« BARKLEY TO FILE AROUND 3:30 TODAY | Home | DFL BOSS TRIES TO STRONG ARM LORD FARIS OUT OF RACE »
BREAKING NEWS FROM THE STAR TRIBUNE: “REP. MARK OLSON WON’T SEEK RE-ELECTION”
By Michael B. Brodkorb | July 15, 2008
“Eight term Republican Rep. Mark Olson, who was shunned by his caucus after a domestic assault conviction, said today he will not file for re-election for his Big Lake seat in the state House of Representatives.
The departure of Olson, who labelled himself an independent after he was removed from the GOP caucus, strengthens the party-endorsed election bid of former Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer in the heavily-Republican district northwest of the Twin Cities.
In an interview, Olson said he only made up his mind not to run hours before a five p.m. filing deadline, describing the decision as a struggle. He said he was concerned about being a career politician and about what he termed the corruption of the party caucus system by the heavy influence of political money.” Source: Star Tribune, July 15, 2008
Click here for the complete story.
Topics: Uncategorized | 13 Comments »
13 Responses to “BREAKING NEWS FROM THE STAR TRIBUNE: “REP. MARK OLSON WON’T SEEK RE-ELECTION””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 15th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
“he was concerned about being a career politician and about what he termed the corruption of the party caucus system”
Yeah, that corruption that bounced his wife beating ass out of the party. Good riddance.
July 15th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Now if only Larry Craig would slither off into the night.
Olson has a long reputation as a type writer thrower at the Capitol. Glad to see him gone.
July 15th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Too bad we are trading one bad politician (Olson) for another (Kiffmeyer).
July 15th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
D:
Larry is not running for reelection either.
Leroy we have traded a bad politician for a great politician. Too bad that great politician isn’t the Secretary of State where we have a very bad politician holding that office.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
July 15th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Calling Mary Kiffmeyer a great politician is an insult to the words great and politician.
July 15th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Leroy, I hope you have something to back up your words, unless, of course, you are a Democrat, in which case I know they are empty. What exactly has Kiffmeyer done to sour you on her? Handled herself with grace and class? Run the Secretary of State’s office 10,000 times better than her successor? You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I am curious what you base it on, if it doesn’t have to do with the party to which she belongs.
Finally, good riddance to Olson, a clueless bastard who won’t admit he ruined his own political career. Go away and find productive work, and learn how to love your wife.
July 15th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
I find that calling someone a great politician to be as great an insult as anything.
July 15th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
thank god the gop got rid of this guy and now he has finally decided to hang it up. i would not comment as to his family circumstances, but it seems rather obvious that any politician to be effective should have as “lily white” a background as possible. we are all sinners, but then there are different degrees of sin of which olson, in my opinion, committed some of the more dastardly.
July 15th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
JFNK-
I look at her efforts to suppress the Native American vote as a sign of her disregard for the rights of all people to participate in the process.
I take her quote at the National Day of Prayer in 2004, where she said that the five most destructive words in America today are “separation of church and state.” as a sign that she disrespects the First Amendment.
When she refused, and was finally forced by the courts to issue absentee ballots that did not contain Paul Wellstone’s name on it following his death, I saw that as a rather egregious slap in the face of fair elections. Same with when she tried to exclude the Independence party from the ballot in 2004. The same court had to tell her how to do her job.
When she printed posters in 2004 to question the terroristic intent of any voter with a shaved head or short hair who smelled of herbs or flowers, wore baggy clothes, and/or whispered to themselves, I saw a woman who was not ready to deal with people who didn’t look and act exactly like her or the people in the pew in front of her.
When she refused to post outstate election results in 2005 because she said it took too much work for her to complete the task, I saw a lazy SOS.
When she left office and joined Minnesota Majority, I found that her extreme religious views have made her so homophobic that she is likely to enter the legislature as a bomb-tossing wedge rider. Earlier when the organization linked infant mortality to racial purity, Kiffmeyer was given a chance to rebuke the idea, but instead supported the theory.
When I think back over all of this, I hope the voters of 16B do what is right for the rest of us, and get out from under the stigma of being represented by the craziest member of the legislature. Steve Andrews has some pretty solid ideas on how the state could be run, and he won’t get there by attacking Indians, gays, the dead, the non-religious, independent thinkers, the bald, those with bad taste in perfume, those who mumble and the 40 percent of people, including 100 percent of her district, that don’t currently live in the Twin Cities.
You asked why I think she is a bad politician. THAT is why.
July 16th, 2008 at 6:49 am
Well, at least you’ve thought it out. I give you some credit for that, if nothing else.
July 16th, 2008 at 10:06 am
“When she left office and joined Minnesota Majority, I found that her extreme religious views have made her so homophobic”
Just for the record. Believeing that homosexuality is wrong or immoral does not mean someone is “homophobic”. Homophobic would imply that someone is afraid of homosexuals or becoming homosexual.
You can be tolerant of something and still not agree with it. Tolerance does not mean acceptance.
Now I’m sure all the libs will scream and cry that I am a homophobe now, but what do you expect from libs, it’s all they know.
July 16th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Why would a group that does not fear the homosexual lifestyle fight against anyone’s right to get married?
If the gay couple across the street gets married, you aren’t going to catch a nasty case of the gays. That isn’t how it works.
July 16th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
No one thinks that they are going “catch” gay.
They don’t fear the lifestyle, they disagree with it.
I personally think civil unions are just fine. But I think the problem is when they want to call it “marriage” that gets people riled up. Marrige to alot of people is a relgious issue and has deep meaning to them.
My opinion is that I am fine with everyone having the same rights, but calling it “marriage” comes across as being forced to accept something that you don’t agree with.
It may seem like semantics to you , but to other people it isn’t.