Norm Coleman and the DOP
Email This Post
- 
Print This Post
- 
Watching the events unfolding in the Minnesota senatorial campaign is like watching a political soap opera. Yesterday, the courts ruled in Al Franken’s favor once again. It seems that the ballot recount that former Senator Coleman wanted so badly has pushed current Senator Franken even further ahead of Coleman. Prior to the recount, Mr. Franken had 225 more votes than Norm Coleman. After, his lead increased to 312. Now it appears that Mr. Coleman will appeal the result that his own request has produced.
Of course, Norm Coleman will tell you that he’s concerned about the people of Minnesota. He’s not. If he were truly concerned about his constituents, he’d accept the fact that he’s lost and get out of the way so that they can be fully represented. What he’s really concerned about is retaining his senate seat. It’s that simple. That is, of course, why Coleman stated earlier in the race that God wants him to serve. The GOP loves to pull out the “God card” in tough situations. While Coleman does answer to a higher power, it isn’t GOD. It’s the DOP (the Desperate Old Party). If Coleman retains his senate seat, it keeps the Democrats from getting closer to that filibuster-proof 60-seat majority. Truth is, neither Coleman nor the DOP give a damn about the people of Minnesota and what they want. And it’s pretty clear that more people want Al Franken than Norm Coleman (regardless of what Our Lord wants).
Enough already, Norm. You’ve lost the election. Give it up.
Comment by Patty on 15 April 2009:
Deb: Why must you always be nasty? Don’t you have the ability to make your point otherwise? You’re an embarrassment to all of us Democrats.
Comment by ihentschel on 15 April 2009:
I am hard pressed to condone “nastiness” from anyone, but we should be careful about who we accuse of that behavior, why and then keep it all in perspective. Everything is relative. Consider this:
The US citizenry is more polarized, politically and ideologically, right now, than any time that I can remember in my lifetime (and I am old). We have people on the far left (progressives?) who advocate radical restructuring and reformation, who are full of harsh criticism and frequently without solutions to accompany them (lots of saddles and no horses). These folks are all too often the vociferous advocates of harsh decisions and knee-jerk reactions which do not always guarantee or promote solid, positive, long term cultural benefits. They seem to be more attuned to sensationalism and immediate popular outrage. And we always pay attention to entertainment.
On the other hand, we have the far right: largely ideological recidivists who demand more and more services (water, sewer, police, jails, stop lights, highways)but cry continually for relief from the taxes that are needed to pay for them. Further, they can both spawn and encourage racism, xenophobia and bigotry, give rise to hate groups and condone guns and violence: more entertainment.
But as much to be held at fault as anyone in the entire group is the “middle” (largely Democrats in name)who say little or nothing and remain too quiet and inactive. There have been any number of recent articles on the web and in magazines, bemoaning our widespread “intellectual laziness” and “social indifference”. Many would say that we lack a definitive and identifiable “edge” on the bulk of public discourse right now, and that is partly why we find ourselves in the fix we are, just now. We have said too little, too late and without any decisiveness, without any discernible “edge”.
I don’t know that I would call Deb “nasty”, but she may be “raspy”, having an edge (or a bite) to her commentaries that are surely designed to break up the icy silence, opening up discussion and promoting forward thinking. I may not always agree completely with what she might say, but I have no problem with the manner in which she says it. If it makes the blood boil just a little, so be it. It sure beats being numb.
And she is right about Coleman: this fight is being waged for the sake of political supremacy and has nothing to do with the welfare of the people of Minnesota. I find it embarrassing.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 15 April 2009:
Patty, know what? I’m sorry, but I’m hard pressed to see my most recent post on Norm Coleman as nasty. It’s not any more nasty than any other article I’ve read across the web over the past several months.
I do have an edginess to my writing on politics, and it’s equally spread across all party lines. That is not something that I want to change. You are free to write whatever way you want. I have not spent much time telling people how to write, nor do I have any intention of doing that.
I’m not here simply to post other people’s opinions. I have opinions of my own, and my goal is to put them out there in the hopes of starting a discussion. There’s not enough of that going on in this country. We are, by and large, a preoccupied silent group convinced that we still live in the best place possible — in spite of its drawbacks. That may well be the case, but that kind of thinking is dangerous in the long term.
If I’m embarrassing to you, then please do not associate yourself with my blog. I’m sorry if you are not comfortable with who I am. Some people use blogs to rant and rave. Some people use blogs as diaries. I use blogs to give you my opinion and, hopefully, start a conversation. Rather than worry about my style, why don’t you pay attention to the substance.
Comment by Patty on 15 April 2009:
It is obvious you “don’t see it.” You are embarrassing to me and very many other and to the mutual determent of important things. You should accept constructive criticism.
Comment by Patty on 15 April 2009:
ihentschel
You ignore the importance of tone which is my point. Deb aspires to be a liberal ANN COULTRER and to the same effect.
Comment by ihentschel on 15 April 2009:
Patty, we are not participants here to monitor, critique or censure “tone” or style: this is all about “substance”. I often read pieces which may have a tone or a nuance with which I am not happy, but if the substance is accurate, then the tone is hardly worth getting riled about. Ann Coulter not only displays terrible “tone” and abrasive style, but has no substance, which is what makes her so unbearable.
There is some certainly verifiable substance to the observations (and they are just that: “observations”) that Deb is making about the Coleman/Franken fiasco, and anything you may find personally objectionable about her “tone” (and I still do not find it nasty, as you seem to), then perhaps you have missed the point and done so for the wrong reasons. What is happening in MN borders on the criminal. That should be your biggest concern.
And speaking of substance, I think you meant “detriment” not “deterent”. The choice of the wrong word would seem to destroy the credibility of the substance of your remarks.
Comment by Patty on 15 April 2009:
I took no stand on Minnesota’s election but only on a destructive tone and approach that offends and divides.
“We” are not participants is revealing.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 16 April 2009:
Know what, Patty? This conversation is finished. My writing style isn’t changing for you. As for your psychobabble, and I refer specifically to: “We” are not participants in revealing, drop it. I am not a blue dog Dem, or a Dem concerned with making nice with the GOP. I am a pretty far left liberal and that isn’t going to change. So, let’s end the conversation here. We all have much better things to do with our time. As for my tone? There are hundreds of articles written about this foolish Minnesota race all over the web, and many have been far more scathing than what I wrote here.
By the way, what is going on in Minnesota is not democracy in action either. It’s a joke and a perversion of the democratic process. Norm Coleman needs to do what he promised he would do months ago — step aside and let the ball roll.
Comment by Patty on 16 April 2009:
RUN AWAY and HIDE
You posted the “we” comment under a different name - that’s what I meant by revlealed.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 16 April 2009:
Do you always have to have the last word? And I didn’t post under a different name, Patty. That wasn’t my post. It was Ivan.
As for running away and hiding? Hardly. You want to keep this up? This is nonsensical. There are bigger issues and I don’t have time for your whining about my posts “DIVIDING” us. As I’ve told you, I believe this bi-partisan crap is far too overrated. And I do not view this particular crop of Republicans as interested in becoming part of the solution. I’m not interested in joining with them. You go ahead.
Comment by Patty on 16 April 2009:
Hoist by your own pitard - again.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 16 April 2009:
Big words, Patty. Bye.
Comment by Patty on 16 April 2009:
Was Hoist or petard too big?
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 17 April 2009:
You know, Patty, you are pretty petty and nasty yourself. The trail of insults doesn’t lie. Do not waste the space on my blog, please. This blog is for people who want to discuss issues. Not your pronouncements on who is and isn’t nice or nasty. Frankly, in spite of what you think, your opinion doesn’t mean that much.
Comment by Joker on 1 May 2009:
As much as the idea of Al Franken having the title of US Senator raises the bile to the back of my throat, I agree with you. Coleman lost, and he should go away. Of course, it’s not like Al Gore went gently into that goodnight back in 2000, taking his whining to the Supreme Court. To this day, there are far-left kooks who will stamp their feet and babble on about then-Florida Sec. of State Katherine Harris “fixing” the election for Bush.
I love how when a Republican contests an election, he/she is branded as a self-important power monger who just doesn’t want to give up office, but when it’s a Democrat the line is, “We just want to ensure a fair and accurate count.”
DOP? You’re right; we are desperate. We’re desperate for an end to the incridible hypocrisy of liberalism that says it’s ok to murder unborn children, but we should not execute convicted murderers and rapists. We’re desperate for the upholding of the SEPARATION of church and state, which means that COURTS DO NOT RE-DEFINE MARRIAGE, which is a religious institution, and has been for all of our history. Now, all of a sudden, just to suit a special interest group, we have to re-write what to a VAST MAJORITY of Americans is sacred.
You say Coleman should get lost because far more people in Minnesota want him. Fine. What do say that if it were put to a vote, far more Americans don’t want “Gay” marriage? Oh, but that’s different for you, because you’re gay. You don’t care about the rest of the electorate, you’re only interested in what YOU want in your life, and the hell with everyone else. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. The answer is civil union. Period. You get all your legal rights, but you don’t infringe on the rest of us who don’t agree with you.
I know your answer. “It’s not fair; it’s about hate, we have a right to equality, blah, blah, blah.” Horse Hockey. Marriage is one man, one woman. Once you change it, where does it end? “Hi, I’d like to get a marriage license for me and my great dane here, cuz he’s my life partner.” How about marrying your cousin? Your sister? “Oh, but that’s different…” NO IT’S NOT. Once you redefine an institution, you open up Pandora’s Box for all sorts of deviance.
Yes, we’re desperate alright. Desperate for a return to some common sense - two words that have no association whatsover with liberals.
Patty may not do her homework, but I do.
Comment by Glen on 1 May 2009:
Al Franken, of course, cares deeply for the people of Minnesota - he reestablished residency for the election. How dare anyone suggest he’s a carpetbagger.
Comment by patty on 1 May 2009:
Joker: Reread my post carefully and you will see I took and take no position on Franken-Coleman. I agree with you about homosexual marriages and I prefer civil debate which appears impossible to achieve with some so I quit.
By the way Franken is the quintesential carperbagger.
Comment by Joker on 1 May 2009:
Patty: Oh I realize that. I mentioned that merely as a play on Deb’s comments to you.
On another note, to ALL, especially and hopefully the Web Master for Hypocrisy.com, I tried to register on this site and set up my own blog, but all I get are “.404 error” pages. What’s the deal? Is this site closed to new members or something? If not, can you fix the problem so I can get equal time here?
If it’s fiery discussion you folks want here, I promise I have much to bring to the table. The liberals won’t like it, but us conservatives are used to being disliked. There is a reason we are called the “right” wing, and the pun is intended.