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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Olson has a long reputation as a type writer thrower at the Capitol. Glad to see him gone.

Yeah, that corruption that bounced his wife beating ass out of the party. Good riddance.