlled Senate and keeping the governor's office firmly in Republican hands.
(Strib)
Kaszuba points to a win in Waseca where a former DFLer, Roy Srp, stole votes from the DFL candidate, the MA win and the fundraising lead the Republican House caucus as proof ... proof ... PROOF (I tells ya ...) that 3 straight landslides are going to be reversed in 2010.
As usual, Kaszuba only uses two paragraphs to bring a little reality, which he probably hopes shows his objectivity, and quotes House Majority Leader Tony Sertich (DFL-Chisholm). The editors put that on the inside page. Typical.
Maria Elena Baca of the Star Tribune has confused ad agency with newspaper. Or maybe Maria is just confusing stenographer with journalist. She wrote a piece that a campaign would have had a hard time putting out, since it is that balantly an advertising piece for Sheriff Fletcher. Let's see how high we can get on the Kelly scale of how biased can an article be.
1) Starting with the title. "Take note if you're up to no good: Ramsey County is watching". Does Maria Elena Baca or the Star Tribune realize that Sheriff Fletcher in previous campaigns took credit for the Metro Gang Task Force now under serious criminal investigation? Does that count as "up to no good?" Or that two close co-workers of Sheriff Fletcher were convicted of corruption? Did Maria ask if any these cameras were being installed in the Sheriff's office? Or if any cameras were already in the Sheriff's office? Or if any of them were actually turned on?
You may recall from my rant last week about how the Minneapolis Star Tribune will not frontpage any bad news concerning Republicans. Well here's something that I guarantee will not make the paper:
Professor Francis A. Boyle of the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign, U.S.A. has filed a Complaint with the Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) in The Hague against U.S. citizens George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Condoleezza Rice, and Alberto Gonzales (the "Accused") for their criminal policy and practice of "extraordinary rendition" perpetrated upon about 100 human beings. This term is really their euphemism for the enforced disappearance of persons and their consequent torture. This criminal policy and practice by the Accused constitute Crimes against Humanity in violation of the Rome Statute establishing the I.C.C.
The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute. Nevertheless the Accused have ordered and been responsible for the commission of I.C.C. statutory crimes within the respective territories of many I.C.C. member states, including several in Europe. Consequently, the I.C.C. has jurisdiction to prosecute the Accused for their I.C.C. statutory crimes under Rome Statute article 12(2)(a) that affords the I.C.C. jurisdiction to prosecute for I.C.C. statutory crimes committed in I.C.C. member states.
(Daily Kos)
The Minneapolis Star Tribune has run with two straight days of bad press about Democratic politicians on it's front page. This isn't actually news. But their behavior should be recognized for what it is. Sheer partisanship.
Republican bad news rarely if ever makes the front page.
This blog has documented that the Strib allows Republicans to push debunked lies on their editorial pages. I have documented at this blog and at my old blog, mnblue.com, that the Strib did nearly everything in their power to reelect Norm Coleman -- from ignoring stories, to shameless spinning, to burying bad news about Norm when they couldn't ignore it. Bill Prendergast and I (though Bill has been at it longer) have documented that the Strib has ignored Rep. Michele Bachmann's evangelist backing, insanity, bigotry and lying.
This Wednesday was the "breathless" revelation that a staffer quit and accused Sen. Franken of favoring DC staffers over Minnesotans. They then state in the 4th paragraph that "... Franken's 19-member Washington staff includes 13 people with Minnesota ties, a ratio similar to that of the state's senior U.S. Senator, Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar."
Would they have written this if the staffer quit Michele Bachmann's team?
Today was the news that Margaret Anderson-Kelliher was fined for a campaign violation. If a Republican gubernatorial candidate, would they have frontpaged it? Very, very doubtful.
What I want to know is by what standard would the Strib frontpage bad news about Republicans?
Would a Republican President caught red-handed about lying us into a war make the front page? Nope.
Would allegations that a Republican Senator from Minnesota accepted illegal gifts? Nope, front of the Metro section.
Would a evangelical Christian Republican from the northern suburbs fomenting revoluation against the legitimately elected government of the United States of which she is a member make the Strib's frontpage? Nary a mention.
The Star Tribune published a commentary by former Republican state party chair Ron Ebensteiner today. He admits that Al Franken "outstrategized" Norm in the campaign and in the recount. He admits that Norm couldn't win even with the "prevailing political winds" behind him. Aside from all the factual inaccuracies in his commentary, I couldn't disagree with him more.
I most definitely want former senator Norm Coleman to join the Minnesota Governor's race (MN-GOV).
As we start the New Year, there has been much conversation about the possibility of former U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman entering the race for governor. As a former state Republican Party chairman and longtime observer of Minnesota politics, I believe it would be a bad idea both for Coleman and for Minnesota. I write these difficult words as one who strongly supported Norm's historic election victory in 2002, a campaign that left me with a great deal of admiration for his remarkable communication skills and sensitivity to the mood of Minnesotans. Words cannot express how emphatically I wish Norm were still my U.S. senator. Yet there are very clear reasons why Norm no longer represents Minnesota in the Senate, reasons with unmistakable relevance and consequences that resonate statewide, leading me to the inevitable conclusion that he should sit this campaign out.
Let's start with the first factual inaccuracy and this is just the opening paragraph. How could such a few number of words have so many inaccuracies?
"...as one who strongly supported Norm's historic election victory in 2002, a campaign that left me with a great deal of admiration for his remarkable communication skills and sensitivity to the mood of Minnesotans."
Isn't the only reason that Norm won in 2002 because Wellstone died a few weeks before the election? And didn't Norm and the right wing noise machine seize upon Wellstone's funeral and use it for political gain?
"Sensitivity to the mood Minnesotans?" Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that he and his fellow Republicans twisted what a grieving son said about his father into a sledge with which they bashed the Democratic replacement candidate Walter Mondale?
Ohhhh ... right ... I forgot ... didn't Ebensteiner orchestrate it?
