I found the following story quite interesting on more than one level.

Lets think about this using the rare thing called logic. If it was a purely popular vote that elected the President then the candidates would be spending time where? Where the most people were obviously. Think: CA,TX,NJ,FL,NY etc. You know, the states that now have the largest number of Electoral votes.  So instead of going to 'swing states' aka small populous states where their Electoral vote could possibly make a difference in election, the candidates would spend their time and money where the greatest congregation of voters were.

Quick side note: Had this been in place in 2004 Maryland's Electoral votes would have gone to Bush instead of Kerry. Wonder how Maryland would have dealt with that?

Hmm it seems we have stumbled onto the crux of the matter. Once again the spectre of the 2000 Presidential Election rears its ugly head. Apparently some people cannot accept what has occurred in the past. I ask, if the results had been reversed, and there were Republicans whining about an election that had been 'stolen' (A word that has been used quite frequently by Democrats) I wonder how they would be received by Democrats or the media? A no-brainer really.

The election of 2000, and the subsequent whining, is an interesting thing to analyze.

How? Very simple really. By winning Tennessee, his home state. The same state he representing for almost 30 years.

To: Democratic lawmakers in D.C.

Re: Iraq

A great deal has been said on both sides of the Iraq issue. It has gotten to the point where a concerned citizen like myself has a difficult time making sense of things. I would like to take this opportunity to perhaps clarify things a bit.

It is well established your opposition to the war in Iraq, (even though you gave the authorization for it to happen) so there is no need to clarify that. However there are a few points that do seem a bit vague to me.

Much has been made of your apparent desire for the war to be unsuccessful, or even being accused of appearing unpatriotic. To many this is a serious accusation. Perhaps a few simple questions will put these accusations to rest.

In a military operation there can be only three outcomes: Victory, Defeat or Stalemate. Though the third can be turned into one of the others.

You say that our efforts are doomed, they are a failure, and so my first question to you is quite simple.

What is the Democratic definition of a U. S. victory in Iraq? (Given the above premise of possible outcomes one can assume it is the first of these that is desired by Democrats.)

This should be a simple question to answer, at least without the usual rhetoric. I don’t mean the usual ‘troops out now’ things we usually hear. In your mind a situation must exist for the U.S. to be achieve victory in Iraq. I do not mean a political victory for the Democratic Party.

Regardless of your feelings as to why we are there the point is, like it or not, we are. Therefore it is incumbent upon the U.S. to do whatever it can to succeed. After all is that not what America has been known for? Why else would we be the first country looked to for help by other countries if they did not think we could do whatever is necessary to get something done?

So my question once more is, what is the Democratic definition of a U.S. victory in Iraq?

A follow up question would be what are you planning to do to assist the military in achieving this version of victory?

One can only assume with the amount of military expertise that resides in the halls of Congress that a well-formed plan is currently being formulated. It was quite apparent from the hearings with Gen. Petraeus that the members of Congress are just as knowledgeable in military matters as a Four-Star General.

I am sure that somehow the Congress and the Administration a plan can be formed to assure a U.S. victory in Iraq. After all we are all Americans so it stands to reason we all would want America to succeed right?

My final question is in regards to the perceived image of the U.S.

Talk has been made of how this war has damaged the reputation around the world. My question then is this.

What sort of image would be presented to the world if we simply left Iraq without any form of victory?

Would this not show the world that America is easily cowed by those opposed to it? What would the opinion of the U.S. be then if we left Iraq and all that we have been warned about occurring in just such an event in fact came true? (Extreme blood shed, Iran filling the void, etc)

I am sure there are honest answers to all these questions and I and my fellow Americans look forward to hearing them.

Signed,
A concerned citizen.

Living in Minnesota I have seen this first hand with our governor Pawlenty. He is on the front lines of those leading this shift. He along with Arnold and others seem intent on dragging the GOP leftward. Is it really a surprise that Pawlenty is so solidly in McCain's camp?

Sorry for the delay but I have started becoming involved with local GOP political party. Hopefully I can inject some logic and reality into things. Instead of a long dissertation on one topic this will be more about just getting thoughts out of my head, random ideas as it were. They may not be Jack Handyesque thoughts but definitely Ravenesque.

Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice

Black and White terms for a Gray topic. Is it not possible for a person to have an opinion without having to be pigeonholed into one ‘camp’ or the other?

Then again from a political point of view what better way to polarize an issue?

The entire topic is flawed to begin with since it really should not be a ‘political’ issue.

Roe v Wade could be looked at as the ‘official’ start of Abortion being a political issue/weapon.

There is a stark contrast between Abortion being a political issue and a legal one. Except that it has evolved to the point where there is no separation between the two.

During Roe v Wade a Constitutional ‘right’ was discovered. Amazing. Only took 200 years or so to discover it.
In one area a ‘right’ was discovered (Right of Privacy ~ Right to an Abortion) yet where a Right is defined there are those who suddenly develop spontaneous blindness. (2^nd Amendment)

‘Roe v Wade’ is now seemingly viewed as Scripture. Something so sacrosanct that the mere thought that the Supreme Court could dare do anything to alter it sends a lot of people in to convulsions. Interesting. Since it is (allegedly) a Constitutionally protected Right it would be blasphemous to do anything that could possibly threaten it.

Only one comment to that line of thinking: Segregation was at one point Constitutionally protected. Just a thought.

Roe v Wade needs to overturned. Why? Because it should be in the purview of the States (ala 10^th Amendment). If one state wishes to ban it and another wished to allow, then so be it. That is of course until we get rid of those pesky state borders. (Who do those States think they are having independent ideas and thoughts? Don’t they know Washington knows best.)

Final Thought: “It is a women’s body to do with it as she chooses.” Or so the thinking of the Pro-Choice goes. Ok. Fair enough statement. So I am sure this line of thinking also extends to these same people agreeing that prostitution should be legalized yes? Those who willingly wish to do so of course.

Coronation 2008 (aka Election 2008)

It seems to be a foregone conclusion that Hilary will be the nominee. Or will she?

This campaign pre-season isn’t even over yet. And much like Football pre-season they both amount to about the same thing, not much.

I agree that the campaigning as started much too early and will be going on much too long. But remember it did not start earlier this year. In all reality it started November of 2004, just after Bush was re-elected. At least on the Democratic side.

I will be quite happy when the election is over with. Then we can start on the next cycle.

The origin of the unmitigated hatred towards Bush is quite easy to determine. Election 2000 aka How Gore lost the Election.

It wasn’t Bush who stole it, or the Court bestowing it. One amazing little tidbit is always conveniently overlooked. Gore did not win his home state. Hmmm Even Mondale won his home state when he got swamped. If he couldn’t get a majority of his home state people to vote for him then he deserved to lose. It’s simple math. Gore wins Tennessee everything else in irrelevant. Bush wins Florida but loses the election. But of course we can’t let facts get in the way of good old fashioned hatred now can we? Besides I am sure has the situation been reversed I'm sure the Republicans would be received just as well as those Democrats who feel Bush stole the election. Right?

Gore in 2008.

A tantalizing prospect too many. I have to include myself in that. I would love to see Al jump in the race. I think it would be quite intriguing to see how the Clinton machine would deal with Al. Plus you would think he would to further get his ‘agenda’ into main stream. Maybe we could actually have a real ‘debate’ on it.

But I doubt he will. Even though he would have quite a bit of clout as President when it came to his ‘agenda’ I don’t think he will because he has just as much clout as a ‘green prophet’ and without the scrutiny he would have as a candidate or as President.

My prediction: One of the two candidates we will have to choose from next November is not currently a declared candidate. Not a risky prediction I know but one that I think will come to fruition.

Could the next President be Madame Hilary? Possibility is there. But I believe if that occurs as long as GOP takes back Congress they can minimize the damage she could do. Assuming there are real Conservatives elected.

It is my contention, as stated previously, that the more a false, or invalid, premise is stated as ‘fact’ the more it becomes accepted as ‘reality’. An example of this is the following concept, at least as it is commonly thought of in today’s society.

There can be no expression of Faith or Religion in a place that is associated at all with the State. 

Also commonly referred to as the ‘Separation of Church and State.’

Where exactly does this concept originate? First we need to look at the two most relevant pieces.

1) The 1^st Amendment of the Constitution.

2) Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802.

The concept of "Separation of Church and State" is generally discussed as political and legal principle derived from the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . ."

The idea of separation is commonly credited to the combination of the two clauses:

1) The establishment clause: Generally interpreted as preventing the government from establishing a national religion, providing tax dollars in support of religion, or otherwise favoring any single religion or religion generally.

2) and the free exercise clause: Which ensures that private religious practices are not to be restricted by the government.

The effect, of prohibiting direct connections between religious and governmental institutions, while protecting private religious freedom and autonomy, has been termed the "separation of church and state."

There are two separate views on this.

The first approach is called the "separationist" or "no aid" interpretation. In separationist interpretation, the clause, as historically understood, prohibits Congress from aiding religion in any way even if such aid is made without regard to denomination.

The second approach is called the "non-preferentialist" or "accommodationist" interpretation. The accommodationist interpretation prohibits Congress from preferring one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious domain to make accommodations in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause.

I would consider myself the latter, to some degree.

In doing some reading and research about the subject and I understand where the ‘separationist’ is coming from, yet I do not completely agree. What I believe has happened is that the ‘separationist’ view has been co-opted and used for other purposes. A lot of which does have the appearance of being ‘anti-religious’.

The following is from a website that states and defends the ‘separationist’ point of view and answers the question: Website (To be fair it does not appear to have been updated since 1997)

Don’t separationists want to eliminate religion from public life?

“Absolutely not. If separationism means anything, it is that people should have the freedom to act publicly on their religious beliefs without coercion from the state. This would include the right to vote and run for public office in accordance with one's religious beliefs. More generally, separationists are aware that religion has profoundly influenced the culture and morality of this nation; it is natural and proper that people would identify with that influence, and use it to order their lives.

Nevertheless, the First Amendment had the effect of forbidding anyone from using the government to pass sectarian legislation (i.e., legislation designed to establish religious belief by law). One's decision about how much we should spend on welfare, for example, might well be influenced by one's religious beliefs, but it would surely be unconstitutional to require people to attend church as a condition of welfare. Granted, it is sometimes difficult to know just where to draw the lines between sectarian and non-sectarian legislation, but such lines do need to be drawn. Separationists believe that the religion clauses of the First Amendment serve as an adequate guideline for resolving most of these disputes.”

Most of which I agree with and makes sense. What I do not agree with is how it has been taken to such a degree that is has today. Hence where Perception has evolved into Reality.

It seems we have arrived at a point where it is no longer a separation of Religion from Government but where Religion is to no longer even be Acknowledged.

Has Freedom Of Religion become Freedom From Religion?

It seems to me that this ‘inviolate line’ is not very clear cut, nor do I think those in the Kingdom would do anything to make it clearer. Why would they? There is no benefit to them to do so.

There is a fine line between Perception and Reality. What we perceive may not always be what reality is. A perfect example of this would be an optical illusion.

Vanity

What your senses tell you may be easily deceived into believing something completely different. It is my contention that is exactly what our society is undergoing. An evolution where what is Perceived has replaced what is Real. I have heard it said before (paraphrasing here) that the more something is said the easier it is to believe, regardless of if it is the truth or not.

That is how our Society operates today. What is ‘True’ does not really matter. Only how it is presented and perceived matters. This can be manifested in a variety of ways. It is glaringly evident in the realm of politics, but is also permeating all aspects of society. You only need to look at what passes for ‘Top Stories’ in some newscasts. If it is on the news it has to be true and important right?

One of the many ways this can be accomplished lies in how something is discussed. If you form an argument a certain way it is quite easy to warp perceptions to a desired end.

“Mr. Doe, how long have you been cheating on your wife?”

By stating the question this way a foundation of ‘facts’ has been established regardless if they are true or not. From the very beginning Mr. Doe is at a severe disadvantage. This is also known as a ‘straw man argument’.

This is happening all the time and not always in such a straight forward manner. Many things in society seemed to have evolved from false premises. The longer a false premise is perpetuated the more deeply rooted in the fabric of society it becomes.

Nowhere is this more evident today, but not limited to, than in the arena of politics and ideas. There are those who are quite masterful in elevating the status of a ‘straw man’ to that of accepted fact but it is not impossible to tear down this ‘straw man’. But it is by no means easy. The first step is always the hardest.

When it comes to the ‘straw men’ of today, the first step is in presenting the idea, don’t be on the defensive. Once you are on defense in an argument you have already lost. Look beyond the straw man and push aside the false premise. The longer ideas are discussed without the false premise the greater the chance of it taking root, as it should. It is amazing what can bloom when the seed of Truth is planted.

A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HEALTH INSURANCE:  Rep. Tom Huntley (D-Duluth) has proposed a constitutional amendment.  It would state:  “Every Minnesota resident has the right to health care. It is the responsibility of the governor and the legislature to implement all necessary legislation to ensure affordable health care.”  Millions of people may move to Minnesota if this bill passes.  (House File 683)

REPLACE LITTLE LEAGUE WITH LANGUAGE CLASSES:  Rep. Loren Solberg (D-Grand Rapids) would require six weeks of summer school for students in grades 1-4 to learn a foreign language.  (House File 623).

FREE GED FEES FOR THE “PRECARIOUSLY HOUSED”:  Rep. Frank Hornstein (D-Minneapolis) would waive the test fee for GED tests for persons who are “precariously housed,” without defining the term.  (House File 751)

WILL THERE BE BACKGROUND CHECKS ON THIS?:   Rep. Erin Murphy (D-St. Paul) wants to create grants for “family, friends, and neighbors” to gather pre-school children together to read them books.  (House File 796)

PAY MORE FOR CAR THIEVES AND DWIs IN TWIN CITIES:  Rep. John Lesch (D-St. Paul) would make people in the suburbs and Greater Minnesota pay more for car insurances by forbidding insurance companies to set higher rates for the Twin Cities and any other area where there are more crashes, DWIs, and car thefts.  (House File 53)

SUCH A DEAL!  HE CAN GET IT FOR US AT RETAIL:  Rep. Frank Hornstein (D-Minneapolis) wants road contractors to lose bids unless they are least 10% below the cost of having the work done by DOT employees.  Under the bill, DOT would keep its estimate secret until after private firms had submitted their estimates.  Then, if a private contractor submitted a bid of $900,001 for a contract where the secret DOT bid is $1 million, the Hornstein bill would deny taxpayers a savings of $99,999.  (House File 546)

RE-ARRANGING THE DECK CHAIRS ON THE TITANIC:  Rep. Paul Thissen (D-Minneapolis) wants to define how “licensed interior designers” apply “design theories of human behavior and aesthetics.”  Sadly, the bill defines “human behavior” solely as “the characteristics and behaviors of individuals and groups that relate to the physical environments in which they function, and to the processes of environmental modification and change.”  Some Republicans believe that “human behavior” has more to do with interactions with people, not furniture.  (House File 991)

THIS WILL BE SOME VERY EFFECTIVE WRITING:  Rep. Kim Norton (D-Rochester) wants school boards to write a policy that “ensures” that “parents and caregivers play an integral role in assisting student learning.”  (House File 990)

LANDLORDS ARE PRESUMED GUILTY FOR GANG CRIMES:  Rep. John Lesch (D-St. Paul) would have courts presume that a landlord knew that one member of a criminal gang was using his apartment to take bets over the phone, or take calls for prostitutes, or engage in any other gang activity.  The fact that crimes happened in an apartment would be “prima facie” evidence that the landlord was aware of the crimes. If a judge issues an injunction to the landlord to stop these crimes, and the landlord fails, the punishment would be up to 30 days in jail, a $10,000 fine, or both.  (House File 49)

WE WILL MAKE THEM MAIL IN YOUR REBATE FORM:  Rep. Carolyn Laine (D-Columbia Heights) would make it unlawful for a business to advertise a price that deducts a manufacturer’s rebate “by displaying the net price of the advertised item (the price of the item after the rebate has been deducted from the item's price) in the advertisement, unless the amount of the manufacturer's rebate is provided to the consumer by the retailer at the time of the purchase of the advertised item. It shall be the retailer's burden to redeem the rebate offered to the consumer by the manufacturer.”  Further, it would be “unlawful for any person to refuse to accept a photocopy or other reasonable facsimile of an original sales receipt when a consumer is redeeming a rebate.”  (House File 1104)

WE NEED A NEW FLAG?:  Rep. Tina Liebling (D-Rochester) wants to finance six legislators and whatever persons “who have either technical or artistic skill in flag construction and design” to “study the form, style, and design of the state flag and suggest any desired changes.”  (House File 1385)

PROTECTING THE WRONG PEOPLE:  Rep. John Lesch (D-St. Paul) wants to make it easier for convicts to get jobs, housing, and access to your children.  He has offered House File 1548 to make it easier to expunge the vast majority of criminal convictions or deferred dispositions of criminal cases.  Minnesota has one of the broadest systems of criminal background checks, which would be crippled by wide-scale access to expungement.  Should school bus companies know about DWI convictions?  Should landlords know about deferred sentences on operating meth labs?  Should day care centers know about the real background of potential employees?

ARE DEMOCRATS A CARBON-BASED LIFE FORM?:  Rep. Sheldon Johnson (D-St. Paul) offered a plan to make The State of Minnesota a “carbon neutral” form of government.  (House File 1377).   Now, if he could just do something about hydrogen sulfide.

INCREASE THE SUBSIDY FOR POLITICIANS BY SIXTY PERCENT:  Rep. Steve Simon (D-Minneapolis) wants to increase the “state elections campaign fund” from $1.25 million to $2 million.  (House File 1547)

THE ANTS AND THE GRASSHOPPERS:  Rep. Scott Kranz (D-Blaine) wants to raise taxes on homeowners’ deeds by 66%.  He would then take that money to subsidize the rents of non-homeowners and to build houses or rental units for other people.  (House File 939) *

LENIN IS DEAD, BUT HE IS MAKING A COMEBACK:  Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis) wants judges to decide what is an “unconscionable” price for any good or service during an “abnormal market disruption” and impose fines of up to $35,000 for each sale at whatever might later be found to be an “unconscionable” price.  (House File 740) *

HOW I SPENT YOUR MONEY ON MY SUMMER SESSION:  The Democrats want to eliminate the cap for legislators’ expenses during special sessions.  HF 227 (Phyllis Kahn). *

SEX ED FOR KINDERGARTEN:  Rep. Neva Walker (D-Minneapolis) would authorize school districts to provide Students in K-12 with “age-appropriate materials that address varied societal views on sexuality, sexual behaviors, pregnancy, and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV, in an age-appropriate manner.”  The bill would require such instruction for grades 7-12.  (House File 615). *

PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT:  At the same time that Rep. Tom Huntley is the Chief Author of the bill to legalize the smoking of marijuana (House File 655), he is also the Chief Author of the smoking ban bill for tobacco.  (House File 305) * (One of my personal favorites)

PROVIDING “EMOTIONAL AND SOCIAL WELL-BEING”:  Rep. Tom Tillberry (D-Fridley) offered a bill with a blank check for school districts to hire people to provide for the “emotional and social well-being” of students.  The blank appropriation would pay for more school counselors, social workers, psychologists, nurses, and other “licensed student services personnel.”  (House File 808) *

$5,000 SCHOLARSHIPS FOR BABY-SITTERS:  Rep. David Bly (D-Northfield) wants to provide $5,000 scholarships and $100 bonuses to people who take care of children up to kindergarten age.  The scholarships and one-year completion bonuses would go to “early care and education providers.”  (House File 814) *

KEEPING THE NEST FULL FOR SIX MORE YEARS:  Rep. Diane Loeffler (D-Minneapolis) wants to raise everyone’s insurance costs by requiring all insurance policies to cover all “dependent children” until age 25 on their parents’ policies.  The current law requires coverage only until age 19, unless the “child” up to age 25 is a full-time student.  (House File 475) * 

HERE IS A BONUS FOR HAVING YOUR CAR STOLEN:  Rep. Michael Paymar (D-St. Paul) wants to give you a $500 bonus if your insured car is stolen.  (House File 425) *

UNCLE RALPH IS TOO FAT, BRING IN THE HOIST:  Rep. Patti Fritz (D-Faribault) would require every hospital, clinic, nursing home and medical facility to ban employees from lifting or assisting patients to their feet.  Instead they would have to purchase hoists, “engineering controls, lifting and transfer aids, or mechanical assistive devices.”  Employees could lift patients in an emergency.”  (House File 712) *

WHAT PART OF “VOLUNTEER” IS UNCLEAR?:  Rep. Tom Tillberry (D-Fridley) wants a $2,400 tax break for parents who volunteer at their children’s schools.  (House File 477) *

NO VOTING FOR “AMERICAN IDOL” ON A CELL PHONE:  Rep. Sandy Masin (D-Eagan) wants to ban cell phone companies from charging users for payments to third parties called by the user. The bill would also require the cell company to explain its contracts in writing.  (House File 635).

SMARTER THAN THE AVERAGE BEAR:   The Democrats want to allow metal containers to be used to capture bears, but not if the containers can trap other animals.  Rep. Larry Hosch (D-St. Joseph) offered House File 72. *

YOU’LL FLIP YOUR WIG:  Rep. Frank Hornstein (D-Minneapolis) wants to create a new state bureaucracy to regulate “hair transplant facilities.”  One of the purposes of investigating hair-weave artists is top make sure there is no “conduct which is likely to deceive, defraud, or harm the public.”  (House File 1069)

Since I always think it’s a good idea to see what exactly those pesky devils we elect are up to I’m going to give you a sneak peek into what goes on here in Minnesota. Last election saw the Democrats (Called DFL here Democratic-Farm-Labor) take control of Minnesota State House and Senate. What a wild ride it has been. Thankfully most of the foolishness has been Vetoed by the Governor (or never made it that far), but not all of them. (Statewide smoking ban as an example)

The following are some tidbits that were offered by House Democrats Jan. 8 – March 31 2007. (Note: As far as I know none of these passed. Then again I could be wrong.)Source

GLASS BOTTLES ON BOATS:  Rep. Andy Welti (D-Plainview) wants to impose severe criminal penalties if you “carry, use, or possess” a glass container on a watercraft or along Minnesota’s public waters.  You could get 270 days in jail if you have a picnic on the lake and bring glass bottles of ketchup, mustard, and relish.  If you have a six-pack of Buddy’s Cola from New Ulm on your pontoon boat, you would face 540 days behind bars, because each bottle would be a separate offense under the precise language of the bill.  If you bring a jar of cold cream when you go sunbathing, you could do 90 days for that misdemeanor.  Rep. Welti later said he introduced the bill as an anti-littering proposal, but his bill outlaws mere “possession” of the deadly glass containers. (House File 522) Criminal possession of ketchup?

MY POOR LITTLE PSYCHE WAS BRUISED.  GIVE ME SOME CASH:  Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis) wants to give workers’ comp cash to anybody who claims that work stress somehow their hurt feelings or gave them a “mental injury,” even if there is no physical evidence of such an injury.  (House File 2047)

I HAVE A RIGHT TO USE YOUR NON-PUBLIC RESTROOM:  This is called the “Freedom To Poop Act” by many critics.  You could face a $100 fine if your “retail establishment” has a non-public restroom for employees, and you do not allow anyone to use that restroom if they have floating back teeth, nausea, or the trots.  Rep. Erin Murphy (D-St. Paul) wants to fine firms and employees $100 if they do not let a customer use the firms’ non-public restroom if the customer has any “medical condition that requires immediate access to a toilet facility.”  This could apply to your residential bathroom if you are having a yard sale or running a daycare center, because the bill is so vague.  (House File 1015)

ALLOWING NON-CITIZENS TO VOTE:  Rep. Phyllis Kahn (D-Minneapolis) wants to amend the Minnesota Constitution to allow local governments to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections if they have lived in the community for 30 days.  (House File 1899)

ALLOW 16-YEAR-OLDS TO VOTE IN SCHOOL ELECTIONS:  Rep. Phyllis Kahn (D-Minneapolis) first wanted 16-year-olds to vote in school board elections.  (House File 428)

ALLOW 16-YEAR-OLDS TO VOTE IN ALL STATE AND LOCAL RACES:  Rep. Phyllis Kahn (D-Minneapolis) then decided to expand her earlier efforts and amend the constitution to allow 16-year-olds to vote in all state and local elections.  (House File 630).

TWO DAYS OF PAID LEAVE FOR BOYFRIENDS:  Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis) wants to give up to two days of paid leave each year for “significant others” who live in a household with a child to attend school meetings or deal with student-related meetings.  (House File 744)

 YOU SHOULD HAVE A WRITTEN RIGHT FOR BATHROOM BREAKS:  Rep. Rick Hansen (D-South St. Paul) wants the state to require written policies for employees of meatpackers to provide “adequate time for necessary bathroom breaks.”  The bill would also create a “Meat-Packers’ Bill of Rights,” calling for written job descriptions and written salary descriptions.  The bill would also create a state bureaucracy to guarantee these rights.  (House File 643).

KNOCK, KNOCK!  THE BABY INSPECTORS ARE HERE:  Rep. Carolyn Laine (D-Columbia Heights) would require government investigators to visit every new mother in the hospital or at home to inquire whether they new about all the requirements of a new mother and all the programs that government offers on such topics as WIC, child abuse, and immunizations.  (House File 595)

THE A.G. IS HERE TO SEE IF YOU ARE “SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE”:  Rep. Bill Hilty (D-Finlayson) wants to change business laws to create “socially responsible corporations,” into which the Attorney General may intervene for failure to meet social goals.  (House File 404)

“HELLO!  I AM BAMBI!  I AM YOUR STATE-FUNDED AEROBICS TEACHER!”:  Rep. Bev Scalze (D-Little Canada) wants to authorize cities to provide their city employees with “staff, equipment, and facilities” for “preventive health and employee recognition services.”  Some municipal employees may find new value in the old advice from aerobics instructors:  “And don’t forget to breathe.”  (House File 905)

 BAMBI IS PLACING YOU UNDER “CREATURE ARREST”:  Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis) wants to create a board to provide "environmental justice," which means the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and income in the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws and policies.  (House File 205)

IF BAMBI IS GOING TO ARREST YOU, BAMBI NEEDS A MAP:  First, Rep. Joe Mullery (D-Minneapolis) wanted to create a board to provide "environmental justice," which means the “fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and income in the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws and policies.”  (House File 205).  Now, Rep. Karen Clark (D-Minneapolis) wants Minnesota to seek federal funds to create a map for where you are most likely to be arrested for crimes against “environmental justice.”  (House File 1407).

SHOULDN’T BAMBI STAY AWAY FROM THE ROAD?:  Rep. Rick Hansen (D-South St. Paul) wants $150,000 for “roadsides for wildlife” program.  (House File 1373)

ALLOWING NON-CITIZENS TO VOTE:  Rep. Phyllis Kahn (D-Minneapolis) wants to amend the Minnesota Constitution to allow local governments to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections if they have lived in the community for 30 days.  (House File 1899)

DRAW ME A PICTURE OF HOW TO TAKE OVER YOUR COUNTRY:  Rep. Steve Simon (D-St. Louis Park) wants election precincts to provide pictures of how to vote, along with Election Day registration materials, absentee ballot information, and big posters in foreign languages to get more “citizens” to vote.  (House File 1827)

WE CAN DEPORT YOGI, BUT WE CANNOT DEPORT MURDERS AND RAPISTS:  Rep. Scott Kranz (D-Blaine) wants to allow Metro governments to fund removal of “undesirable” wild animals from the Metro area.  However, over 500 foreign-born felons in the Minnesota correctional system are not deported.  (House File 247)

COME TO AMERICA AND HANG AROUND A HIGH SCHOOL:  Rep. Karen Clark (D-Minneapolis) would allow anyone over the age of 23 to enroll in a high school, even if they are not a resident of the school district or a U.S. citizen. (House File 1176)

ILLEGAL ALIENS TO GET IN-STATE TUITION:  Rep. Carlos Mariani (D-St. Paul) wants illegal aliens to get in-state tuition.  Illegal aliens would get discount tuition if they spent three years in a Minnesota high school, earned a GED, and promised to file to become resident aliens at their earliest possible opportunity.  (House File 722) *

ILLEGAL ALIENS TO GET IN-STATE TUITION; BADGERS TO PAY MORE!:  Rep. Debra Hilstrom (D-Brooklyn Center) wants to give in-state college tuition to illegal aliens who file a paper saying there are applying to legalize their immigration status.  The same bill would raise tuition for students from Wisconsin and some other states, instead of relying on their home states to pay the difference under reciprocity agreements.  (House File 682) *

ILLEGAL ALIENS TO PAY SAME TUITION;  MINNESOTA RESIDENTS HIT:  Rep.  Diane Loeffler (D-Minneapolis) wants to set tuition for MnSCU colleges and universities at the same rate for all students.  Minnesota residents would lose their in-state advantage over both students from other states and illegal aliens.  (House File 1032) *

WELCOME TO AMERICA!  PUT UP YOUR FEET:  The Democrats want to waive the work requirements of welfare programs for immigrants who are getting funds from certain federal programs.  Rep. Cy Thao (D-St. Paul) offered House File 316. *

CASH BONUSES FOR LOW-INCOME ALIENS:  Rep. Steve Simon (D-St. Louis Park) wants to give cash bonuses to illegal aliens.  The bill would create a tax credit for English classes, citizenship classes, and application fees.  If an alien’s tax bill is lower than the cost of these expenses, the bill would give the balance of the credit to the alien in cash.  (House File 747). *

REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IN COURT:  Rep. Cy Thao (D-St. Paul) wants courts to give job preferences to immigrants over citizens when awarding contracts for translators and interpreters.  Should immigrants automatically be presumed to have better English skills than American-born citizens have skills in foreign languages?  (House File 46)

YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE IS GOING UP AGAIN:  Minnesota is always in a race with Maryland to see how many services can be required to be covered by every health insurance policy in the state.  Rep. Maria Ruud (D-Minnetonka) wants every premium payer to cover health insurance coverage to provide foreign language interpreters for each patient in the state.  (House File 1077) *

THIS COULD GIVE TAXPAYERS A TOOTH-ACHE:  Rep. Cy Thao (D-St. Paul) wants to pay for a group of at least 18 members to study whether interpreters should be provided for dentists.  In any language, most dentists know when they have touched a nerve.  (House File 1831) *

RAISE MINIMUM WAGE BY 50% AND PUT IT ON AUTO-PILOT:  Rep. Tom Rukavina (D-Virginia) wants to raise the minimum wage by 50% and put annual increases on auto-pilot with indexing based on urban pay scales, even if the unemployment rate suddenly skyrockets.  (House File 456)

HOW DOES ONE SHAVE A YAK?:  Rep. David Bly (D-Northfield) wants you to pay $125,000 to provide research on what “alternative livestock” could eat grass in Minnesota.  (House File 845)

MOVING CONVICTED PERVERTS TO THE SUBURBS OR SMALL TOWNS:  Rep. John Lesch (D-St. Paul) wants to draw stay-away zones in such a way that large concentrations of convicted Level II and Level III sex offenders in Minneapolis and St. Paul will have to move to the suburbs.  (House File 476)

MORE SOCIAL SPENDING, INSTEAD OF DEBT PAYMENTS:  The City of St. Paul took out huge state loans to build the Xcel Energy Center and the adjoining RiverCentre convention complex.  Now, the city wants to spend money on other things, instead of making its promised payments on the bonds.  Rep. Alice Hausman (D-St. Paul) wants the Legislature to forgive the rest of the $65 million owed to the state on the Xcel arena and the $43 million owed to the state on the convention center.  (House Files 859 and 860)

I’LL BUY THAT CAR FOR $40 MILLION:  Rep. Frank Hornstein (D-Minneapolis) would give you a tax credit for buying an “alternative fuel” car.  If you don’t owe any Minnesota income taxes, the state will pay you the 10% as a cash refund.  The bill has no limit on the 10% credit, the refund, the price of the car, or how long you own it.  You could buy a $40,000 car for $40 million, sell the car back to the dealer for $38 million, and keep $2 million.  What a country!  (House File 1002)

MOVING SLUMS TO THE SUBURBS AND SMALL TOWNS:  “For the purpose of promoting economic diversity throughout Minnesota and to alleviate the concentration of low-income households in high poverty areas,” Rep. John Lesch (D-St. Paul) would create a tax incentive to move more low-income housing to the suburbs and rural communities.  (House File 777)

SEAT BELTS IN ALL SHOPPING CARTS:  Rep. Mike Jaros (D-Duluth) has proposed a requirement that every shopping cart in Minnesota must be equipped with “a strap, device, or piece of equipment designed, using reasonable engineering standards, to prevent a child from falling out of a shipping cart.  This