Recently in Al Franken Category
Sigh.
I get so tired of everyone clutching their pearls at every breaking bad news or organized swift boat tactic occurring this election. You'd think prior to 2008 none of this stuff ever happened. Seriously, I can picture people holding there hands at their temples pulling out their hair, crying out loud "OH. MY. GOD! The election is LOST!" as the latest email alert from CNN, MSNBC, or Fox opens up on their screen. But then, drama queen dramatics are just what the ratings ordered. Right?
Ya, whatever.
Look, it isn't about the bad, damaging, reveling, surprising, shocking, scandalous, incredible, etc., etc., etc, news or swift boat smear tactic. It is the manner in which the candidates fight back. We saw in 2000 what happens if the news/swift boat tactics are not dealt with intelligently, confidently, and quickly; you lose a primary in an important state resulting in a downswing in your poll numbers followed by the loss of your party's nomination.
And it seems John McCain's example from back then has not gone unnoticed by many democratic campaigns in 2008. Al Franken has emerged from a particularly hard hitting press cycle statistically tied in the polls, against an incumbent. Since he's made some very promising changes to both his campaign staff, and his campaign strategy, I suspect we will see further increases in his numbers. But this statistical tie is the result of intelligent, confident, and quick responses on his and his campaigns part. Obama has also capitalized on bad news and smear tactics by heading right into them. As a result he has shown his ability as a leader.
Talk all you want about the issues. But people having the same stance on the issues as I do does not make them qualified to be president, any more than being a POW 30 plus years ago does not automatically qualify John McCain to be president. I want to see a person's current ability to respond under duress. I want to see their current character while under fire.
Political office is about character, grace under fire, and the ability to recognize an opportunity when one comes along. Barack seized just such an opportunity by nailing John McCain on his elitist mindset. If you'll pardon my modified Jeff Foxworthy redneck routine; You might an elitist if you don't know how many homes you own.
Anyway, that does not mean I expect my candidate to be perfect in every move they make during a campaign. Of course they will make gaffs, stick their foot in their mouth, and generally do what humans do; behave imperfectly. I pay close attention after they make their mistakes, or find themselves at the receiving end of a swift boat attack.
Do they learn from their mistakes? Do they admit to them? Do they acknowledge the attacks on their character? And most importantly, do they make adjustments once they've gain knowledge and experience? Because, being in office is about handling bad shit, whether its the Presidency of The United States, or a seat in the senate.
So far Al Franken and Barack Obama have shown me this strength of character. They have not dismissed any of the attacks thrown at them, thus depriving opponents the ability to make meaningful charges of arrogance and superiority. In the process they have come across as intelligent, thoughtful, and insightful.
After 7 plus years of idiocy that has been the Bush administration and the Republican controlled congress, it is a refreshing sight.
Oh, and just because it popped into my head; Does anyone else notice that despite his obvious elitist mindset McCain still gives off redneck vibes? And Coleman? He still has that stoner gaze. You know, that half-backed "Wow, what a trip!" look. Even with the new teeth.
I get so tired of everyone clutching their pearls at every breaking bad news or organized swift boat tactic occurring this election. You'd think prior to 2008 none of this stuff ever happened. Seriously, I can picture people holding there hands at their temples pulling out their hair, crying out loud "OH. MY. GOD! The election is LOST!" as the latest email alert from CNN, MSNBC, or Fox opens up on their screen. But then, drama queen dramatics are just what the ratings ordered. Right?
Ya, whatever.
Look, it isn't about the bad, damaging, reveling, surprising, shocking, scandalous, incredible, etc., etc., etc, news or swift boat smear tactic. It is the manner in which the candidates fight back. We saw in 2000 what happens if the news/swift boat tactics are not dealt with intelligently, confidently, and quickly; you lose a primary in an important state resulting in a downswing in your poll numbers followed by the loss of your party's nomination.
And it seems John McCain's example from back then has not gone unnoticed by many democratic campaigns in 2008. Al Franken has emerged from a particularly hard hitting press cycle statistically tied in the polls, against an incumbent. Since he's made some very promising changes to both his campaign staff, and his campaign strategy, I suspect we will see further increases in his numbers. But this statistical tie is the result of intelligent, confident, and quick responses on his and his campaigns part. Obama has also capitalized on bad news and smear tactics by heading right into them. As a result he has shown his ability as a leader.
Talk all you want about the issues. But people having the same stance on the issues as I do does not make them qualified to be president, any more than being a POW 30 plus years ago does not automatically qualify John McCain to be president. I want to see a person's current ability to respond under duress. I want to see their current character while under fire.
Political office is about character, grace under fire, and the ability to recognize an opportunity when one comes along. Barack seized just such an opportunity by nailing John McCain on his elitist mindset. If you'll pardon my modified Jeff Foxworthy redneck routine; You might an elitist if you don't know how many homes you own.
Anyway, that does not mean I expect my candidate to be perfect in every move they make during a campaign. Of course they will make gaffs, stick their foot in their mouth, and generally do what humans do; behave imperfectly. I pay close attention after they make their mistakes, or find themselves at the receiving end of a swift boat attack.
Do they learn from their mistakes? Do they admit to them? Do they acknowledge the attacks on their character? And most importantly, do they make adjustments once they've gain knowledge and experience? Because, being in office is about handling bad shit, whether its the Presidency of The United States, or a seat in the senate.
So far Al Franken and Barack Obama have shown me this strength of character. They have not dismissed any of the attacks thrown at them, thus depriving opponents the ability to make meaningful charges of arrogance and superiority. In the process they have come across as intelligent, thoughtful, and insightful.
After 7 plus years of idiocy that has been the Bush administration and the Republican controlled congress, it is a refreshing sight.
Oh, and just because it popped into my head; Does anyone else notice that despite his obvious elitist mindset McCain still gives off redneck vibes? And Coleman? He still has that stoner gaze. You know, that half-backed "Wow, what a trip!" look. Even with the new teeth.
I remember a time when message discipline and party unity were
proclaimed the hallmark of the Republican machine. My, my, how times
have changed.
Aaron Landry of MNPublius has a detailed post on the division occurring in the Minnesota Republican Party over Mark Olson. It reminds me slightly of the brief spat that occurred within the Minnesota DFL over Al Franken's 2000 Playboy satirical article. Both controversies invoked party infighting. However, the vicious invective being used by the Republican party and it's media machine appears to indicate a much deeper rift.
Jason Lewis, the radio personality running for the title of "Minnesota Radio's Rush Limbaugh" and a staunch conservative who has shown a wholesale predilection towards the propaganda tactics of the Right Wing, refers to the state level Republican leaders as "A bunch of elitist, Republican party hacks."
Now, normally the word elitist is reserved for Democratic party politicians. Its use against Republican state level politicians is a serious breach of intraparty decorum. Then, to top it off, one of the local Republican politicians accuses the Republican state pols of being condescending.
And the Democratic Party's infighting? Well, I just don't remember seeing any personal attacks.
Simple, honest statements about the personal impact of Al's article, and their perception of its demeaning, derogatory language towards women. Quite frankly, I agree that the article needed to be confronted, and a discussion held over its impact on the DFL party. And it seems to have been a healthy discussion, because Betty McCollum, one of those concerned about the Playboy article, is now endorsing Al Franken:
Aaron Landry of MNPublius has a detailed post on the division occurring in the Minnesota Republican Party over Mark Olson. It reminds me slightly of the brief spat that occurred within the Minnesota DFL over Al Franken's 2000 Playboy satirical article. Both controversies invoked party infighting. However, the vicious invective being used by the Republican party and it's media machine appears to indicate a much deeper rift.
Jason Lewis, the radio personality running for the title of "Minnesota Radio's Rush Limbaugh" and a staunch conservative who has shown a wholesale predilection towards the propaganda tactics of the Right Wing, refers to the state level Republican leaders as "A bunch of elitist, Republican party hacks."
Now, normally the word elitist is reserved for Democratic party politicians. Its use against Republican state level politicians is a serious breach of intraparty decorum. Then, to top it off, one of the local Republican politicians accuses the Republican state pols of being condescending.
I can't tell you how shocked I was to see the letter from the Senate State Caucus basically insulting all the state delegates that came to our convention and made their decision. Saying "No, you people are too stupid. You're just country hicks. You don't know what you're doing."Again, a serious breach of intraparty decorum. Accusations of condensation, with words such as stupid and hicks added for smarmy impact, are strictly to be used against Democrats. To see it used intraparty is quite the shock to this humble blogger.
And the Democratic Party's infighting? Well, I just don't remember seeing any personal attacks.
"As a woman, a mother, a former teacher, and an elected official, I find this material completely unacceptable," McCollum said of Franken's piece, published in 2000 under the headline "Porn-O-Rama!"<sarcasm>I don't know, some pretty harsh language there. I mean, personally degrading and insulting to Al, that's for sure.</sarcasm>
"I can tell you it's not playing comfortably in St. Paul, and I can't imagine this politically radioactive material is doing very well in suburban and rural districts," McCollum said.
Minnesota Reps. Tim Walz and Keith Ellison expressed similar concerns in interviews Thursday with the Associated Press. Ellison said the Franken article made him "uncomfortable," citing passages on oral sex and bestiality. Walz called the piece "pretty inappropriate."
Simple, honest statements about the personal impact of Al's article, and their perception of its demeaning, derogatory language towards women. Quite frankly, I agree that the article needed to be confronted, and a discussion held over its impact on the DFL party. And it seems to have been a healthy discussion, because Betty McCollum, one of those concerned about the Playboy article, is now endorsing Al Franken:
This spring I voiced concerns about material from Al's past career. To have remained silent when asked would have been hypocritical and dishonest. I am confident my concerns have been heard and since then I have watched Al's campaign take steps to address these matters. Now, I believe Al and his campaign are appropriately focused on building a solid relationship with voters based on our shared Minnesota values, ideals, and hopes for the future. Like all candidates, Al understands that he is not only asking Minnesotans for their vote, but for their trust. As November 4th approaches, Al Franken will earn the trust of Minnesotans and I intend to work with him to win this election.Say what you will, but I think the DFL party is in much better shape all the way around. Their ability to confront controversy, discuss it among themselves, and reach an accord is both a pleasant surprise and hopeful sign for the party's future. Meanwhile, the Republican's are throwing about very personal and incendiary language that suggest a much deeper schism. Unlike the fracas over Al's article, which seemed to be dealt with maturely and quickly, I don't see this fight blowing over. Maybe it gets sidelined; but if so, it will fester and, I suspect, keep the Republican party of Minnesota off message and out of step.
Act to Blue MN has less than $100 to go to reach it's goal of $2000. I have to have some readers willing to give as little as $5. Today is the last day of this quarter. Help us to put Minnesota Democrats into congress. Give to Al Franken, Ashwin Madia, Elwyn Tinklenberg, Steve Sarvi.
Red to Blue MN has just a bit more to go to hit the $2000 goal by Monday. I am asking what few readers I have to go and think about $10, $20, or more, to the worthy Democrats this ActBlue site supports. They all would be fine addictions to congress, and would keep their focus on the people they represent, not the corporations that bribe them with large donation.
Red To Blue MN
Every single Republican in Minnesota's congressional delegation is up for reelection this cycle and each seat is a prime pick-up opportunity for the DFL. With a lot of hard work, we can send a delegation to Washington in 2009 that is 100% committed to bringing Minnesotans the change they deserve.
Help us to clean the House and Senate of corruption, greed and incompetence. The four candidates are: Al Franken, Ashwin Madia, Steve Sarvi, Elwyn Tinklenberg.
Update: Look's like the target amount was reached quite quickly and so it's been doubled. Hence the move back to the top.
Update: Look's like the target amount was reached quite quickly and so it's been doubled. Hence the move back to the top.
What's this? I am linking to a second post of Atrios in as many days? I really must be sick. Anyway, he's once again made a relevant point.
I attended the Meet Al Franken event at the Levee Cafe in Hastings. It was well attended. All seats were filled and there were people sitting in chairs along one of the side walls and at the back of the room. Oh, and I tried to take pictures, but the lighting was bad, and I just did not get any good shots.
Although this is a long post, it falls far short of communicating every aspect of my experience. And a quick personal disclosure; at present I do not work for any one candidate, nor do I volunteer-as of yet. That being said, I have to say, I was impressed. Al was very present. As in you knew he was listening to you when you talked to him.
Well, maybe I should not speak for others. But I most definitely walked away believing he heard me. I also feel somewhat embarrassed. When he mentioned he'd written a couple of movies about recovery, I was only aware of Stuart Saves His Family.
What I didn't know, and only found out by visiting his web site after coming home from the event, was that he also wrote the screen play for "When A Man Loves A Woman." I've been using that movie in my job for years. So, now that I've wipe the egg off my face, let me get on with the night.
His speech to the crowd was good. It hit all the important issues. Each received a solid round of applause. But it is not the substance that was important. Well, it's important, but it's not what stood out for me. However, I'll get to that later.
He was tired, I could see that. Especially during his speech. As a public speaker of sorts myself, I could recognize the moments when his brain out paced his mouth. There's that little extra dramatic pause while searching back to the next part of the speech. But they were few and far between, and always occurring at a time when a dramatic pause was helpful.
You can always tell when a speaker is really tired. They start to drift into the William Shatner school of dramatic pause. You know, pauses so big Shatner and his belly could easily walk through them.
Anyway, being tired did not put Al off his game. He avoided the curse of Shatner speak. He spoke from memory, without the use of notes, and did so in a loose, comfortable manner, despite appearing tired. He held the crowd. There were occasional distractions when people arrived from downstairs, talking loudly, but the crowd did not get pulled away. I did, but I was at the back of the room, close to the stairs. Oh, and I suffer from a mild form of ADD, so it's a given I'll be distracted. However, I regained quickly, and never saw others looking back at the distractions.
But, as I said earlier, the content of his speech was really not the highlight of the night. It was how well he interacted with the crowd both before and after his speech. Any trace of exhaustion vanished. He owned that room. What was most impressive was just how well he listened. And I do not mean nodding his head, saying yes, making the right expressions and responding with generalities. I mean he actually made an effort to understand what you were telling him.
When I went up to shake his hand and explain the harsh realities of health insurance, even within the health care industry, I misspoke at the same time the crowd noise momentarily crescendoed. Instead of just acting like he understood and move on to the next person, he asked me to re-state what I said, until he understood.
And that, more than anything, is what can win him the election. After seven years of not being listened to, Al is listening.
Although this is a long post, it falls far short of communicating every aspect of my experience. And a quick personal disclosure; at present I do not work for any one candidate, nor do I volunteer-as of yet. That being said, I have to say, I was impressed. Al was very present. As in you knew he was listening to you when you talked to him.
Well, maybe I should not speak for others. But I most definitely walked away believing he heard me. I also feel somewhat embarrassed. When he mentioned he'd written a couple of movies about recovery, I was only aware of Stuart Saves His Family.
What I didn't know, and only found out by visiting his web site after coming home from the event, was that he also wrote the screen play for "When A Man Loves A Woman." I've been using that movie in my job for years. So, now that I've wipe the egg off my face, let me get on with the night.
His speech to the crowd was good. It hit all the important issues. Each received a solid round of applause. But it is not the substance that was important. Well, it's important, but it's not what stood out for me. However, I'll get to that later.
He was tired, I could see that. Especially during his speech. As a public speaker of sorts myself, I could recognize the moments when his brain out paced his mouth. There's that little extra dramatic pause while searching back to the next part of the speech. But they were few and far between, and always occurring at a time when a dramatic pause was helpful.
You can always tell when a speaker is really tired. They start to drift into the William Shatner school of dramatic pause. You know, pauses so big Shatner and his belly could easily walk through them.
Anyway, being tired did not put Al off his game. He avoided the curse of Shatner speak. He spoke from memory, without the use of notes, and did so in a loose, comfortable manner, despite appearing tired. He held the crowd. There were occasional distractions when people arrived from downstairs, talking loudly, but the crowd did not get pulled away. I did, but I was at the back of the room, close to the stairs. Oh, and I suffer from a mild form of ADD, so it's a given I'll be distracted. However, I regained quickly, and never saw others looking back at the distractions.
But, as I said earlier, the content of his speech was really not the highlight of the night. It was how well he interacted with the crowd both before and after his speech. Any trace of exhaustion vanished. He owned that room. What was most impressive was just how well he listened. And I do not mean nodding his head, saying yes, making the right expressions and responding with generalities. I mean he actually made an effort to understand what you were telling him.
When I went up to shake his hand and explain the harsh realities of health insurance, even within the health care industry, I misspoke at the same time the crowd noise momentarily crescendoed. Instead of just acting like he understood and move on to the next person, he asked me to re-state what I said, until he understood.
And that, more than anything, is what can win him the election. After seven years of not being listened to, Al is listening.
Buy Me Something, Please
