« BREAKING NEWS: ATTACK MAILING HITS IN HD 28B SPECIAL ELECTION | Home | MDE ON THE RADIO: SHOWTIME! »
MINNESOTA DFL USES GOP CANDIDATE’S FAMILY IN ATTACK MAILING
By Michael B. Brodkorb | July 27, 2007
Please click the images for a larger version.
This is the attack mailing paid for by the Minnesota DFL. I'll have more information on this issue later tonight on Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
UPDATE: I just got off the phone with Steve Drazkowski's campaign manager. She said Drazkowski's daughter (the same daughter mentioned in the above attack mailing) gave his nominating speech at the GOP endorsing convention and that Drazkowski has never missed making a child-support payment.
This mailing is disgusting and it represents a new low in Minnesota politics. I hope the Minnesota DFL is proud.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 147 Comments »
147 Responses to “MINNESOTA DFL USES GOP CANDIDATE’S FAMILY IN ATTACK MAILING”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:11 PM
Wait so had a Democrat candidate not paid child support payments then what? If it’s a lie expose it if not sorry, Minnesota Republicans didn’t do there homework on a candidate just like they didn’t when they endorsed Alan Fine.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:22 PM
Was there anything not true in the mailing? Will there be no mud throwing GOP mailings?
July 27th, 2007 at 8:37 PM
So what part of it is a lie?
Its more solid than anything I’ve seen thrown at Keith Ellison on here (racist, terrorist, infidelity, woman abuser, anti-semite, etc).
Tell us what part is a disgusting lie?
Did he quit his job to run for a 33,000/yr job? Yes.
After quitting his job to run, did he try to get relief from child support payments because he was unemployed? Yes, as if the child needs suddenly were not present.
Has he campaigned on Family Values? Yes.
Seriously, how is this not an issue and how can you defend this guy?
Forgot about us Libs for a moment and tell me, would you have supported this guy to represent the GOP if you had this information on him? If so, then there is a guy named Olson in Big Lake who is going to need your support too.
This is not good for the Caucus overall. You guys didn’t do your homework.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:59 PM
A new low in Minnesota politics?
A little melodramatic, don’t ya think?
There are much worse examples on both sides and we all know it.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:07 PM
The low is Governor Rudy Perpich holding a series of press conferences across Minnesota with the divorce papers of the GOP candidate.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:13 PM
Perpich? When was that? At least 20 years ago?
MB, if this was something that was focusing on the childs action (Grams kid for example) or the wife (like shoplifting) then you’d have a point. But, this is all of HIS actions.
MB, you’re a new father or soon to be, what in the hell did that kid do to deserve her dad trying to legally deadbeat his way out of payments? A piss poor effort too.
The lead is far enough in the House for you guys to give this one up until next year. Can the GOP survive supporting this deadbeat and Olson at the same time?
I wouldn’t want to be in Marty Seifert’s shoes right now.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:15 PM
You are entitled to your opinion. Which apparently has conveniently shifted enough for you to pick up another handful of mud and throw it at a dead guy.
I really don’t think it adds to the discourse.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:23 PM
DJZ”
This wass all brought out in the last election (where Drazkowski won this side of the district against an incumbent senator).
Your defensive response underlines the fact that you feel sick doing this.
Margaret Kelliher’s first political casuality is a teenage girl. Be proud madam Speaker.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:31 PM
I don’t feel sick.
I am confused how this has anything to do with girl.
He’s a snake. How can you defend him?
Are you defending him?
July 27th, 2007 at 10:17 PM
Does this mean that Linda Pfielsticker’s lifestyle is now fair game?
July 27th, 2007 at 10:29 PM
Wow. Why are you Republicans so blind to what ails you?
1. He tried to fraud his way out of child support
payments.
2. He boasts of family values.
See? No one is dragging his kids in this.
No one is questioning his lifestyle choice.
He’s being called out on CHARACTER. Something Conservatives use to claim to care about.
Mike has painted this as an attack on the mans family when in reality he attacked his family and the DFL is highlighting it.
Hearing that this came out last year when he lost is shocking. But, if the republicans endorsed him them they are going to get what they got coming to them- another lost or, another embarrassment which doesn’t lead to more Republicans in the House.
The short term gain is not worth it.
July 27th, 2007 at 10:31 PM
What do you mean by that, Chris? Anti-gay Goedker’s efforts to go after Koering being gay backfired – even among Republican primary voters. He’d have won that primary if he’d focused on Koering’s liberal voting record on a number of issues (especially health care).
July 27th, 2007 at 10:33 PM
Eva,
Are you saying Linda Pfielsticker is gay?
July 27th, 2007 at 10:41 PM
This wasn’t Kelliher, it was the DFL that paid for this – and this mailing is trash – even though technically true. Brian Melendez should be ashamed.
July 27th, 2007 at 10:42 PM
P.S. Eva, Last I checked Sen. Koering is an endorsed Republican.
July 27th, 2007 at 10:44 PM
“This wasn’t Kelliher, it was the DFL that paid for this…”
Eva, you’re smarter than that. You know that the caucuses run their mailings through the parties during special elections. In fact, last year, one caucus ran every mailing through the DFL even though they in fact created the mailings and transferred funds to pay for them.
July 27th, 2007 at 10:51 PM
From Lloydletta:
Pfielsticker is in her mid thirties and single. It would be fairly stupid – and would backfire – for the State Republican Party to run such a campaign.
I find no comparison to someone being gay, and someone being a deadbeat dad (which was the claim in the DFL mailing).
I guess Eva is saying she is gay.
July 27th, 2007 at 11:17 PM
the attack ad does seem kind of low but i find it pretty justifiable
July 27th, 2007 at 11:18 PM
The Democrat’s rush to the gutter should not give the GOP the license to do the same with Ms. Pfeilsticker’s private life. Leave it be.
Get back to the issues. Pfeilsticker is a non starter in Steve Sviggum’s district. She will raise taxes. She will vote for Minneapolis and the unions every time.
July 27th, 2007 at 11:26 PM
purplebluedog,
I agree with you except that it’s interesting that when it’s a Republican they have no private life. Their spouses and minor children are fair game. But when someone even hints at examining the DFL candidate’s private life (not even knowing what a firestorm this would create thanks to Eva Young), people go berzerk. All I know is that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones and if the DFL wants to go down this road, they had better be prepared for what happens when their candidate has to stand up to scrutiny.
July 27th, 2007 at 11:31 PM
P.S. I know MNPublius ran an article touting an ad child pornographer and mysoginist Larry Flynt ran in the Washington Post offering a cash reward on anyone who can provide information on a politician who has had improper sexual relationships. Again, if the Democrats want to cash in on this kind of gutter politics, they better be careful what they wish for.
July 28th, 2007 at 12:51 AM
Liberals can’t win on issues and they have no ideas. They have to resort to slanderous lies. Think of the poor example that lying liberal Linda is to the children she teaches. Shame on her.
July 28th, 2007 at 5:16 AM
The term “deadbeat” normally refers to someone not reporting income. Your crossing a huge line when you say that someone has an obligation to work. Winning an election would concievably increase income and thus child support.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:32 AM
The guy has never missed a child support payment.
The ad is a lie.
Kelliher, Melendez, Pfeilsticker all owe everyone an apology for dragging a 16-year-old girl into such a disgusting campaign attack.
Candidates everywhere beware: The Minnesota DFL has their sights set on attacking your family if that’s what it takes for them to win. Hell, even the mafia left families alone. Not the DFL. Nothing is sacred to them, not when it stands in the way of higher taxes, more welfare and trasit boondoggles.
Disgusting.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:36 AM
So tell me if I got this straight, Mike, Tim and DJZ. Two lawyers, Brian Melendez and David J Ziegler with the DFL, alone decide what is an appropriate caucus mailing and what isn’t?
And then as the mailing goes out, David hurries over to the comments section of the local blog to try to obscure the simple responsibility for the attack?
Nothing sleazy in that, I guess. If you’re with the DFL. A little transparency would be nice.
Let’s turn our back on the DFL, who in this election, are hoping an entire family, not just one man, are deprived of the money that goes along with the responsibility of governing this great state.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:54 AM
Is Drazkowski’s daughter going to be left destitute if a few child support payments are reduced? Will it make the difference between her going to college or living on the street?
The legislature is a PART TIME job. He hasn’t resigned from his position at Whitetails Unlimited (Cool Job) he has taken a leave of absence. If he should win the special election he will still presumably keep his position. He may even have to increase his support payments because he has additional income.
The ad is a personal smear. Just another example of the DFL engaging in the “Politics of personal destruction”.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:09 AM
I could very easily name 15 Democrats currently serving in the MN House and Senate who have no other job than being a career politician. I believe that might include the Speaker of the House as well.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:16 AM
I am not saying Pfeilsticker is gay – I have no idea whether she is or not (and I don’t care) – she is in her 30s and is single.
Stephanie Herseth – congresswoman in SD is in her late 30s and is single – and is most certainly straight – in fact there were gossip items about her shacking up with a married congressman. Herseth was a big supporter of the Federal Marriage Amendment.
http://lloydletta.blogspot.com/2005/03/democratic-marriage-protection.html
I’m saying that gay baiting tactics will backfire – even in that district. If the State Republican Party does gay baiting mailings in that district, it will hurt the Republican brand state wide.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Actually, all the accusations against Keith Ellison “(racist, terrorist, infidelity, woman abuser, anti-semite, etc)” are well founded and backed by solid evidence…. He is supported by terrorist-backers, he did cheat on his wife, he did attack his girlfriend, he did host and promote anti-Semitic speakers at the U of M and as a leader in the radical racist organization Nation of Islam. These are all irrefutable facts.
Back to the matter at hand. On the face of it, this add appears not only to be disgusting, but a disgusting, bald-faced lie.
It doesn’t surprise me a bit that a bunch of liberal clowns would justify it here. They justify everything the lying, coward, immoral, unethical Democrat party does.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Eva,
I’m pretty sure you said Linda Pfielsticker was gay on your web site. Maybe you want to correct that information. Also, Stephanie Herseth is in fact married to Max Sandlin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Herseth_Sandlin
July 28th, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Baggage is baggage. This is simply a poor candidate, not one that the party can point to with pride in the character of the individual. A better candidate was available but lost on the second ballot.
Given that, if he does not win by 3 to 1 over a geewhiz neophyte in a far far right district held for years by the former speaker he should join Algore in the great-collapse hall of fame.
“(Drazkowski) is a guy who’s just disgruntled. He makes me nervous, but what do you do?â€
–Sen. Dick Day (R-Owatonna).
July 28th, 2007 at 10:55 AM
She wasn’t when she started shacking up with him. The marriage came later.
I did NOT say Pfielsticker is gay – because I have no idea whether she is or not. I said she was single and in her 30s. Someone does not have to be gay to have a gay baiting campaign used against them.
Herseth was single and in her 30s when she first ran for congress – this piece quotes Roll Call.
http://lloydletta.blogspot.com/2005/03/democratic-marriage-protection.html
July 28th, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Eva,
Stephanie is married to former Texas Congressman Max Sandlin, hence her name Herseth-Sandlin. Herseth’s family name has been huge in South Dakota for about three generations. http://hersethsandlin.house.gov/
Just Sayin,
If you have proof that there was any coordination between the party, the caucus and/or the candidate’s campaign then you’d best come forward with it. We’ve handed hundreds of thousands in fines to the Republicans for doing the same since Pawlenty broke the rules in August ’02. This would be your chance to show the DFL is breaking the campaign finance laws just like the Republicans.
Chestnut,
Your ‘irrefutable facts’ were in reality refuted by the Minneapolis Police, press, FBI, history and the voters.
I don’t understand this line “It doesn’t surprise me a bit that a bunch of liberal clowns would justify it here. They justify everything the lying, coward, immoral, unethical Democrat party does.”— What was it you wrote about name calling being a substitute for ideas when you’re void of them?
Jay,
His family is not brought into this, only his attempt to weasel out of child support payments- NOT reduce them or delay payments but, WEASEL out of them.
That’s the picture of family values. Draz and Mark Olson is going to raise a lot of money for the DFL House Caucus next year.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Chris: The marriage occurred in March 2007 – so I was unaware of that. I just knew they were shacking up – as reported in Roll Call – and the question was, was this shacking up part of what caused Sandlin’s divorce? Sandlin was another Federal Marriage Amendment supporting Democrat. It’s interesting how many of these supporters of “traditional marriage” seem to live in glass houses.
I’ve clarified on my blog. I was assuming that your reference to “lifestyle” meant “gay” – that’s generally the way I hear people try to suggest someone is gay without directly doing so. You don’t hear about the divorced “lifestyle” or the “heterosexual lifestyle” – just the “gay lifestyle” or the “lifestyle.”
Draz does appear to support the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Eva,
I think you protest too much.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Jay, JS, MB, Chestnut, Chris, and whomever,
Were you all this upset with the Republican hit piece on Draz from the Republican side? I do believe it was a bit more personal. I’m sure you wrote the Party on stated how you won’t have this.
You did, didn’t you?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Here’s my question – why didn’t the DFL just reprint the Republican hit piece against Draz – that made the same point? Then include Dick Day’s quote about Draz.
It all seems like a missed opportunity.
I think this piece is the worst in politics – it might be technically accurate, but it’s the lowest common denominator. I would feel differently if the DFL wanted to use this, why not point out some hypocrisy in issue positions – rather than just point out the guy requested to have his child support obligations reduced when he didn’t have an income source. Draz does support the Bachmann amendment to ban gay marriage. Did the possibility of gays getting marriage cause his own marriage to end in divorce?
There were even worse – and in this case, inaccurate nasty pieces that went out against Pam Wolf who ran against Don Betzold. Why not run on the issues?
On Herseth’s marriage – that was recent – in March 2007, and I was unaware of it. I still stand by my statement that Herseth and Sandlin are hypocrites – when it comes to their support of the Federal Marriage Amendment or state marriage amendments, just as there are many Republican Hypocrites – David Vitter and Mark Olson for example. Does Sandlin think gays caused his marriage to break up?
July 28th, 2007 at 12:04 PM
DJZ,
“Your ‘irrefutable facts’ were in reality refuted by the Minneapolis Police, press, FBI, history and the voters.”
Which part of the police report was refuted? The FBI refuted nothing. And whether a bunch of mindless 5th CD Democrat voters selected the diversity candidate over the qualified candidate bears not on the fact that Keith Ellison is a racists, anti-Semitic, hate-mongering, terrorist loving, girl-friend abusing asshole.
The facts are irrefutable, whether you bothered to read them or not.
BTW — I never said anything about name calling, you piece of pig shit.
July 28th, 2007 at 12:19 PM
More than anything, the next election is 15 months away. It’s more than a little early to be diving this deep in to the DJZ (aka pig shit).
Again, I expect it to some degree from Democrats. The lowest common denominator is the DFL base. Liberals thrive on emotion and ignorance. Racing to the bottom is what they do.
July 28th, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Eva,
Why out Pfielsticker? I personally don’t care about her sexual preference as long as it does not involve children and livestock. You should be ashamed of yourself. But then again, you are a liberal.
July 28th, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Ok…everybody write something nice about the person you’re attacking. Chestnut, write something about DJZ. DJZ, you write something nice about Chestnut.
Folks, I know the debates get heated, but let’s try and focus our comments on the issue.
I’ll be discuss this attack mailing on my radio show starting at 3:00 p.m..
July 28th, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Eva, I thought you knew more about politics. Lost opprotunity? Mark my words, the Dick Day quote (and more) are coming. Direct mail is about a series of ads, that together, tell a story. By the time this is done, Draz is going to be embarrassed to leave the house and go to Dairy Queen. Who is this attorney David J Ziegler that is supposedly writing this lit? WTF?
Draz has so much baggage he has to buy two tickets to fit it all in the overhead binds. He is bad news and has no business in the legislature. His “family values” views open him up to this line of attack.
July 28th, 2007 at 1:01 PM
LOL… o.k…. DJZ has a wonderful imagination.
July 28th, 2007 at 1:41 PM
Thanks Chestnut.
July 28th, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Fine…Chestnut is a good loyal soldier for his side.
Jason,
I’m not writing anything for the DFL or have I wrote any lit for the DFL. I don’t know Brian Melendez.
July 28th, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Wait!!!!
Why do I have to say something nice about Chestnut? I didn’t direct any attack against him. Now I have a freebie.
July 28th, 2007 at 2:41 PM
I hope some of you will call in starting at 3 p.m. @ 651 289-4488. This attacking mailing is disgusting.
July 28th, 2007 at 3:39 PM
That’s nonsense – I didn’t out Pfielsticker. If you read what I wrote, I pull quoted Chris’s comment about Pfielsticker’s “lifestyle” – and commented that trying to gay bait as a campaign tactic is a poor tactic. Someone doesn’t have to be gay to be gay baited.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:21 PM
Fathers, let this be a warning. If you were ever to divorce, don’t think of changing jobs. According to this hit piece, if your pay should ever drop -even for a short time-the DFL will label you a child abuser. As if a single mother would ever have to worry in this “welfare for all” state.
July 28th, 2007 at 5:11 PM
Great show Michael! We need a transcript of your shows. You were awesome.
The best lines:
Don’t talk to me about concerns for children, DFL.
You just dragged a 16 year girl into partisan politics.
Don’t talk to me ever again on the house floor, Margaret Kelliher, that you are concerned with the children of this state.
Repudiate this disgusting DFL Lit Peice, Larry Pogemiller.
The DFL parade themselves around as defenders of vulnerable children and families.
No no – not any more –
If they were legitimately concerned about children they would never have divided Steve Drazkowski’s family and sent out this lit peice.
Gary at http://therevolutionwillbeblogged.blogspot.com called in:
Taryl Clark won’t show up on talk radio.
Patty Wedderling wouldn’t show up for the Commerce Dept debates with Binkowski and Bachmann.
Now Linda Pfielsticker won’t show up at a Tax Payers League forum and spends only a small amount of time at a transportation debate.
Draz himself called in and expressed frustration at Linda’s failing to show up and seriously debate.
You may not know Brian Melendez of the DFL, DJZ, but the DFL disclaimer is on the mail peice. Do you know Donna Cassutt of the DFL?
Drew Emmer had a great insight that Lori Swanson’s husband is a competitor to the firm she is suing http://wrightrepublican.blogspot.com/2007/07/those-insurance-companies-are-delicious.html.
DJZ doesn’t deny he is David Jay Ziegler, “P.J.†as he said last year:
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/09/26/mde-exclusive-discovery-of-secret-hatch-slush-fund-6/#comment-17515
DJZ = David Jay Ziegler, “P.J.â€
Call me Jay.
Comment by DJZ — September 26, 2006 @ 2:25 pm
And DJZ does not deny he supports this anti-Draz mailing. DJZ sounds like a DFL attorney from the suits against republicans that “we handled”.
We need accountability in the DFL. WHO APPROVED THIS MAILING? Why are you defending it?
Let Melendez and the person who wrote it appear here. Brian Melendez knows who wrote it.
July 28th, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Great radio show today. This story deserves wide attention.
What in the world happened to the once-great DFL?
July 28th, 2007 at 5:29 PM
Nobody who advocates and promotes abortion can call themselves “as defenders of vulnerable children.”
The DFL hasn’t had any credibility on that score for a very, very long time — regardless of what the lying thieves say.
July 28th, 2007 at 5:58 PM
So you think the DFL is implying he should be shot based on that picture? Have you considered taking a little break from politics. It’s pretty clear you have lost all ability to be rational. If the Democrats are wrong in this case show them up by not doing the same to Democrats. Anyone that files for political office knows what there getting into until one side is ready to stop the BS there are no innocent victoms.
It’s politics and god damn it Michael you know it better then anyone else so don’t cry and while for an hour on the radio about how horrible it is. You make your paycheck off the same BS you are if it ever stopped you would be looking for a new line of work, one where you actually contribute something to society.
You have the gall to accuse the DFL of putting his head in a scope based on that? How dare you.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Mike: It looks like a scope to me…and it’s targeted at Drazkowski’s head.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:13 PM
Eva,
For the last time, I never said anything about Linda Pfielsticker being gay. I said that if the DFL wants to attack Drazkowski and his family (including his minor daughter) they ought to be careful because their candidate may have something in her lifestyle that could be fair game. I don’t even know the woman Eva, how could I know whether she is gay or not. Had I wanted to say she was gay, I would have used the word “alternative” lifestyle or something to that effect. You wrote on your website something about her being gay. Now you say you don’t know whether she is gay or not. I just find it interesting how you’ve defended this woman since she first got the DFL endorsement, in light of the fact that GLBT politics is pretty much your single issue.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Understandably if you shot a bullet directly at the center of that circle you would hit him in the head, and graffics of scopes do usually have a circle and tend to be aimed at the head. but graffics of scopes also have little lines. On the radio you said it was clear who the piece was reffering to and yeah an intelligent person should be able to figure it out, but it is not new to highlight the image of the guy your focusing on, and I know you know that.
Bottom line we can make stuff up as to accuse the DFL of doing something horrifying, or we can get real and simply see a piece that doesn’t benifit the GOP and thus bothers partisans such as yourself who know that this sort of thing works
July 28th, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Mike: Not all scopes have little lines. The circle is focused on Drazkowski’s head and it has the appearance of a scope.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:22 PM
Michael is right and since the Democrats are the ones making assassination “jokes” about President Bush and Vice President Cheney on their web sites and in movies, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:31 PM
It’s a pretty far stretch to think that that circle is a “scope”… I think the piece is disgusting enough, without making up reasons to be outraged.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Chris – I did NOT write she was gay, I wrote your quote (which I interpreted as you making the inuendo that she was gay), and said it would be a campaign tactic that would backfire.
Also, I don’t know the woman, so have no knowledge of whether she is gay or not. She is single. Her website isn’t very detailed about what her issues are.
Steve Drazoski’s endorsements are mostly from anti-immigrant groups – the Minutemen for example.
Draz was claiming on your show Michael that he doesn’t take PAC support. His website disputes that:
Organizations
* Republican Party of Minnesota
* Minnesota Minuteman Project (MINNSIR)
* USA Border Alert
* EdAction
* Right to Keep and Bear Arms Sportsman’s Club (Rollingstone area)
* Twin Cities Republican Association
* MInnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL)
* CCRN-PAC
It will be interesting to look at campaign finance reports from both campaigns to see how much of their money comes from within the district.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:37 PM
I’ll be the first to say the way liberals act towards Bush and Cheney is beyond scary,unfortanatly it seems they are simply uping the anti from the treatment Republicans gave Clinton. Ultimatly this kind of mainstream hate is going to get a president killed. I respect my president, the time not to respect them if they deserve not to be respected is during the election process.
A couple basic questions.
Is it common practice in negitive political ads to highlight the focus of attack?
When highlighting a person what shape is generally used?
What body part is usually focused in on?
I don’t think the answers are no triangle and knee’s but thats just me. Assusing your political opponents of pointing a gun at a candidates head even if it’s simply implied to me isn’t the sort of thing you do simply because it sort of kinda looks like it could be. If there is further evidence to suggest that they are having a good laugh at the DFL offices about the scope they intentially created then they should have hell to pay, but I just don’t see anything out of the ordinary here.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:38 PM
Eva, the Minutemen are a far cry from “anti-immigrant”. Demanding the U.S. enforce immigration laws and secure its borders is not the same as being anti-immigrant… it’s being anti ILLEGAL immigrant.
And it’s fair to want to keep invaders and criminals out of our country.
My guess is you know the difference.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:39 PM
Grimes,
“If the Democrats are wrong in this case show them up by not doing the same to Democrats”
Okay. Draz does not retaliate and republicans look good. Great.
Then you say: “this sort of thing works”
Which is it?
July 28th, 2007 at 6:40 PM
Eva,
You talk about innuendo. Drazkowski is not, in fact, taking PAC dollars. There is a difference between endorsements from issue advocacy groups and taking PAC money from special interests like Education Minnesota. What will be interesting to see is how much money Education Minnesota spends on Pfielsticker. My guess will be somewhere in the neighborhood of $200,000
July 28th, 2007 at 6:41 PM
P.S. Eva,
You did write:
I find no comparison to someone being gay, and someone being a deadbeat dad (which was the claim in the DFL mailing).
So yeah you did say Pfielsticker was gay.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:02 PM
My last few comments on this post were flagged as spam. Hopefully this one will go through.
First: Michael, you’ve used children in political attacks on the pages of this blog. Less than a year ago, you posted 911 call records regarding children in front of Keith Ellison’s home. Perhaps we could say you were for using children to attack candidates before you were against it?
Second: This sniper scope business is pathetic. You’re supposed to be a campaign professional, but this is bush league material on the best of days. Just in case you don’t remember, a web ad attacking Denise Dittrich that you posted on your YouTube account and promoted on this blog features the same imagery you are now attempted to “expose.” For your reference, here is a screenshot of the relevant portion of the video: http://img524.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dittrichscopekt6.jpg
As long as we’re on the subject of “new lows,” I think most of us can easily agree that your latest attacks are a new low in your political career.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:03 PM
Folks, I would estimate that I have see over 1000 campaign literature pieces in my life. I have never seen a literature piece with light circle focused on a candidate’s head. It has the appearance of a scope. I ask: what is the reason for the circle on his head?
July 28th, 2007 at 7:06 PM
mrw,
Where is the scope shot on Dittrich’s head? I do not see one.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Chris: Perhaps you should actually look at the image. It is plainly obvious that there is a circle around Dittrich’s head which is lighter than the surrounding area, the same visual technique used in the anti-Drazkowski mailer.
Michael, the purpose of the circle is to draw attention to the candidate in the photograph used in the mailer. Your ignorance game wouldn’t fool a toddler.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:13 PM
I don’t see it either. Another false attack from Minnesota Republican Watch.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:15 PM
I can’t believe a leftist elite like Eva would resort to Gay bashing. That’s really tragic, even for a lefty.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:17 PM
I also posted a public document. I said there were two sides to every story and I would provide Ellison’s campaign an opportunity to respond. The DFL mailing is disgusting. This isn’t even apples and oranges…this is apples and automobiles.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:17 PM
mrw, are you kidding? Is that some kind of a joke?
Comparing this ad to a MDE Post regarding a 911 call about Ellison’s kids being left outside in the freezing cold?
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/08/30/mde-exclusive-911-call-to-report-kids-at-ellisons-house-left-outside-in-the-cold/
That’s hardly using children in a political attack. And you have to be out of your lunatic mind to think so.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:22 PM
Chestnut: I think he is joking. I posted a publicly available document and I provided Ellison’s campaign with an opportunity to discuss it. What the DFL did is disgusting.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:24 PM
Given the fact that the only individuals in the foreground of the photo on the lit piece are a man, a woman, and a child, there is no rational reason to highlight the head of the man, Drazkowski, because the reader would assume that’s who the lit piece refers to.
Scope it is.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:33 PM
I’ll have a new post up on this subject soon.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:46 PM
I think we can have lots of fun with this all circles are scopes theory.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:51 PM
By the way it’s really really dumb to say the circle is a scope because of the fact the reader would be aware who the focus was on.
Simple question if the messege was this guy turned his back on this girl why did they use a photo where his face was slightly tilted toward the camara?
July 28th, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Simple question if the messege was this guy turned his back on this girl why did they use a photo where his face was slightly tilted toward the camara?
Probably because whomever the DFL/House caucus paid to stalk Drazkowski like paparazzi wasn’t able to get the money shot so they had to use what the person was able to take.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:09 PM
But wait since they were planning on putting a scope on his head wouldn’t they want to show his face so that it would be clear who the DFL wanted to see murdered?
If you all want to run with the scope theory go for it, go for it big time. If you think someone in the DFL wants him dead get him some police protaction and get the investigation started so whoever it is that did this gets what they have coming.
You don’t get to make this outragous claim for political purposes, and then do nothing for it outside of politics. Treat this as seriuse as you make it out to be or shut the hell up about it.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:17 PM
Mike: It has the appearance of a scope.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:37 PM
Chris: P.S. Eva,
You did write:
I find no comparison to someone being gay, and someone being a deadbeat dad (which was the claim in the DFL mailing).
So yeah you did say Pfielsticker was gay.
EY: I said that, but I did not say that Pfielsticker is gay. I was responding to your “lifestyle” remark – which I interpreted as making the claim that Pfielsticker was gay.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:46 PM
Michael don’t play dumb as an attempt to cover what you now realize was an outragously moronic thing to accuse the DFL of.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:50 PM
It’s going to be important to scrutinize the campaign finance reports of both candidates. It’s interesting to note that the Chamber of Commerce isn’t listed as a Draz endorsement – rather the groups that endorsed him are extreme – especially EdAction and the Minutemen.
This is definitely a follow the money race.
You are absolutely correct on Education Minnesota et al – they will be in Pfielsticker’s report – and will be doing independent expenditures for her.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:16 PM
Eva,
I never said she was gay and I still think you said that she was. I guess we’ll just have to leave it up to Larry Flynt to figure it out then. MNPublius is advocating using his million dollar reward line to collect information about political candidates and politicians. Since they think it’s so cute to be in bed with Larry Flynt, maybe they will find out how cute it really is.
http://mnpublius.com/2007/07/not-sayin-but-just-sayin/
July 28th, 2007 at 9:35 PM
[...] By Michael B. Brodkorb | July 28, 2007 This above picture is from an attack mailing paid for by the Minnesota DFL. The target of the mailing is the GOP endorsed candidate in the HD 28B special election, Steve Drazkowski. During today's radio show, Drew Emmer and I said the circle looked like a scope focused on Drazkowksi's head. This comment was left on Minnesota Democrats Exposed: [...]
July 28th, 2007 at 9:43 PM
Just Sayin,
So, you’re now resorting to the ol’ outing a person you don’t like. I’m sure Mr. and Mrs (or Mr in your case) ‘Sayin’ named you ‘Just’.. And, now that you know, call me JAY!
This ‘angry man’ Drazkowski (Republican Dick Day’s words not mine) seemed to have put running for office (not serving but just running) above the monthly support payments that he was court ordered to pay. You can’t do that, and run on family values.
Let’s talk about bringing the kids into this.
He was the one who had his daughter give an interview to the press last year after the other allegations came forward. He also had her give the nominating speech at the convention. Fine. Don’t complain when the story gets out that he hasn’t always done right by the kids. Unlike him, the DFL is not sticking a camera or microphone in the kid’s face.
MB is reaching and not this simple minded when it comes to his face being highlighted. Its a highlight exactly the same that is used in hundreds of the grainy negative ads on tv. I remember one when Linda whatever-her-name was running against Betty McCollum. The tv ad spoke on good things about Linda in full color and normal movement. When it switched to talking about McCollum, it suddenly went dark black and white, the picture was jerky, a gong sounded in the background, Betty was shown in session at an angle that made her look both pregnant and mean-faced. It highlighted her face with the same kind of circle shaded lighter.
Its done for effect, not symbolism.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:57 PM
DJZ,
Wouldn’t you admit that the problem should have been between parent and child. If the child and parent have since resolved whatever the problem was, as in the case of Steve Drazkowski and his daughter, should the opposition be using the daughter for political gain? Honestly, I think the DFL is exploiting the minor child for political purposes against her father. To me, that is completely out of bounds.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:58 PM
P.S. DJZ,
Prove that Steve Drazkowski has not done right by his daughter. If you talked to Steve’s daughter (or his other relatives for that matter) I don’t think you would be able to support that statement.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:17 PM
Chris – You used the term “lifestyle” (a term I detest when used to refer to gays btw) – but a term I often have seen as code words to refer to gay people. I’ll take you at your word, that’s not what you meant. You can think all you want, that I stated that Pfielsticker is gay – the fact is, I did not state that.
http://www.draz.com/stock/Steve%20Drazkowski.mp3
July 28th, 2007 at 10:22 PM
While I understand the highlighted area is for effect and not a scope (my previous comment was in jest — for effect), I find it bizarre the need to highlight his head when he, a woman, and a child are the only individuals in the foreground.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:26 PM
Wtm: It has the appearance of a scope.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:36 PM
Eva may have outed Pfielsticker, “Sticky” for short, preemptively.
Sticky has no record whatsoever. If elected, she would be nothing more than another Education Minnesota sock puppet.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:39 PM
What makes it ok for Eva to “out” a DFLer?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:44 PM
How can Pfielsticker represent my family when she doesn’t have a husband and children? Maybe the Draz campaign should put out a smear mailing asking the same question.
I’m sure DFLers would be ok with that.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:53 PM
Michael it appears to be a scope, what are you going to do about it?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:33 PM
The problem here is between Draz and the government. .
Speaking of representing and real jobs. The GOP House Leader has been taking from tax payers since he was 18, how can he fight for smaller government when he went to a government subsidized state u or subsidized student loans and federal grants? he then went on the government dole by teaching for a couple of years and then ran for office. True Republican.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:04 AM
I think it may be a halo around his head (being he is such an angelic guy!).
July 29th, 2007 at 1:39 AM
Wow this is up there right with the GOP mailing criticizing an unpaid volunteer for Coleen Rowley’s campaign last year. Both the DFL and MnGOP should be proud that these mailings will definitely encourage people to want to get into politics.
July 29th, 2007 at 8:17 AM
Barack Thompson
Someone on the DFL needs to rebuke this ad for there to be any progress. It doesn’t do any good to call out the GOP on 6 month old ads. We need a response NOW from the DFL.
We’re tired of the whole manufactured outrage style of Minnesota campaigns. This is a perfect example of manufactured outrage.
It differs from the Left’s manufactured news articles (even legitimate news sites like Huffington Post have featured one or two) only in the focus. Both are calculated lies as this case demonstrates.
Draz did not turn his back on his daughter.
That’s just a lie.
We caught the DFL finally. The DFL has been doing this deceitful calculated lying for years in campaigns.
As for the highlight having an appearance of a scope Grimes and DJZ you just don’t know if the similarity is deliberate or where they got the
idea to use a rifle scope highlight.
Brian Melendez is the only one who knows. We need a response from Brian Melendez or Donna Cassutt either defending this or explaining it.
“The problem is between Draz and the government”
Give it up already DJZ
July 29th, 2007 at 9:13 AM
Brian Melendez does know but he sure as hell ain’t gonna tell you what you might like to think.
This is a really really big deal, if it is what you imply it might be then it’s a death threat. Until I hear otherwise I’m assuming that those making the scope accusation, are not seriuse enough to take it to that level, and if thats the case then it is crystal clear that those making the accusation know they are full of BS.
This is well beyond the scope (ha,ha what a great pun by me)of politics. Not everything in life is about poloiics. If you believe Brian Melendez is making a death threat then the time for politics was over yesterday, the time for dealing with the death threat is now.
July 29th, 2007 at 9:57 AM
My hubby and I are both veterans. Neither of us thinks the cycle looks particularly like a rifle scope type image.
As my hubby put it, the reason they highlighted the only male in the picture is because the people who vote DFL are stupid and need the simplest things highlighted in crayon.
July 29th, 2007 at 10:53 AM
I too hunt and have never seen or used a scope like this. I believe Honeydog hit it on the head.
Look at hideous GOP mailers from the Sviggum/Carey election last November. You will find many examples that were much worse than this and that were much more full of BS than this.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:01 PM
I’m just happy the DFL is wasting money on this race. Every dollar they spend in this un-winnable election, is another dollar they can’t use to attack Coleman, defeat Kline, or protect all the freshman DFL’ers in the legislature. Spend away DFL.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:26 PM
I went to your site Mike Grimes.
Interesting that a wannabe moderate is revealed as a Lefty. Just like Flash at Centrisity.com, Jeff Fecke at moderateleft.com, Neil Krasnoff at loyalopposition.com, Mike Grimes aspires to be moderate but is quickly shown how insider left he is. You and the others aboard the Lost Flying Dutchman you call the DFL can take a flying leap.
Brodkorb and I both observe the highlight resembles a rifle scope. My accusation, if any, is the DFL deliberately used a highlight which
resembles a rifle scope. What response do we expect from Melendez? Well any civilized professional responds to this type of concern with sincerity. So let’s wait and see what his response is shall we? He probably won’t choose to use your beligerent response. It’s funny – I
thought you were practiced in the role of counsel for issues you feel passionately about like this.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:32 PM
You had a second post on this topic that highlighted the scope claim. Now the post is down. Why?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:34 PM
It is easy to know when Brian Melendez is lying. His moving lips are a dead giveaway.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:34 PM
If you are following this race, you will see that the Pfeilsticker side refuses to bring forth where she stands on the issues. Drazkowski has been releasing where he stands on the issues.
http://www.draz.com/news.php
The DFL knows they will lose on the issues so they throw dirt.
The undecided voters I have talked to in the district have found this mailing very distubing, and it has convinced them to vote for Drazkowski.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Eva,
Why did you find it necessary to out Pfielsticker?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Liberals have learned long ago that telling the voters exactly where they stand on the issues gets them nowhere. Fast.
Stupid legislation like banning glass containers and forcing small business to open up their bathrooms to the public as well as raising taxes on anything that moves is not a platform middle class folk would rally behind. That’s why they throw the terms “moderate” and “bipartisan” around. Their aim is to deceive the electorate. Plain and simple.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:41 PM
Pfielsticker stands for whatever the DFL leadership tells her to stand for.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Does it seem odd that a person of her age still lives with mommy and daddy, then thinks she can help run the state.
She should learn how to live on her own and stop leeching off her parents.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:54 PM
I’m pretty sure I got accused of supporting Sue Jeffers the other day, but hey I’m a lefty. Might want to check out my comment on the most recent post. Thats right if David Strom ran for mayor of Minneapolis I would vote for him. Just saying you are in so deep you can’t even see right in front of you.
I hate Democrats, I hate unions, I hate increasing budgets. I hate politicions who think it is their duty to solve all of lifes problems. yeah sure I’m in favor of gay marraige but then again I’m pretty damn sure gay people have gay sex from time to time regarless of the legal deffinition of their relationship so what the hell difference does it make?
You got me buddy, I’m a leftaholic. By the way did you see any Democrats pointing guns at Republicans heads today, as party chair Brian Melendez clearly is encouraging them to do?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Pfielsticker would represent people who are in their thirties and still live with mommy and daddy well.
Unfortunately for her, most people in the district are raising families and have nothing in common with them. Middle class families and the DFL have nothing in common.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Pfielsticker would represent people who are in their thirties and still live with mommy and daddy well.
Unfortunately for her, most people in the district are raising families and have nothing in common with them. The goals of the DFL (i.e. high taxes and government control of everything) are incompatible with middle class family values of industry and personal responsibility.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:23 PM
?
You’re all that yet you support garbage anti-Draz ads put out anonymously by the DFL. If the Briggs and Morgan picture of you is recent I can tell you your problem Mike. You curry the respect of the DFL leaders and concede to them the hit machine that they’ve run for years. I don’t want to hear another story of how an insider DFLer is fighting for Pro-Life, fiscal responsibilty, open shops, or moderate social issues yet remain staunch supporters of the DFL. I’m sick of it you hypocrite. Condemn the ad.
July 29th, 2007 at 4:17 PM
Just Sayin’,
You are out of luck, buddy. Smear and character assassination is all the DFL counts on to win elections these days.
July 29th, 2007 at 5:11 PM
We haven’t even won yet, and you guys are conceding. I expect the name calling and whining from Republicans but, I never thought I’d see the day you all become quitters.
I guess that election cycle whipping from last year is still smarting.
July 29th, 2007 at 5:14 PM
I have to laugh at Eva. She is outraged that someone would use the word “lifestyle”. Where is her outrage against the Christian bigots? Oh, she not only doesn’t condemn them but participates in sites that are anti-Christian. Eva, want to discuss Michele Bachman?
July 29th, 2007 at 6:15 PM
DJZ,
The liberal jig is up, fool.
BTW, what does Pfielsticker stand for? Has the DFL leadership bothered to tell her what to believe yet or are they too busy concocting a dirty campaign?
July 29th, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Wow, I check in on MDE and see a thread with 119 posts. Intersting items/
cash-n-cary, good point. Recall last year when the DFLers said Bachmann wasn’t fit to be a congressman because she belong to the Lutheran Church_Wisconsin synod. Of course that’s the same church liberal Democrat Ron Kind of La Crosse (ake Mr. Partial Birth Abortion) belongs to.
July 29th, 2007 at 6:51 PM
He runs away from us just as I thought he would, AlFrankenFraud. I guess I’ll email Brian Melendez and try to obtain condemnation or at least clarity on the July 27 2007 Draz mailing.
July 29th, 2007 at 7:17 PM
The Democrats have decided to go ugly. That means that it is going to get worse.
July 29th, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Just Sayin’,
Melendez is a coward. He would never own up to the ad.
purpleblogdog,
You say, “The Democrats have decided to go ugly.”
They don’t have a choice. Their black hearts and damned souls are ugly. It’s their repulsive nature.
Note that they didn’t spend money on a mailing that would convince the electorate that their candidate would be the better one. That’s because they know Pfeilsticker is a nobody. Her only “qualification” is that she will do what the DFL leadership tells her to do.
July 29th, 2007 at 7:27 PM
Eva,
I’ll ask you again: What possessed you to out Pfielsticker?
July 29th, 2007 at 9:14 PM
Wait I’m being called a DFL insider. I have never voted for a Democrat, I will never vote for a Democrat.
This was a negitive piece no doubt about it, the sort of negitive piece that Republicans have used countless times. If you don’t like negitive attacks then maybe instant run off voting should be something to look at as it would end the BS overnight.
I simply called out the Republican party of Minnesota’s outragous scope theory. Those that made that accusation need to now either follow it up with real action or personally apolagize to DFL leadership. Everyone that is running with the scope theory are either incredibly stupid or blatant liars.
July 29th, 2007 at 9:22 PM
You also said this tactic works. Well if it works then why don’t you join the rest of republicans in condemning it?
July 29th, 2007 at 9:30 PM
because the truth doesn’t bother me, I’ve voted for a grand total of 3 Republicans in my life by the way Dave Klies being the only one that won.
As the story has developed it is clear that this is a non issue, but at the same time the DFL seems to think exposing this truth will work for them. Meanwhile the Republican spin machine wants to say the DFL was pointing a gun to his head in the piece. In fact Michael stated he would have more on the scope, so far nothing, and you know why we see nothing more, because he relizes he crossed a line that you can’t cross without being held accountable.
July 29th, 2007 at 9:42 PM
Hey Eva:
They have you all figured out over here, don’t they. Now you have even more people convinced you are running an anti-Christian biggoted site. Maybe you can dazzle them with another one of your non answers.
July 29th, 2007 at 9:54 PM
The headline turning his back on his family is not accurate and your lawyer colleague and DFL chair Brian Melendez should be ashamed of the mail peice. Now we’re supposed to believe you don’t share his sentiments when you come here to defend Brian’s mail peice. You have the same professional stature in a long established local law firm and are almost the same age as Brian. Let’s hear you condemn your colleague Brian Melendez and Brian’s mail peice, Mike Grimes. Supporting conservative issues is easy – condemning colleagues you need to work with as a practical matter when they show moral depravity – that’s a little more difficult isn’t it? But I’ll remember it and I’m sure everyone here will.
Regards,
Just Sayin’
July 29th, 2007 at 10:07 PM
The DFL is beyond shame.
July 29th, 2007 at 10:13 PM
This piece has people disgusted and turning against the DFL. Some people are not going to donate anymore. Brian and Donna need to pull the plug on this junk – people have decency in this area and this is beyond the pale.
July 29th, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Hmm I’m a lawyer now, thats pretty cool. I actually graduated from St Cloud State with a degree in economics in 2003, took a handful of classes from King Baiainin, and am currently a mail man and get the great fun of hearing union loyalist wish Bush or Cheney would die.
July 29th, 2007 at 10:54 PM
I better clarrify my last sentance. It pisses me off to hear anyone wish for the death of our leaders no matter who the leaders happen to be.
July 29th, 2007 at 10:59 PM
The DFL is beyond decency.
July 29th, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Then you don’t have any excuses. Still waiting …
July 29th, 2007 at 11:19 PM
You accused me of being a democrat, you accused me of being a Republican, you accused me of being a lawyer. You don’t have any clue what your talking about, so I suppose you can probably wait somemore.
The DFL is preying on idiots with this piece, and hey you don’t win elections without getting the idiot vote, based on recent post it seems as if you are a perfect example.
July 30th, 2007 at 6:51 AM
Supporting anonymous dirty mailings across the board is not a moderate position.
Refusing to hold those responsible for dirty mailings is not a moderate position.
You do not hold the middle ground by calling most of the Minnesota electorate idiots and siding with Brian Melendez.
If there is one other Minnesotan besides you who holds this view I’d be surprised.
You condemn everyone except the one responsible – Brian Melendez and the DFL.
July 30th, 2007 at 8:40 AM
Who’s saying this is an anonymous mailing?
July 30th, 2007 at 9:11 AM
I waited until Monday morning to read the litany of responses to this post. At 138 entries this ranks as a significant nerve ending being reached. The tenor of the left indicates that there are some facts worth recapping here:
1. The mailing is simply disgusting. Brian Melendez should be ashamed of himself.
2. The “what’s not true” claim is way too thin to hang your DFL doo rags on. David Ziegler’s apoplectic resposnes early on do suggest that he may have had a hand in the deign and content.
3. Indeed Draz asked for a reduction in his payments. That’s what you are supposed to do when you have a reduction in income. I doubt he consciously considered a run for office as a nifty way to dodge child support. That suggestion is at the center of the moral bankruptcy of the hit piece. Petitioning the court for a reduction is the right thing to do when your income drops. The suggestion of “deadbeat” is equally disgusting as he never missed a payment and supports his daughter emphatically.
3. A positive lit piece on Pfeilsticker was apparently not considered the best startegy at camp DFL. That in and of itself is disturbing. Does she lack the basic capacity to make promoting her abilities the lead item in the campaign?
4. It appears to me that the rifle scope theory is on target. But to each their own opinion. There is no argument that this is a disgusting hit piece that was approved by Brian Melendez and the DFL.
I’m grateful for everyone who has chimed in on both sides, especially those who dare push back at the out of control DFL machine. The days of passively watching them defame us are over.
No more free shots Brian. Hopefully our ability to respond will cause them to think before they drag politics further into the sewer.
I think this reprehensible character assassination piece is worthy of a formal complaint. Does anyone else agree?
Once again great job Michael for exposing this unfortunate DFL turd for all to see!
July 30th, 2007 at 9:14 AM
How would Paul Wellstone feel about a trash piece like this being distributed against his opponent?
I emailed Linda Pfeilsticker asking for her comments on the DFL mailing. When she replies I will post it at http://www.wrightrepublican.blogspot.com
July 30th, 2007 at 10:27 AM
Eva “The Dumpster Queen” Young said:
“uh, oops, I corrected that”
“I thought..”
“I didn’t write that…but”
“I did write that..but”
“read my blech”
“Gay..Filthsticker…gay..gay..gay…gay..Michelle Bwaaaackman!”
pfft.
Hey Eva. Have you submitted your resume to MiniMoni yet? You’re just their cup of tea baby.
=========
Now to the matter at hand.
If Steve Drazkowski had missed even one child support payment in order to run for office, he is a scumbag IMO.
But MDE says he spoke with the players and they deny that accusation unconditionally…that makes the DFLers who published and mailed this trash culpable scumbags.
Oops, DFL\culpable scumbags is kind of redundant isn’t it.
July 30th, 2007 at 2:05 PM
HAhaha!
Why in the world would Brian Melendez give a damn about what a bunch of DFL- HATING anonymous bloggers think?
Keep whining. I’m going back down to the district and doorknock some more. People knew and loved Sviggum in this district. His family was part of their community, this guy Draz is something different. I won’t repeat it over and over but, the former GOP Minority Leader freely speaks of Draz having problems and a chip on his shoulder. Its going to be hard for people to rally behind him in the special election. I assume that’s why the defeatist attitude here so early.
Brodkorb took down the post on the ‘scope’ because like me, he discovered a lot of Republican mail with actually cross hairs on the Democrat (simple Google search). A little more research tells us that Draz has had multiple problems that are not shining examples of family values.
The real question is what does he stand for?
It doesn’t matter Swiftee but the piece states that he TRIED to get out of payments. That part is true. He signed an affidavit claiming to have no income to pay when the truth is, he took a leave of absence to run for office last year.
The only reason he didn’t end up in your scumbag category is because the courts denied his request. So he had the intent to become a scumbag- to use your own words and reasoning.
Hey Drew, I’m also the pilot of the black helicopter you see over your house.
Stop your whining and go campaign.
July 30th, 2007 at 2:40 PM
“That part is true”
Incoming!!
Brace yourselves, I smell moonbat truth parsing on the way.
Really, read that again to yourself sport.
“That part is true”
Pfft.
July 30th, 2007 at 5:31 PM
“…Hopefully our ability to respond will cause them to think before they drag politics further into the sewer.”
Way to go ‘high road GOP’ers.’ No doubt the nasty mailers were/are already planned. I suspect none of them will make it to this site, though.
Tsk….tsk….tsk.
July 30th, 2007 at 8:27 PM
DJZ,
The real question is, “What does Pfielsticker stand for?”
Other than kissing up to the her DFL masters, that is.
MnBlueWater,
When and if the GOP sends a disgusting, lying mailer like the one your people sent, let us hear from you. You are currently in the sewer all by yourselves, slug.
August 9th, 2007 at 9:29 AM
[...] The major contributing factor, though, was the DFL’s first mailing. You’ll recall that that mailing accused Steve Drazkowski of turning “his back on her”, a reference to his daughter. As I said at the time, that was the DFL essentially saying that they couldn’t win the race on the battlefield of ideas. They had to do everything possible to drive GOP turnout down if their candidate had any shot at winning. [...]