« COLEMAN FOR U.S. SENATE PRESS RELEASE: “SEVERE FRANKEN WARNING: FRANKEN TO ADDRESS MACALESTER STUDENTS, THOSE WITH DIFFERING POLITICAL OPINIONS NOT WELCOME” | Home | INTERVIEW WITH RNC CHAIRMAN MIKE DUNCAN »
WALZ FLIP-FLOPS ON OBAMA; WALZ PREVIOUSLY UNSURE IF OBAMA WAS A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR SOUTHERN MINNESOTA #2
By Michael B. Brodkorb | February 7, 2008
This post has folks fired-up and it warrants a follow-up post. Last year, Congressman Tim Walz made an interesting statement that he didn't know if Senator Barack Obama was a good candidate for southern Minnesota:
"Asked if [U.S. Senator Barack] Obama is a good candidate for southern Minnesota, Walz said, 'I don't know.'" Source: Rochester Post-Bulletin, January 23, 2007
I'm still curious as to why Walz didn't think Obama would be a good candidate for Southern Minnesota. Also, what has Obama done in the last year for Southern Minnesota for Walz to now support him? I really want folks to focus on Walz's answer to the questions asked. Walz said "I don't know." He couldn't come up with anything positive to say about why an Obama candidacy would be good for southern Minnesota.
What's changed in a year? It would appear that Walz is picking Obama because he won in Minnesota and not because he would be the best candidate. But once again, what has Obama done for Minnesota that would now make Walz support his candidacy?
Tags: Barack Obama, Tim Walz
Topics: Barack Obama, Tim Walz | 40 Comments »
40 Responses to “WALZ FLIP-FLOPS ON OBAMA; WALZ PREVIOUSLY UNSURE IF OBAMA WAS A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR SOUTHERN MINNESOTA #2”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Do not question the Great One Obama!
SHUN THE NON-BELIEVER! SHUN!
Come worship at the altar of the great OBAMA
only he can provide the answer!
February 7th, 2008 at 5:02 PM
But once again, what has Obama done for Minnesota that would now make Walz support his candidacy?
Dam, Michael – ol’ Multiple-Choice Mitt droppin’ out today cloud up yer mind??!?
“But once again, what has McCain done for Minnesota that would now make Pawlenty support his candidacy?”
February 7th, 2008 at 6:05 PM
DO NOT DOUBT THE POWER OF OBAMA!!!
SHUN THE NON-BELIEVERS!!!
worship obama.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:11 PM
Michael,
I have a better question. What position has Obama taken on any issue that will be of interest or benefit to Southern Minnesota.
For that matter, what position has Obama taken on any issue. That guy is long on smile and charisma, and short on accomplishment and ideas.
As for Walz, he could have backed either the socialist from New York or the socialist from Illinois. So, he picked the socialist.
Either Hillary or Obama will do a fine job of delivering the economic hardship that Democrats like to talk about, but which very few are actually experiencing.
Democrats are out for equality all right, ensuring every one is equally miserable, poor and destitute… and enslaved to their policies.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:35 PM
SHUN THE NON-BELIEVERS!!!
SHUN!!
WORSHIP AT THE ALTAR OF OBAMA
February 7th, 2008 at 6:51 PM
The caucus goers of the 1st Congressional District , picked Obama.
Tim is voting the way his constituents want him to vote.
I know that is hard for you to understand, but there are Congressmen who do listen to what their constituents say.
In fact Tim holds town hall meetings all over the 1st.
For those in the 2nd & the 6th these are meetings where anyone can attend and ask questions.
I have the best question, What position has Norm Coleman taken on any issue that will be of interest or benefit to southern Minnesota.
For that matter, what position has Norm Coleman taken on any issue that Bush didn’t tell him to have?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:55 PM
“In fact Tim holds town hall meetings all over the 1st.
For those in the 2nd & the 6th these are meetings where anyone can attend and ask questions.”
I think this should be stressed, a little louder:
In fact Tim holds town hall meetings all over the 1st.
For those in the 2nd & the 6th these are meetings where anyone can attend and ask questions.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:51 PM
Ummmm something about “change”. And he looks good on TV. I guess that makes him qualified to be President.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:52 PM
Pretty sure that means he wasn’t ready to endorse and he knows people like you would get all over it if he said anything else. Another non-news worthy post. I’m bored…
February 7th, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Chestnut, they don’t need to talk about issues, just “change”. It would be fun to quiz Obie on corporate welfare to big ethonal.
February 7th, 2008 at 8:06 PM
Dave,
It also would be fun to quiz Barak Hussein on his ties to “slumlords” as Hillary Clinton called them.
February 7th, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Oh, How The Mighty Have Fallen
Published by Zack34 minutes ago in Uncategorized.
Give Michael Brodkorb credit, he’s had more than his share of big stories over the last few years. Lately, however, it seems his standards have dropped considerably. I don’t know if his sources have dried up or if he is just getting lazy but these days it feels like his blog is just a repository of MN GOP press releases, promos for his radio show and really lame attacks on DFLers.
Its the last category that inspired this post. Today, Michael attacked Tim Walz for his “flip flop†in endorsing Barack Obama. Here is Michael’s evidence that Walz “flip flopped†on Obama:
“Asked if [U.S. Senator Barack] Obama is a good candidate for southern Minnesota, Walz said, ‘I don’t know.’†Source: Rochester Post-Bulletin, January 23, 2007
This is beyond weak. No reasonable person would ever call this a flip flop. For this to be a flip flop, Walz would have had to have said that he wouldn’t support Obama, a statement he never made. MDE’s attack is just silly.
More, here:
http://mnpublius.com/
February 7th, 2008 at 9:43 PM
Wow puddles, that sure convinces me that your right! Seeings how it came from mnpublius.com it must be true. puddles, you make me puke son.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:04 PM
To me, at least, this does not look like a flip-flop.
If Walz had said, back in January 2007, that he would not support Barack Hussein, then his support now for BH could reasonably be called a flip-flop.
But his statement of “I don’t know” when compared against his support of BH today doesn’t look like a flip-flop to me.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:54 PM
let’s not forget that the hard-fought for votes taken at the GOP caucuses don’t mean diddly-squat when it comes to identifying delegates. It’s yet another circle-jerk.
If Rep. Walz is a ‘super delegate’, maybe he’s taking the high road by representing the DFL activists in his district. What a concept.
February 7th, 2008 at 10:56 PM
It’s official, Brodkorb has fallen to class C blogging… crap
February 7th, 2008 at 11:14 PM
I agree. This site used to be a valuable resource, along the lines of the National Enquirer. Frequently wrong, always bombastic, but occasionally dead on.
This post proves that Michael has either lost a lot of credible sources due to his frequent inaccuracy, or he simply is getting lazy.
To accuse someone of *GASP* gathering information before shooting off their mouth perfectly crystalizes why the republican party’s lack of vision is sending people across the aisles in droves.
The republican party no longer stands for anything, and that is why this is a great election cycle to be a proud democrat.
February 8th, 2008 at 12:21 AM
The trouble with liberal is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.
February 8th, 2008 at 12:46 AM
* Investing $150 billion in renewable fuels
* New incentives for farmer owned biofuel refineries
* Increasing the renewable fuel standard
* Establishing country of orgin labeling
* He also supported the Farm Bill which passed the Senate with more support than any other since the 1950′s (84 votes), before Bush vetoed it.
February 8th, 2008 at 3:18 AM
LOL, great, lets list the biofuel stuff. Not a real bright move to list that after the articles yester about how they aren’t all that great since they raise greenhouse emissions. (which is something I knew years ago)
SO yeah you liberals, lets increase that global warming by even more. LOL
February 8th, 2008 at 6:18 AM
I guess if that farm bill is so great, they’ll override the veto?
Oh, wait… the FARM BILL hasnt’ even come up for a vote yet!!!!
True, Bush has threatened to veto the farm bill, that has not been voted on, and has not passed with 84 votes…. And he should, if that farm bill does nothing to reform farm subsidy payments (as the current Democrat bill fails to do) or raises taxes (which the current Democrat bill does).
Damn DJZ, you’re ignorance has just elevated to idiocy.
February 8th, 2008 at 6:20 AM
… and great point Honeydog…. Biofuels release more greenhouse gases in to the air than fossile fuels do… Go alternative energy.
I’ll as again, what does Obama stand for, beyond generic platitudinal ramblings of the socialist manafesto?
February 8th, 2008 at 9:03 AM
“LOL, great, lets list the biofuel stuff. Not a real bright move to list that after the articles yester about how they aren’t all that great since they raise greenhouse emissions. (which is something I knew years ago)
SO yeah you liberals, lets increase that global warming by even more. LOL”
I thought Pawlenty claims to be a big supporter of biofuels and ethanol, is he a liberal now? Are all the Republicans in the legislature who voted to raise the ethanol level to 20% a couple years back liberals? Damn, this state is blue
February 8th, 2008 at 9:11 AM
Tim, yes. That’s exactly what that means.
Buying in to ignorant anthropogenic global warming bullshit doesn’t make it correct.
February 8th, 2008 at 9:16 AM
“Tim, yes. That’s exactly what that means.”
Don’t you really mean:
“RINO! Every (cheney)in’ one of ‘em!!!”
February 8th, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Stick this in your pot pipe
http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175
February 8th, 2008 at 1:10 PM
So, GC – are you suggesting that we SHOULD be polluting our planet??!?
February 8th, 2008 at 2:39 PM
I don’t think anyone suggests we should pollute the planet. However, it’s equally stupid to follow the myths of global warming fear-mongers and their predictably socialist “solutions”… which would have no impact… well, other than kill America… which is their real goal.
February 8th, 2008 at 5:31 PM
chestNuts, you seen’ anyone for that paranoia?
February 9th, 2008 at 8:58 AM
puddles, global warming is a fantasy of the left used to scare the ignorant among us. It is just another push to try and make more people dependent on the goverment and since the Democrats are the party of big goverment it benefits them. I’m just amazed by how many idiots out there buy into this BS. They pay no attention to the negative impact on our economy and way of life it would have if we did what the left wing wacko crowd wants us to do. I believe you and your ilk need to see someone because it is you who has the problem Now go grab your blanky and curl up by your bowl son.
February 9th, 2008 at 9:53 AM
Pete, I was recently in a manufacturing plant in Pennsylvania where they were making roller bearing for large wind turbines. I was chatting with one of the engineers and he said all their other bearing work had gone to India and China and if it were not for this product, 250 people would be looking for work. The reason, by the way, that the roller bearing work was not in India or China was because the quality requirements were too high for them. I saw some of the work out of China. Absolute crap. So tell me, where’s the economic downside. And try and speak specifically about 250 hard working folks in Pennsylvania.
February 9th, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Richard,
Excellent point… one lost in the noise about global warming. Green technologies (the ones that actually are green and the ones that actually work) are good for the economy, the labor market and the environment.
Unfortunately such solutions are few and far between…. but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to work on it.
The problem is that the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis (I won’t dignify it by calling it a theory) is bullshit. And those most interested in waving that hypothesis like a billy club are more interested in advancing socialist politics than improving the environment.
So let’s work on green technologies for the good of it… and quit scaring people with myths.
February 9th, 2008 at 11:44 AM
chestNuts, if it weren’t for “scaring people with myths”, republiCons wouldn’t have anything to run on.
Get a clue, ya (cheney)in’ putz.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Richard, I have no idea what you want me to comment on other then it is wonderfull that those jobs have not been sent to China. If you are talking about wind power specifically I have nothing against it except of course for the expense. Out here in western MN people are fighting the construction of Big Stone II. This makes no economical or environmental sense. It is merely a left wing attempt to force the development of less economical power sources that will benefit them and their investments.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:23 AM
I’m just amazed by how many idiots out there buy into this BS. They pay no attention to the negative impact on our economy and way of life it would have if we did what the left wing wacko crowd wants us to do.
250 people still have jobs because of this left wing wacko crowd. Big Stone II is a coal plant that will, even after using the best technologies available, still burn dirty, high sulfur coal. My daughter is not allowed, at the advise of her doctor, to eat walleye. She’s healthy but she’s hoping to have a child sometime in the next 10 years and she has to watch her mercury intake. The primary source of mercury in walleye is coal power plants. Also, centralized power generation is not the most efficient method. The more local we can produce power the better. Ballard Power manufactures a unit about the size of a small refrigerator that will produce all the electrical needs of a home, about 950 watts a month. It uses hydrogen fuel cells to do this. The only byproducts of this production is heat and water. Seems like a better idea then another large pollution producer.
February 10th, 2008 at 4:21 PM
You tell em’ Richard!!!
I cannot fathom the opposition to Wind Powered Electrical Energy, other than for the unsightliness of the Wind Turbines. Yet, there are those who think that burning coal, the fumes getting into the air we breathe, is the way to generate Electricity.
Our Electrical Power plant in Rochester is a Coal Burning one. There have been numerous Bad Air Quality alerts weekly because of it. Home to the Mayo Clinic where the sick from all over come to get treatment, only to find out that the air isn’t fit to breathe most days.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:40 PM
What does one of those units cost Richard? Where does one get the hydrogen? … Not being sarcastic, I’m curious.
kathy, I don’t disagree… but you really should write a letter to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the loudmouth, fear-mongering enviro-socialst who’s one of the biggest opponents to wind-generated power… because it’d be in view of his billion dollar estate…
February 10th, 2008 at 8:05 PM
The units range in price but a system for a house will come in somewhere in the neighborhood of 20K. Costly for a retrofit but for a new home a small percentage of build cost. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe so it’s everywhere. Extracting and collecting present problems but not insurmountable ones. Low voltage current in water cracks the water molecules and O2 and Hydrogen go their separate ways. Wind or solar would do a nice job accomplishing this. Hydrogen delivery systems could be set up with a little government assistance. California is already doing this.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:18 PM
With Big Stone II they will be cutting thier mercury emmissions in half. And your against that? Strange…
February 11th, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Pete – doesn’t “cutting in half” mean there’s still a lot of mercury emissions?
Now, above, you said this:
“It is merely a left wing attempt to force the development of less economical power sources that will benefit them and their investments.”
That rhetoric can easily be rewritten, as follows:
It is merely a RIGHT wing attempt to force the development of less economical power sources that will benefit them and their investments.
Who benefits from coal, used around here? Where is it mined? How is it transported? Any public subsidies in this delivery system?
Follow the money, pal – follow the money.