MinnPost, more than any other media outlet in the Twin Cities, has come out with yet another bombshell report on the continuing scandal in the Minnesota AG's office.

The recent agonies of the Minnesota attorney general's office under Lori Swanson (an alarming turnover rate in the office, a futile unionization effort blocked by Swanson, a series of allegations that lawyers in the office felt pressured to do things they considered unethical and a preliminary investigation by the legislative auditor, which may be released any day now) are really the latest symptoms of trauma that goes back nine years and starts with two words:

Mike Hatch.

One former assistant attorney general said that when people ask him what he thinks about the turmoil of Swanson's first year, he replies: "Are you kidding me? None of this is new. All of this has been happening since Hatch took over."

Hatch, who is Swanson's mentor, ran for governor three times and was elected attorney general twice as a hard-charging populist. He made his name by his willingness to take on corporations that he felt were victimizing Minnesota consumers. Although his temper was legendary — and may have cost him the governorship in 2006 — his admirers see it as a symptom of his crusading zeal.

But as attorney general from 1999 to 2007, Hatch traumatized the AG's office. His bare-knuckled style tested the boundaries of acceptable conduct, stretching across matters of law, politics and especially the norms of Minnesota niceness. Attorneys and other subordinates describe working for Hatch and Swanson as hellish, featuring verbal abuse and pressure to do things they believed were unethical, and to put Hatch's political needs foremost.

Author Eric Black (formerly of the Minneapolis Star Tribune) interviewed current and former employees of the AG office who were more than willing to "spill" office secrets.

As attorney general, they told me, Hatch was a foul-mouthed screamer and a bully. Some of the former employees described scenes of Hatch yelling, cursing, turning red, calling his subordinates names, pounding his fist on a desk. They said that any reluctance to unquestioningly implement an order could lead to a sudden loss of status with the management, an unwanted transfer, or being called into a meeting and offered a choice between resignation or dismissal.

The sources describe Hatch as quick to suspect political motives behind any disagreement. He also seemed to assume that any small setback, a small mistake made by someone in the office, might spell his political demise. Said one source, who worked with Hatch for years and has now moved on: "Several times I heard him say, 'You may have just ended my career.'" He believed that any mistake could turn into negative publicity from which he could never recover politically."

He also attempted to interview both Hatch and Swanson.

MinnPost had requested interviews with Hatch and Swanson a week and a half ago. Swanson never offered an interview. Hatch, after much delay, agreed to an interview that was to occur this morning. Publication of this article was delayed to meet his schedule, but then Hatch canceled the interview this morning.

Former AG Hatch did, to his credit, send Black a written statement which was posted in it's entirety (which I will comment on in a later post). However the stories of forced resignations and bully tactics are a tale of a pair addicted to power and who feel that they are somehow "owed" the power that they have and crave.

A former deputy attorney general under Hatch recalls getting summoned to the Capitol for a meeting with the boss... As the deputy walked up the big marble stairs (to the Capital Building), he saw Hatch...Hatch was in a rage (my source didn't know why at the time) and started screaming.

"Hatch berated me like I haven't been talked to since my drunk old man did when I was a kid," the former deputy said. "He's poking my chest with his finger. I almost hit him, I almost popped him."

Hatch used the f-word and the mother-f'er variation. He called the deputy and his entire division the "biggest bunch of [f'ing] losers" he'd ever seen. He accused the subordinate of some unspecified betrayal. My source knew not what it was.

He later learned from one of Hatch's top deputies what set off the tirade. Hatch was in the midst of one of several significant purges of the staff. The former deputy had picked up word that one of his subordinates was in danger of getting axed. He confidentially warned the woman to watch her step..the woman confronted Hatch...Hatch...considered the warning to the woman to be a personal betrayal...

...A long-serving attorney, still in the office, said that, under both Hatch and Swanson, "it's a cult-like atmosphere. They demand blind obedience. Nobody's criticism is tolerated."

Black, in his piece, likens the former AG employees who still gather to compare stories to victims of physical abuse. You really need to go read the whole thing. It is eye-opening to say the least.

It's no fun to kick a state when it's down – especially when the local politicians are doing a fine job of it – but the latest news of Michigan's deepening budget woe is a national warning of what happens when you raise taxes in a weak economy.

Her tax plan raised the state income tax rate to 4.35% from 3.9%, and increased the state's tax on gross business receipts by 22%. Ms. Granholm argued that these new taxes would raise some $1.3 billion in new revenue that could be "invested" in social spending and new businesses and lead to a Michigan renaissance.

Officials in Lansing reported this month that the state faces a revenue shortfall between $350 million and $550 million next budget year....Six months later (after the budget was enacted - ed) one-third of the expected revenues have vanished as the state's economy continues to struggle. Income tax collections are falling behind estimates, as are property tax receipts and those from the state's transaction tax on home sales.

Michigan is now in the 18th month of a state-wide recession, and the unemployment rate of 6.9% remains far above the national rate of 5%. Ms. Granholm blames the nationwide mortgage meltdown and higher energy prices for the job losses and disappearing revenues, but this Great Lakes state is in its own unique hole. Nearby Illinois (5.4% jobless rate) and even Ohio (5.6%) are doing better.

The tax hikes have done nothing but accelerate the departures of families and businesses. Michigan ranks fourth of the 50 states in declining home values, and these days about two families leave for every family that moves in. Making matters worse is that property taxes are continuing to rise by the rate of overall inflation, while home values fall. Michigan natives grumble that the only reason more people aren't blazing a path out of the state is they can't sell their homes. Research by former Comerica economist David Littmann finds that about the only industry still growing in Michigan is government. Ms. Granholm's $44.8 billion budget this year further fattened agency payrolls.

We are faced with some sobering realities:

* Between 1990 and 2007 Utah experienced a 47.5 percent increase in population growth.

* During that same period of time, travel on Utah roads, measured in vehicle miles traveled on our roads (VMT), increased 78.5 percent.

* During those same years the State added only 4.2 percent more capacity to the highway system to accommodate this explosion of growth.

So what does this mean? In a word: congestion.

To exacerbate the problem:

* Since 2000 UDOT construction costs have increased 91 percent. In fact, recent reports show that steel has increased again by another 30 percent in the past few weeks alone.

* Funding for transportation was raided beginning 2001 when we experienced a downturn in the economy in order to keep public education funding whole. It took the legislature several years to bring funding levels back to pre-downturn totals. But demand for roads and the cost of construction outpaced our capacity to meet the demand several times over leaving us far behind.

So what steps have we taken without raising taxes?

* We looked internally for other funding options within existing budgets. We found that between 10 to 20 percent of the revenue from sales tax within the state came from auto related sales (car sales, tires, oil changes, etc). Many of us in the Legislature felt that these tax dollars should be earmarked for roads and so we pushed legislation through to capture this money. It is in place today.

* We are looking at ways to focus economic development in areas where the transportation system in unbalanced. In Northern Utah I-15 is a log jam southbound to SLC in the AM and the opposite in the afternoon leaving half the system underutilized. When placing incentives for economic development we, as a legislature, need to be conscious of balancing the transportation system and encouraging job growth closer to where people live.

After spending most of the month trying to paint John McCain as having a lobbyist problem, Barack Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod may have been hoist by his own petard. His consulting firm turns out to do lobbying as well, and in some shady ways:

When Illinois utility Commonwealth Edison wanted state lawmakers to back a hefty rate hike two years ago, it took a creative lobbying approach, concocting a new outfit that seemed devoted to the public interest: Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity, or CORE. CORE ran TV ads warning of a “California-style energy crisis” if the rate increase wasn’t approved—but without disclosing the commercials were funded by Commonwealth Edison. The ad campaign provoked a brief uproar when its ties to the utility, which is owned by Exelon Corp., became known. “It’s corporate money trying to hoodwink the public,” the state’s Democratic Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said. What got scant notice then—but may soon get more scrutiny—is that CORE was the brainchild of ASK Public Strategies, a consulting firm whose senior partner is David Axelrod, now chief strategist for Barack Obama.

Barack Obama continues his quest in demonstrating just how feckless he can be on foreign policy. Once again, he talks about how terrorists should be isolated in one breath while demanding presidential-level engagement with their financiers in the next.  Jake Tapper had a difficult time keeping pace with the shifting rhetoric over the space of just two days:

More recently, Obama as he traveled through Florida seemed to give some contradictory statements about Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and the Colombian terrorist group FARC.

On Thursday Obama  told the Orlando Sentinel that he would meet with Chavez and “one of the obvious high priorities in my talks with President Hugo Chavez would be the fermentation of anti-American sentiment in Latin America, his support of FARC in Colombia and other issues he would want to talk about.”

OK, so a strong declaration that Chavez is supporting FARC, which Obama intends to push him on.

But then on Friday he said any government supporting FARC should be isolated.

“We will shine a light on any support for the FARC that comes from neighboring governments,” he said  in a speech in Miami. “This behavior must be exposed to international condemnation, regional isolation, and - if need be - strong sanctions. It must not stand.”

So he will meet with the leader of a country he simultaneously says should be isolated? Huh?

First off, I hate to correct a man who ran the Harvard Law Review on vocabulary, but the proper word is fomentation, not fermentation, unless one wants to start marketing Anti-American Sentiment Beer. Imagine if George Bush had used fermentation in such a context. The media would have a field day pointing out that Bush once belonged to a fraternity! And that he had a drinking problem! It would end up at Slate’s “Bushisms” column within hours.

So one of the many "mom" things I have been dealing with this week is the Junior Logician's viewing of "An Inconvenient Truth" in his 8th grade Science class.  Their science class has been talking about "global warming" for a few weeks now.  Today, the Junior Logician brought home two sheets - one a page for the kids to calculate their carbon footprint and the other a sheet entitled "Reflections on 'An Inconvenient Truth' What Am I Willing To Do??"  I have to admit that I was curious as to how he was going to answer.  While we have never directly talked about the issue, he has heard my radio programs talking about it from time to time.  While several of his answers were spot on, there were a couple of things that I do need to work with him on - mostly taking shorter showers....sewer and water charges being what they are and all.  The one answer that I did get a chuckle out of was his answer to the suggested action "Eat Less Meat".  His simple answer to that was a very emphatic "NO!"

While filling out the carbon footprint calculator, he had to ask about certain energy saving appliances that we have in the house.  It was nice because it gave us the opportunity to talk about ALL the reasons for having low-flow toilets and Energy Star appliances (cost savings and energy savings).  It also gave us the opportunity to talk about the pros and cons of things like compact fluorescent bulbs and the like.

Yeah, I could have complained about the propaganda as many conservative parents do.  However, I prefer to use these moments to teach the Junior Logician how to apply critical thinking to the propaganda.  It is a skill that will serve him well over the next few years.

Then, in 2002, dissatisfaction with President Bush and Republicans on the national and local levels led to a Democratic sweep of nearly every lever of Illinois state government. For the first time in 26 years, Illinois Democrats controlled the governor's office as well as both legislative chambers.

The white, race-baiting, hard-right Republican Illinois Senate Majority Leader James "Pate" Philip was replaced by Emil Jones Jr., a gravel-voiced, dark-skinned African-American known for chain-smoking cigarettes on the Senate floor.

Jones had served in the Illinois Legislature for three decades. He represented a district on the Chicago South Side not far from Obama's. He became Obama's ­kingmaker.

Several months before Obama announced his U.S. Senate bid, Jones called his old friend Cliff Kelley, a former Chicago alderman who now hosts the city's most popular black call-in radio ­program.

I called Kelley last week and he recollected the private conversation as follows:

"He said, 'Cliff, I'm gonna make me a U.S. Senator.'"

"Oh, you are? Who might that be?"

"Barack Obama."

I am not surprised then to see this:

So how has Obama repaid Jones?

Last June, to prove his commitment to government transparency, Obama released a comprehensive list of his earmark requests for fiscal year 2008. It comprised more than $300 million in pet projects for Illinois, including tens of millions for Jones's Senate district.

Shortly after Jones became Senate president, I remember asking his view on pork-barrel spending.

I'll never forget what he said:

"Some call it pork; I call it steak."

On the stump, Obama has frequently invoked his experiences as a community organizer on the Chicago South Side in the early 1990s, when he passed on six-figure salary offers at corporate law firms after graduating from Harvard Law School to direct a massive voter-registration drive.

But, as a state senator, Obama evaded leadership on a host of critical community issues, from historic preservation to the rapid demolition of nearby public-housing projects, according to many South Siders.

Harold Lucas, a veteran South Side community organizer who remembers when Obama was "just a big-eared kid fresh out of school," says he didn't finally decide to support Obama's presidential bid until he was actually inside the voting booth on Super Tuesday.

"I'm not happy about the quality of life in my community," says Lucas, who now heads a black-heritage tourism business in Chicago. "As a local elected official, he had a primary role in that."

Emphasis mine.  Let's just say that reality is much colder...

Obama's aloofness on key community issues for years frustrated Lucas and many other South Siders. Now they believe he was just afraid of making political enemies or being pigeonholed as a black candidate. Lucas says he has since become an ardent Obama supporter.

Obama has spent his entire political career trying to win the next step up. Every three years, he has aspired to a more powerful political position.

He was just 35 when in 1996 he won his first bid for political office. Even many of his staunchest supporters, such as Black, still resent the strong-arm tactics Obama employed to win his seat in the Illinois Legislature.

Obama hired fellow Harvard Law alum and election law expert Thomas Johnson to challenge the nominating petitions of four other candidates, including the popular incumbent, Alice Palmer, a liberal activist who had held the seat for several years, according to an April 2007 Chicago Tribune report.

Obama found enough flaws in the petition sheets — to appear on the ballot, candidates needed 757 signatures from registered voters living within the district — to knock off all the other Democratic contenders. He won the seat unopposed.

"A close examination of Obama's first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career," wrote Tribune political reporters David Jackson and Ray Long. "The man now running for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it."

Emphasis mine.  That has long been the local conventional wisdom on Obama....the ruthlessness with which he dealt with anyone who challenged him.  We have only seen glimpses of this during the primary...the RNC would be wise to learn from this - as should the McCain Campaign.  This candidate will talk the talk, but when it comes to "playing nice" he will not walk the walk.

Three years later, in September 1999, Obama was already preparing his first national campaign. He ran for U.S. Congress against veteran incumbent Bobby Rush, a former co-founder of the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party.

Rush painted the largely unknown freshman lawmaker as an out-of-touch elitist, and won the 2000 primary by more than 30 percentage points.

You know....when Bobby Rush calls you an "out of touch elitist" you are in deep water.

If you want to know how Barack Obama will handle any dissent from the Democratic ranks during this campaign all you need to do is read the closing paragraphs....

A week after my profile of Obama was published, I called some of my contacts in the Illinois Legislature. I ran through a list of black Chicago lawmakers who had worked with Obama, and was surprised to learn that many resented him and had supported other candidates in the U.S. Senate election.

"Anybody but Obama," the late state Representative Lovana Jones told me at the time.

State Representative Monique Davis, who attended the same church as Obama and co-sponsored several bills with him, also did not support his candidacy. She complained of feeling overshadowed by Obama.

"I was snubbed," Davis told me. "I felt he was shutting me out of history."

In a follow-up report published a couple weeks later, I wrote about these disgruntled black legislators and the central role Senate President Emil Jones played in Obama's revived political life.

The morning after the story was posted online, I arrived early at my new offices. I hadn't taken my coat off when the phone rang. It was Obama.... He said the black legislators I cited in the story were off-base, and that they couldn't have gotten the bills passed without him.

I started to speak, and he shouted me down...I asked if there was anything factually inaccurate about the latest story.

He repeated that his former colleagues couldn't have passed the bills without him.

He asked why I wrote this story, then cut me off when I started to answer.

He said he should have been given a chance to respond.

I told him I had requested an interview through his communications director.

He said I should have called his cell phone.

I reminded him that he had asked me months ago to stop calling his cell phone due to his busier schedule.

Today I no longer have Obama's cell phone number. I submitted two formal requests to interview Obama for this story through his Web site, but have not heard back. I also e-mailed interview requests to three of his top staffers, but none responded.

Maybe he'll call the day after this story runs. I'll get to the office early just in case. And this time I'll have my recorder ready.

Todd Spivak has seen the "real" Barack Obama up close.  The real Barack Obama is a product of the Chicago political machine.  He is a man who quickly figured out how to use the political machine to his advantage.  However, as a product of the machine, you have to realize that the "empty suit" that most people see is not what it appears to be.  It is all part of the chameleon like nature that is necessary to "win at all costs".

Spivak's story is a cautionary tale of what Republicans can expect this fall from the candidate of "Hope and Change".

Gary Gross has a post up on this Doug Grow MinnPost column.Gary does a great job tearing the base premise of the column apart but I do have to add to one comment.  Gary remarks:

...Here’s how Grow finishes his post:

As November approaches, Republicans are trying to understand who they are. Meantime, DFLers are bouncing around the state more robust, and unifed, than they’ve been in a quarter century.

There isn’t any doubt that DFL legislators are unified....

If you watched the floor debates from the last month of the session you would know that the claim of unity is patently false!  Whether the subject was Education funding or property tax relief, there were countless speeches on the House floor from outstate DFL'ers about how the leadership (who are all from metro cities) were overlooking the needs of outstate townships and giving everything to the metro.  If there was any unity in that caucus, it was the unity of fear of the leadership.  The DFL leadership made it clear, through out the session that there would be consequences to voting against them.  When Rep. Mary Ellen Otremba voted initially against the Transportation bill, rumor has it she was told that she would lose her committee chairmanship if she voted against the over-ride.  

Here's a little more from Grow on the "dis-unity" that he says is afflicting the GOP.

Like Tingelstad, Rep. Neil Peterson, a Republican from Bloomington, has felt the wrath of his party for joining the Override Six. He was not endorsed at his district convention, meaning he’ll have to run against a more pure, endorsed candidate in a September primary.

“The leadership in the party has become very conservative,” said Peterson. “It’s caused quite a rift. Next week, they have a (district party) monthly meeting that we’ve always been invited to to discuss how the session went. This year, I’m not invited. Neither is Ron Erhardt. They don’t even want to hear from us.”

Erhardt, from Edina, is another of the Override Six. He’s been representing his moderate district for 18 years but now is pondering whether to try to continue his job by running in the Republican primary or as an independent.

“I’m not sure if this is Ron Paul people or what,” said Peterson. “I just know I don’t pass their test.”

Mr. Grow...shall we talk about Reps. Joe Muellery and Willie Dominguez?  It seems that your unity meme does not apply to them.  You see, like Reps. Peterson and Erhardt, Reps. Muellery and Dominguez were not endorsed by their respective BPOU's this year.  Do you suppose the Ron Paul people infiltrated those BPOU's as well?  Or do you suppose that maybe, JUST MAYBE is it because, like Reps. Peterson, Erhardt et al, these representatives are no longer "representing" their district?

This idea of strict party unity is one of those memes (media themes) that just does not wash when put through the scrutiny of reality.  The reality is that the local party unit decides if their representatives are really representing them and if they are not, it is the local unit's choice whether or not to endorse!  In the case of Representatives Muellery, Tinglestad, Dominguez, Peterson and Erhardt the reality was that the BPOU did not endorse because the member in question was no longer "representing" the district.  It has nothing to do with "party unity" and everything to do with "local representation".

Then again, I realize that local representation is a foreign concept to reporters and elitists like Doug Grow.

An Inver Grove Heights charter school must take "corrective actions" to address concerns about how it handles Muslim prayer in school and after-school religious instruction, the Minnesota Department of Education said today.

In its report, the department raised several issues with Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy, a public school with many Muslim students, which came under fire this spring for allegedly blurring the line between church -- or in this case, mosque -- and state.

Friends and Neighbors,

 The biggest news item from the State Capitol this week was that the projected budget surplus remained well above the $2 billion mark, even though it dropped a fraction of a percent from earlier forecasts. Earlier this session I explained how "a fraction" in state budget terms can actually be a huge amount of money, and that is true in this case. State economists lowered their surplus projection by $7 million,which to any of us is a fortune. But in terms of a $31.5 billion state budget, it's relative pocket change.

 How will this affect the rest of the session? Probably not a whole lot. The forecast is that we will have just shy of $34 billion to spend, and that is the number we will use to set the state budget. The economists warned that there is still an amount of uncertainty in the economy (witness this week's unexpected fall in the stock market) and we need to be prudent with spending and not leave ourselves in a tough situation if the economy takes a sudden downturn.

May 15, 2008, Anonymous, Minnesota
Katherine Kersten should lose her job because her column is extremely poorly researched, completely lacking any criticism of those in power who hold her narrow and intolerant views, and is invariably divisive to the community. It takes advantage of the Right of Freedom of Speech to perpetuate oppression --time and time again. The Star Tribune can certainly find a conservative columnist who is not so one-dimensionl.(sic)

In response to questions prompted by Katherine Kersen's recent columns on Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy (TIZA), I decided to visit the school myself.

What I learned during a tour late last month is that none of Kersten's concerns that the charter school is promoting religion in violation of a state law that prohibits public schools from doing so is valid.

What I did see was excellent teachers hard at work in the classroom focused on improving student achievement. I saw engaged students of different religious and cultural backgrounds learning reading, math, government and science. I spoke with parents, teachers and administrators who all stressed their high standards for TIZA students.

While an outsider, or someone like Kersten who is trying to validate a predetermined conclusion, might be tempted to brand Tarek ibn Ziyad as an "Islamic School" because it leases space from the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, the school, like other charter schools in Minnesota that lease space from churches, is a separate entity. It does comply with federal law that requires all schools to accommodate a student's right to practice his or her religion. And unlike other charter schools that have faced financial and other administrative challenges, the school was recognized with a 2008 School Finance Award from the Minnesota Department of Education for its "sound fiscal health and financial management policies."

Kersten's reckless journalistic standards have diminished this paper's credibility. Worse, they have threatened the safety of the children and staff at the school, which has been forced to take extra security measures in the wake of recent death threats. While I value a broad range of opinions from a variety of perspectives, I value the facts even more. Kersten's gross distortion of the facts in this case should compel Star Tribune management to ask for her resignation.

REP. MINDY GREILING, DFL-ROSEVILLE; CHAIRWOMAN, HOUSE K-12 FINANCE DIVISION

He says he won't rule out running for U.S. Senate and he repeatedly ripped Franken and Coleman with some very harsh words. He said he lives in Minnesota more than Al Franken and when he wrestled for 30 years in different states he knew he had to pay taxes where he earned the money. He wondered why a Harvard grad like Franken wouldn't know that. Moving on to Coleman, he was angry the Republican Party was using an old wrestling image of him in ads and said he'd like to see some images of a long-haired war protestor from years ago who was Norm Coleman.

This story gets worse and worse every day for Team Franken.

HT MDE

The Wall Street Journal has a little different take on the recent special election loss than my friend Kevin does.

If there is such a thing as a useful election defeat, then Tuesday's Republican loss in a special House election in Mississippi would qualify. Maybe this thumping in a heretofore safe GOP seat will finally scare the Members straight, or at least less crooked.

Democrats won with 54% of the vote in a district that a Republican won with 66% in 2006 and that President Bush carried in 2004 by 25 points. It was the GOP's third special election loss this year, and it has Democrats predicting that November will be another rout of 2006 proportions. Oklahoma's Tom Cole, who runs the National Republican Congressional Committee, captured the GOP reaction when he declared that "There is no district that is safe for Republican candidates."

Three straight special elections losses here in Minnesota have also driven the point home hard - especially coupled with the not-so-stunning caucus defeats by 3 of the so-called "Override 6".

This is the lesson Republicans should have learned in 2006, but the Members preferred to blame their failure on President Bush and Iraq. House Republicans pooh-poohed their own earmarking scandals, spending excesses and overall wallowing in the Beltway status quo. Rather than rethink their habits, they re-elected the same party leaders and even kept Jerry Lewis as their chief Appropriator. Congressman John Shadegg of Arizona is right when he says that "Since the 2006 elections, Republicans have done absolutely nothing to redefine themselves. We can't even get behind an earmark moratorium bill."

The state and national parties use the "2006 was just a tough year to be a Republican" meme to excuse the massive losses that they suffered, rather than taking the long hard introspective look at what THEY did wrong....and they did a lot wrong. Both the state and the national parties have abandoned running on a vision or message and decided that the best way to campaign is fear. They constantly point out what a horrible person the other guy is and then whine with the other side responds in kind! Meanwhile, no one knows what Republicans are supposed to stand for. It is that abandonment of the message that caused this very website to come into being! After all - SOMEONE needs to let people know what conservatism is about.

They've also been content to replay their same losing political attack strategy. In 2006, they thought they could save their majority by donning a Nancy Pelosi fright wig and shouting "liberal, liberal, liberal." This year they're wearing a Barack Obama mask, and that isn't working either.

In the Mississippi race, the national GOP tried to link Democratic candidate Travis Childers to Barack Obama and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. One TV ad declared: "Travis Childers: He took Obama's endorsement over our conservative values." But Mr. Childers was well known as a cultural conservative who favors gun rights and opposes abortion. In a year when Americans are mad as hell, such a negative attack strategy merely reminds voters that Republicans have run out of ideas.

I would maybe not say that Republicans have run out of ideas, but I would say that the consultancy class that the state and national parties rely on are woefully out of touch with the voters!

The Journal then goes on to say something that many on these pages have said for the last 3 years!

The better strategy is to offer a reform agenda of their own, especially one that begins to speak to the economic anxieties of the middle class. This includes doing some homework on health care for a change, instead of ceding that field to the Democrats. One of Tom DeLay's great blunders, among many, was failing to do anything about health care when Republicans controlled Washington in 2005. This year, John McCain is offering them a policy lifeline, and they should grab it.

Mr. McCain is also proposing to veto all earmarks, and you can hear the grating of teeth in the GOP caucus on that one. Yes, the "real money" is in entitlements. But there's nothing independent voters hate more than the self-dealing and incumbent protection that earmarks represent. An earmark ban would be potent political symbolism – and substance.

Democrats and the media want to cow Republicans into believing that tax cutting doesn't sell anymore. But tell that to Republican Mayor of Indianapolis Greg Ballard, who won an upset victory last year by calling for lower property taxes. The GOP should expand its tax cut message into a larger tax reform theme that also hits at the corruption of tax loopholes for the rich.

Voters are especially angry about rising prices for food and gasoline, and here too Republicans can start speaking for the middle class. The weak dollar policy of the Bush Administration and Federal Reserve has helped to cause the price spike, and Republicans on Capitol Hill should start talking about how inflation punishes those who work and save. With oil at $124 a barrel, voters are also willing to listen to a message that encourages more domestic energy production across the board – oil, natural gas, coal, shale and nuclear.

Yes, yes, yes, yes and YES!!!!! That is exactly what the voters in Minnesota AND America want to hear! However, we also want you to act on your campaign promises.

Democrats have settled on a formula of running as cultural conservatives in GOP districts, and as economic populists on "fiscal discipline," trade protection, corporate bashing, and "middle-class tax cuts" paid for by taxes on the rich. If Republicans can't trump that message with an agenda of low taxes, health-care affordability and portability, jobs and stable prices, they will be routed again in November.

We have already seen that the Democrats don't mean it when they campaign as fiscally disciplined. We saw (in 2006) Margaret Anderson-Kelliher stand before the microphones and claim that this new legislature would be fiscally moderate and then watched this same "fiscally moderate" DFL Leadership propose MILLIONS of dollars in tax increases over the last two years. The voters have a serious case of "buyers remorse". If the House Republican Caucus were smart, they would seize on that and propose a vision for Minnesota that not only highlights what they will do but it will give the voters an "accountability matrix" so that they realize that this caucus means what they say.

If they do this, it could reverse a very troubling trend. Will they learn this lesson? One can only hope the answer is a resounding "Yes we can!"

Ohio's attorney general resigned Wednesday under threat of impeachment because of a sexual harassment investigation in his office and his extramarital affair.

The AP released a story today on how Jack Nelson Pallmeyer has been the "surprise" beneficiary of the Franken campaign's self destruction.

On the Senate campaign trail, Al Franken frequently invokes the name of his friend, the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, as a major inspiration.

But as Franken moves to consolidate Democrats behind his challenge to Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, another Democrat is chipping into his support — one whose background and beliefs spark even greater Wellstone nostalgia for some voters.

Like Wellstone, Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer is a college professor with a long history of political activism and fearless liberalism. His green-and-white campaign signs mimic the Wellstone placards that still hang in the front window of many a Democratic household, and that's not an accident.

However, unlike Wellstone!, Pallmeyer does not have the devoted legions behind him. Pallmeyer ran a constant 3rd behind Franken and Mike Cirisi (before Cirisi dropped out of the race) and in a head to head battle against incumbent Norm Coleman, Pallmeyer finishes 18 points back! Now I fully understand that can (and most likely will) change after the conventions, but that is an awfully deep hole to start in and it will be even harder to get out of the hole with some of the policies that Pallmeyer espouses. While these policies play very well with the DFL base, they will not play all that well with many of the strapped taxpayers who just want a little relief to their financial ills.

On Global Warming, Pallmeyer advocates reducing our output of greenhouse gases by 80% by 2030. The problem is the last time we were ever at that level of greenhouse gas production, it was 100 years ago. Does he really think that the average consumer is going to be willing to give up heating their homes, their showers and powering their toys? I suspect that once people hear exactly what that lofty goal entails, the answer will be no!

On Immigration Reform, Pallmeyer advocates legalizing all illegals who are here already (out of respect to family unity) and pulling out of trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA. Senators Clinton and Obama are both already backing away from those remarks, one (Sen. Obama) even admitted that he was simply using the issue as an election issue - telling a Canadian official that he "really didn't mean" what he said in Ohio on the issue.

Pallmeyer's idea of education reform is to repeal the Bush Tax Cuts on employers and using that money to pay for increased funding. The only problem with that will be when those employers leave the country, who is going to pay for the workers unemployment compensation? He also opposes No Child Left Behind (well something we agree on!) and would work to repeal that - if it does not get done already by the current congress.

On health care, Pallmeyer supports putting the same bureaucrats that are in charge of the Veterans Administration in charge of your health care. Oh, I know he does not exactly say that on his issues page, but he does say that he wants a system that covers everyone and that is paid for at taxpayer expense. The government already has the VA in place, so if they do take over health care for the rest of us, you know that the bureaucracy in place will not rest until they get their hands on YOUR tax dollars - one way or another!

Jack Nelson Pallmeyer is probably a very nice man....definitely well meaning. However, former Senator Wellstone was that and much more. He was inspirational, he was thoughtfull and he (most importantly) he respected ALL of his constituents whether they agreed with him or not. I still remember the interviews that he did with Jason Lewis when Lewis was still on KSTP-AM. Those interviews were some of the best radio I have ever heard in my life. While Lewis and Wellstone disagreed on just about everything, they did so in a way that was well sourced, well thought out and 100% respectfull of each other. I simply do not see that respect for the other side in any of the current crop of state and local Democrats (and to be fair in a few Republicans as well). Wellstone was one of a kind and we are a poorer state because of his loss (yes this conservative did just say something nice about a liberal).

Does Pallmeyer stand a ghost of a chance against Franken or Coleman? Well, let's just say that as much as he wishes it were so, Jack Nelson Pallmeyer is no Paul Wellstone. At least not as far as I can see...