« LTE FROM MN GOP CHAIRMAN RON CAREY: “FRANKEN POLARIZING, MEAN-SPIRITED” | Home | BREAKING NEWS: IN INTERVIEW WITH AP, CIRESI AND SPEAR RIP FRANKEN’S RECORD OF “CALLING PEOPLE NAMES” »
TEAM COLEMAN CLAIMS TEAM FRANKEN IS MISREPRESENTING COLEMAN’S RECORD; CREATES “TRUTH” SECTION ON CAMPAIGN WEBSITE
By Michael B. Brodkorb | February 11, 2008
It's great to read that Team Coleman will be aggressively correcting Team Franken's distortions about U.S. Senator Norm Coleman's record:
"Coleman's office challenged Franken's assertions on Monday, saying Coleman has helped increase federal funding for veterans programs by 67 percent between 2003 and this year through 29 votes of support. That amounts to an increase of $25 billion.
'If Al Franken worked as hard at being honest about Norm Coleman's record as he does in misrepresenting it, Minnesotans might take him a bit more seriously,' said Tom Erickson, a Coleman associate." Source: Hutchinson Leader, February 10, 2008
Click here for the complete story.
Coleman's campaign had created a page on their website labeled "TRUTH" which gives readers "nothing but the facts about Norm." Click here to read Team Coleman's response to Team Franken's distortion about Coleman's record about veterans.
Team Franken is the most dishonest campaign (Al Franken is the most dishonest candidate) that has ever run in Minnesota. I'll have more on Team Franken's dishonesty later this week on Minnesota Democrats Exposed.
###
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.
Tags: 2008 U.S. Senate, Al Franken, Mike Ciresi, Norm Coleman
Topics: 2008 U.S. Senate, Al Franken, Mike Ciresi, Norm Coleman | 37 Comments »
37 Responses to “TEAM COLEMAN CLAIMS TEAM FRANKEN IS MISREPRESENTING COLEMAN’S RECORD; CREATES “TRUTH” SECTION ON CAMPAIGN WEBSITE”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 11th, 2008 at 1:29 PM
“Team Franken is the most dishonest campaign (Al Franken is the most dishonest candidate) that has ever run in Minnesota.”
That’s quite an accomplishment after Patty Wetterling’s dishonest campaign.
February 11th, 2008 at 1:36 PM
From the Disabled American Veterans website:
***
The DAV was formed as our country faced the painful effects of World War I. Throughout our 85-year history, DAV has grown and adapted to face the needs of disabled veterans. As a new generation of wartime disabled veterans return from the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, the DAV is working hard to ensure all veterans are cared for well into the future.
**
http://www.dav.org/about/index.html
Now, since the subject of this post is Coleman’s record, going back to 2003, for care of veterans, let’s look at the non–partisan DAV Scorecard, for Senator Coleman, from 2003 through 2006:
http://capwiz.com/dav/officials/congress/?lvl=C&only_votes=1&azip=55346
Seems like Senator Coleman voted AGAINST Disabled American Veterans more than he voted FOR Disabled American Veterans.
That, folks, are the facts.
And I’d like to hear how Senator Coleman defends that record, of voting against Disabled American Veterans more often than he’s voted for them, during that time frame of 2003 through 2006.
February 11th, 2008 at 1:45 PM
What a handy site. First you realize most of the “no” votes Coleman cast were in the majority. The second thing you notice is that nearly all the “no” votes Coleman cast represented fiscally responsible positions.
Thanks for the link TPT.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:09 PM
“The second thing you notice is that nearly all the “no†votes Coleman cast represented fiscally responsible positions.”
Well, if you say so. However, a LOT of veterans with service-connected disabilities would disagree with you.
Personally, I feel taking care of Veterans is the morally responsible position.
But I’m not surprised you’d compromise the morally correct position on the basis of cost.
After all, that’s the same compromise republicans made, when they broke the promise government made to veterans and tossed Category 8 veterans out of the VA System. But, what’s a promise to a veteran, when there’s a cost involved? Gotta be fiscally responsible, “right”?
Thanks for making your position clear.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:13 PM
None of those votes represents “not taking care of disabled veterans.”
In fact, many of them represent the best form of “taking care of disabled veterans.”… particularly the ones that dramatically expanded coverage and funding, while balancing some of the less responsible amendments.
Norm’s record for vets is clear.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:14 PM
For Democrats, it would seem that Veterans join blacks, children and the elderly as political pawns.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:22 PM
For Republicans, it would seem that Veterans join blacks, children and the elderly as political pawns.
See how easy that is?
Now, back to facts:
“Norm’s record for vets is clear.” Yes it is clear, and it clearly isn’t particularly great. Nor even “good”.
And that’s the non-partisan Disabled American Veterans record, Chestnut.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Easy as brick. Because changing the words makes the statement false…
Is that really all you have to offer.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Chestnut, Coleman’s record on veterans is nothing to write home about.
Is he as awful as, say, Kline? Well, no, but then again, few have as atrocious a record as Kline.
And actually, that statement about pawns IS true.
You do know that many, Many, MANY Minnesota DAV Members believe – for good reason – that’s exactly what John Kline did, and does. Well, Kennedy, too.
http://www.davmn.org/April_2006.pdf
Start reading on page 3 – those two legislators were Kennedy, and Kline.
To recap, I’ll agree that Coleman isn’t as bad as Kline, nor as bad as Kennedy was. But his record is nothing to brag about.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Is he as awful as say, Clinton or Kenndy (Ted) or Pelosi, no. He’s damned perfect by comparison.
Delusional is any other analysis.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Say, Chestnut?
Do we vote for Ted, Nancy, or Hillary, here?
Try to stay on topic, will ya?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:00 PM
As a vet, I resent leftist attempts to tie issues important to me and my fellow vets to their wasteful spending and redistribution efforts.
I also resent, and refuse to be pandered to.
Senator Coleman has been a strong advocate for vetrans while holding the left accountable for it’s anti-capitalist, anti-American agenda.
It’s funny. I’ve been to several fund raisers for disabled vetrans in the past couple of years, most notably for Sgt. John Kreisel (a guy who sits right at the top of my all time most influential hero’s). Norm Coleman and representatives of our GOP congressional delegation have been present at each and every event,..the Democrat delegation?
AWOL at each and every event.
Thanks for nothing Amy, and Betty and Hakim and the rest.
Why do Democrats hate our military?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Swiftee, do you have anything other than rhetoric to post?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:12 PM
Oh, sorry… you’re right…. is he as awful as Dayton, McCollum or Ellison, no… Those begin stabbing our veterans in the back while their still serving the country.
Coleman supports veterans throughout and after their careers in the armed forces.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:14 PM
To All:
Here is the homepage for Sgt. John Kreisel, the American Hero who gave both legs in service to his country:
http://johnkriesel.com/index.html
Now, on this site you will see a page that’s doin’ a benefit and fundraiser for this American Hero.
I’m asking: if politicians in general, and Republicans in particular, were taking care of veterans, why would Sgt. Kriesel need to be doin’ a benefit and a fundraiser?
How many other veterans are out there that have to be begging for money, because politicians in general, and Republicans in particular, are letting them fall through the forseeable but unaddressed cracks?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:15 PM
“Coleman supports veterans throughout and after their careers in the armed forces.”
Unfortunately, Chestnut, the facts don’t back your assertion.
Pesky things, fact are, eh?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Swiftee,
You never answered the question… why does this guy need a benefit to pay for his health needs if they are service related? Don’t you think our government should cover those costs?
February 11th, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Let me say this once, and I do not want to have to repeat it, and trust me here, neither do you.
I have held benefits for John. John doesn’t have to BEG anyone for anything, it is an HONOR to do what little I can for him and his family.
John hasn’t asked for anyone’s sympathy; he doesn’t want any. He rejects the idea that he is a victim of any kind. He is PROUD to have had the opportunity to serve our country.
Although I wouldn’t be so bold as to call John my friend, I have had the honor of speaking to him on more than one occasion and I AM TELLING you, he doesn’t like leftists, especially big mouth leftists that make asses of themselves at the expense of a fine unit like the 101st Airborn.
The benefits that are being held are to build John and his family a house fit for a hero like John to call home, not to pay medical bills.
You leftists are skating on thin ice, I’d drop it if I were you.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:01 PM
In other words, Swiftee, you don’t want to answer the question.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:04 PM
To All:
From Sgt. Kreisel’s website:
***
John Kriesel has special needs with his sleeping and the bed that he will need to purchase does not have insurance policies in place to cover this and will cost $4000.00. The donation will go towards SGT John Kreisel’s bed..
***
Shouldn’t this cost be covered by a grateful Nation?
February 11th, 2008 at 4:06 PM
2putt, I kid you not. Drop it.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:12 PM
Hey, if ya don’t want to answer the question, don’t answer the question.
Personally, I’m wondering why these politicians you claim show up at this guy’s fundraisers, aren’t working to change the system so Disabled American Veterans don’t HAVE to have benefits and fundraisers.
I guess maybe it fits with their “fiscally responsible” ideology, eh?
February 11th, 2008 at 4:47 PM
“It’s great to read that Team Coleman will be aggressively correcting Team Franken’s distortions about U.S. Senator Norm Coleman’s record.”
Mikey, don’t you feel a little silly writing about yourself in the third person like that? Where did you “read” about Team Coleman–in your daily GOP assignment sheet?
February 11th, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Say, Ian?
I don’t think Swiftee is going to answer your question….
February 11th, 2008 at 5:24 PM
John Kreisals health is being cared for. It’s other incidentals, like handicap accessibilizing his home, that the benefits are for. The government never does that for your.
My group has also helped out John and held benefits for him.
John Kreisal is a real stand up guy. I, too, have met him.
And I know John doesn’t like leftests either. I guess Ian and Tommy haven’t heard the radio commercial featuring John.
February 11th, 2008 at 5:36 PM
No, Honeydog, I haven’t – but I’m guessing we don’t listen to the same stations – well, especially when it comes to talk.
Now, at the beginning of this thread, I brought up the Disabled American Veterans – the DAV.
The DAV was started, after World War I (the ‘war to end all wars’ – sheesh), because those maimed in Europe came home to too few resources to help – and many veterans were left to beg.
The purpose of the DAV to to help secure funding from a grateful nation, to allow disabled veterans to live with dignity and purpose.
And it seems to me, the DAV is needed as much today.
Care of veterans SHOULD be non-partisan.
Sadly, it is not.
Any politician that wraps him/herself in a flag, claiming to “take care” of veterans, when the record clearly indicates they do not, simply does not deserve election and/or re-election.
February 11th, 2008 at 6:00 PM
Twopudd – Glad to hear that you support our veterans. Look forward to seeing you campaign for our next president. I am sure you are willing to walk the talk.
God bless you John McCain.
February 11th, 2008 at 6:14 PM
Well then Tommy, a whole bunch of your democrats would be out of office.
Lets face facts, as much as we would like it, there is simply not enough money to buy every veteran everything he could possibly need. I don’t know about you, but I sure didn’t go into the Army (willingly in my case) to have my every desire given to me.
February 11th, 2008 at 6:36 PM
So, Honeydog – put you down in the camp that says it’s ok to break promises to veterans, eh?
You are aware of what the Bush Administration did to Category 8 veterans, with the complicity of a republican house and senate, aren’t you?
February 11th, 2008 at 6:39 PM
Cash N Carey – I’d respond in kind, but: Michael doesn’t like it when I hit back.
Somethin’ ’bout hurtin’ the tender feelin’s of GOPers, or somethin’…I dunno….
…but – just saw this:
***
UAW, VFW Team up to Aid Military Families
DETROIT, Jan. 18, 2008–On Dec. 11, 2007 the UAW presented a donation of $15,000 to the VFW to support Operation Uplink, a program which provides free phone cards to members of the U.S. Armed Forces stationed overseas so they can stay in touch with their families during their terms of military service.
“We’re proud to provide assistance to military families,” said UAW Vice President Cal Rapson, who directs the union’s Veterans Affairs Department. “The men and women of the U.S. armed forces make great sacrifices on behalf of our country, and their families sacrifice as well during their absence. It’s good to know that with the help of the VFW, we can provide some assistance to help families stay in touch, especially during the holiday season.”
In receiving the check from Rapson, Sherwood H. Pea, VFW Michigan state commander and a member of UAW Local 651 said, “We always know we can count on the UAW. This donation for Operation Uplink is just another example of how UAW members have been generous in every way possible in their support for military families and veterans”
http://www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=4418
Now, using your logic, since you support veterans, and the union supports veterans, you support the union.
God Bless you, for supportin’ the Union, Cash N Carey!
February 11th, 2008 at 7:19 PM
I stopped by VFW 425 tonight to put a shine on your boots 2putt. Your fellow members are REAL impressed with you.
See you soon.
February 11th, 2008 at 8:35 PM
If you say so Tommy. I’m convinced… Not.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:11 AM
Where was the promise to build them houses and give them everything under the sun? I don’t remember any such promise? Please provide a link.
Also, for those who don’t know, Category 8 vets are:
Veterans with income and/or net worth above the VA national income threshold and the geographic income threshold who agree to pay copays
o Subpriority a: Noncompensable 0% service-connected veterans enrolled as of January 16, 2003, and who have remained enrolled since that date
o Subpriority c: Nonservice-connected veterans enrolled as of January 16, 2003, and who have remained enrolled since that date
o Subpriority e**: Noncompensable 0% service-connected veterans applying for enrollment after January 16, 2003
o Subpriority g**: Nonservice-connected veterans applying for enrollment after January 16, 2003
I’m assuming that Tommy is refering to the 2003 restriction that SOME of the Category 8 vets were barred from getting medical care if they have never been seen previously at a VA medical facility. Since this catagory of veteran is ABOVE the income threshold, in other words they make darn good money, and they never bothered being seen before………..
I would however disagree with barring the category E vets, these guys have a minor disability, not enough to get compensated for. They should be at least seen for that disability. I would also recommend them appealing to VA Benefits. VA Benefits is NOT anybody’s friend.
February 12th, 2008 at 7:09 AM
You’re a real class act, Swiftee.
February 12th, 2008 at 7:23 AM
“Where was the promise to build them houses and give them everything under the sun? I don’t remember any such promise? Please provide a link.”
Where was the post where anyone claimed what you just did?
“Since this catagory of veteran is ABOVE the income threshold, in other words they make darn good money, and they never bothered being seen before………”
Yeah, “right”. You go with that. Those of us that have had loved ones turned down for care, know better.
You think it’s no “bid deal”, the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, the VFW, feel differently.
Gee, tough decision; who to believe? Honeydog, or the American Lengion??!?
Here’s what the Commander of the American Legion had to say, about this subject:
***
Guest Opinion
Veterans Divided Are Easily Conquered on VA Health Care
By Thomas L. Bock
National Commander, American Legion
Feb. 25, 2006 – Generations of Pvt. Ryans have laid their lives on the line for America. They stormed the beaches on D-Day. They marched on frostbitten feet across war-torn Korea. They waded through swamp water in the Mekong Delta, rescued refugees from rooftops, intercepted missiles, flew reconnaissance missions, swabbed decks and removed tyrants from power. They may have earned a place in the Veterans Day parade, but far too many are denied access to VA medical care.
Related Stories by Legion
VA Budget Request 2007: The Good, the Bad and the Foggy
Indianapolis, February 07, 2006 – President Bush’s VA budget request for 2007 has been hailed for adding nearly $3 billion in real appropriations for veterans health care, compared to 2006. “That,” said American Legion National Commander Thomas L. Bock, “is the good.”
However, he added, it’s a budget request built on charging new annual enrollment fees for VA care, nearly doubling drug co-payments and driving 1.2 million veterans out of the system created specifically for them. “That,” Bock explained, “is the bad.”
Bock added that the budget request still relies on $1.1 billion in cost-saving ‘efficiencies’ – the subject of a Government Accountability Office report released last week that criticized past VA health-care projections from the president’s Office of Management and Budget – and also how realistic it is for the president to expect dramatic improvements in VA’s ability to collect payments from insurance companies, especially since VA is prohibited by Congress to bill Medicare.
“Those are some of the foggy parts,” Bock said.
The decision to lock VA’s doors to all but those with service-connected disabilities or economic hardship is not what America wanted or expected. It’s not what veterans deserve.
In 1996, Congress wisely reopened VA medical facilities to all veterans. Upon enrollment, they were placed into priority groups. There used to be seven. Now there are eight. Group 1 receives the highest priority of care, Group 8 the lowest. In January 2003, the VA secretary suspended new enrollment of Priority Group 8 veterans, effectively capping the system, leaving out in the cold anyone in that category who came looking for a VA doctor after that deadline.
Rest of story, here:
http://seniorjournal.com/NEWS/Opinion/6-02-25-VeteransDivided.htm
Now, some of those reading this will take Honeydog’s word that everything is peachy and kind; I expect many more will take the word of the service organizations, and demand that change is made.
Since Norm Coleman isn’t demanding change be made, he must go: he hasn’t done his job.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:08 PM
So, you didn’t really address what I said. Since I wasn’t sure what you were referring to, I had to take a guess. And guess what there Tommy, everybody’s health care is going up.
I got my information RIGHT FROM the VA website. In other words, if the changes just posted (and committed copyright infringement while doing it), haven’t been enacted yet.
February 17th, 2011 at 8:19 PM
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TJSWIFT, TJSWIFT. TJSWIFT said: More info on #StolenValor #Scumbag @TwoPuttTommy: mocks true hero, gets slapped down; Start at #15 http://bit.ly/ekhLen @RorschachNEOCON [...]