« OCTOBER 25, 2002 | Home | TWO BIG POSTS ON MONDAY EXPOSING MINNESOTA DEMOCRATS »
MN GOP “TRACKER” DENIED ADMISSION TO PUBLIC EVENTS OF AL FRANKEN #2
By Michael B. Brodkorb | October 25, 2007
The Star Tribune's McMemo blog has new post up about campaign "trackers" and includes information from my post about the Republican Party of Minnesota's tracker being denied admission to public events of Al Franken:
"The GOP's Drake, asked about the posting on MDE, cited three instances when the GOP tracker was turned away: A labor-union event in which Franken worked alongside a health care worker for a day; a luncheon; and an appearance before the Macalester College Democrats.
Drake acknowledged that the Franken campaign may not have directly organized and controlled all the events. But he said that Franken’s appearance at them was publicly advertised, including in at least one case on Franken’s website, giving it the imprint of a Franken campaign event. He said that if Franken’s campaign is committed to openness, it should have taken 'one minute' in advance to 'work with the organizers to allow admission to Republicans.'
Barr said he's not aware of a single time the Franken campaign has turned a tracker away from an event they had control over, and said that trackers are welcome at their events. He said that Drake was setting an 'unreasonable standard' in expecting the Franken campaign to instruct organizers to admit trackers to events that Franken is simply invited to himself." Source: McMemo/Star Tribune, October 25, 2007
Click here for the complete post.
Team Franken sure sounds defensive. I don't think it's an "unreasonable standard" to expect that Team Franken ensures that Republican trackers don't get turned away from public events where Al Franken is speaking. I also noticed how Barr drew a distinction between events they had control over. After this post, I'm sure the Republican Party of Minnesota's tracker won't be turned away from any future Al Franken events.
###
This post also appears on Blogs for Norm!, an online community and blog covering the 2008 U.S. Senate campaign in Minnesota. The primary goal of Blogs for Norm! is to organize bloggers who support U.S. Senator Norm Coleman.
Topics: Uncategorized | 14 Comments »
14 Responses to “MN GOP “TRACKER” DENIED ADMISSION TO PUBLIC EVENTS OF AL FRANKEN #2”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 25th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Does that mean that the MNGOP will allow non GOP bloggers at their Convention and other public events they have been denied access too.
Flash
October 25th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
I think it’s unreasonable to say that the candidate and his/her staff should do anything more than allow the opposition to come and film their events. I think that the trackers are old enough to not need babysitters to check in and make sure everything is alright.
October 25th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
I think Barr has a point though. When it comes to events that Franken is invited to and that he doesnt actually plan and put together himself, I think it is rude for a tracker to come. Especially at a Macalester Dems meeting. I would be pissed if someone came to my college’s Dems meeting, the meeting is for college students and whoever we invite.
October 25th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Flash, I’m 90 percent sure that a “convention” isn’t a public event.
Beyond that, what “public events” have Democrats been turned away from?
… or are you just leveling baseless claims?
October 25th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Well, Chestnut, let’s look at what MDE says is a public event, and you tell me. Actually, I am just trying to figure out where the baseline is:
MB said “Republican Party of Minnesota and they confirmed their tracker has been denied access to numerous public events”
STRIB cites Drake saying: “The GOP’s Drake, asked about the posting on MDE, cited three instances when the GOP tracker was turned away”
So now we know ‘numerous” = 3 (most people would call that few, but lets go with numerous, cause that will come in real handy later. And since I have 4 kids, is that a bunch, a whole lot, numerous?!?)
Ya with me still.
MB defines Public events as: “I’ve seen people from Team Franken (J.D.) and the DFL attend press conferences held by the Republican Party of Minnesota about Al Franken.”
and “the opposition’s press events.”
Now, what were these ‘numerous press events’
1) A labor-union event in which Franken worked alongside a health care worker for a day;
2) a luncheon; and
3) an appearance before the Macalester College Democrats.
So The MNGOP/MDE wants to define press events as anything the candidate attends that happens to appear on their website and imply it will happen in the public, or at least were ‘Press’ is allowed.
So I counter, the MNGOP convention is clearly advertised on their website, and by MNGOP/MDE standards, considered a press event.
I agree that the convention may not be a ‘public’ event open to anyone, no more or less then a luncheon, a labor union event, and/or a College Club.
So lets quit picking nits and someone, preferable MB, tell me where the line is and when, or if, an event organizer has the right to determine the attendees of said event.
Flash
October 26th, 2007 at 1:19 am
You might recall the pictures of Franken getting beet red when confronting people at a republican event (the last presidentail conventuion) when getting “in their face” (Mike, repost these)
If the union has an event that is open to their members at large then it is public. If it is people at work then it is a call judging on weather it is just a job description or someone claiming a hardship. If someone really needs to know how something like a 911 workstation works and a specifiic employee is “camera shy, look for someone else or a supervisor. If you have, for example, a 9-11 operator who claimes on camera “my house is being forclosed because President Bush leid about weapons of mass destructions and wouldn’t take the advice of “Peace mom Cindy Sheehan” then this claim will be open to scrutiny.
I’ve noticed that a lot of these “progressives” have no problem getting “in your face” and intrusive, picketing in front of republican’s houses and in the case of the “Progressive” “Stillwater Infidel” giving details on opponents residences and the schedules and potential kidnap vulnerabilties of their children. (I help with precident law here when Symbionese Liberation Army arrested fugutive Kathleen Ann Soliah/Sara Jane Olson posted personal information on potential prosectuion information on the official defense website, including information the personal information on cops/witnesses they failed to kill with pipebombs.
Anyway, the Franken campaign is extremely vulnerable here, especially in light of “Angry Al’s” very “assertive befhavior’. (Mike you have to repost that link!}
Oh I forgot! The “Progressives” are “special!”.
October 26th, 2007 at 6:59 am
The Republican Party in the 6th District wouldn’t let Ken Avidor and I videotape speeches at a 6th District Central Committee meeting – when Norm Coleman spoke. Norm Coleman’s speech at this meeting was quite different than the speech he gives at mainstream gatherings.
October 26th, 2007 at 7:19 am
Eva, the difference is that you are a worthless rabble rouser.
You take pride at outing people (see Filesticker case) and being a general no-good pain in the ass.
October 26th, 2007 at 8:08 am
Flash says: “I agree that the convention may not be a ‘public’ event open to anyone, no more or less then a luncheon, a labor union event, and/or a College Club.”
Chestnut says: “You make a compelling argument.”
October 27th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Reality Check – I pointed out veiled inuendos made by Chris on this website about Pfeilsticker – others called that outing. I just pointed out that there was clearly a rumor campaign going – and it showed up in this blogs comments.
And Flash – you are exactly correct with your arguments.
The DFL does allow the public to attend their conventions (MDE was treated well at the Rochester convention). They keep their elists private. The Republican Party of Minnesota wants their conventions private. That suggests they want to hide something.
October 28th, 2007 at 6:10 am
Eva, you aren’t being truthful here. You said they didn’t want you to video tape their at the 6th district meeting. You didn’t say you got kicked out. There is a difference you know.
Also, how is it there are pictures at the Republican Convention if they don’t let you worthless Demoncrats in? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. Another case of you not being truthful!
October 28th, 2007 at 11:19 am
“That suggests they want to hide something.”
That’s a big leap… could be they don’t care to have the DFL brown-shirts and hate squad disrupt the meetings.
October 28th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
The Dumpster Queen belched:
“The Republican Party in the 6th District wouldn’t let Ken Avidor and I videotape speeches..”
Sweetie pie, evidently you missed the “No Hampsters Allowed” sign clearly posted at the enterance…you have to leave your pets at home!
That being said, I guess it is true that you would have been asked to leave for the reasons RC states even if you had left Weiner at home.
May I suggest a clever disguise? Perhaps something along the lines of a sane, but enthusiastically zaftig, woman?
October 29th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
The Dumpster Queen belched:
“The Republican Party in the 6th District wouldn’t let Ken Avidor and I videotape speeches..â€
Eva, that may also be because you could not give proof you had been faithfully taking your meds.