« URGENT: GROUP THREATENING TO POST PRIVATE COLEMAN DATABASE INFORMATION ONLINE | Home | FROM THE STAR TRIBUNE: DFL SENATE BUDGET PLAN MAY “EVEN FIND OPPOSITION AMONG HOUSE DFLERS” »
STAR TRIBUNE: “REPUBLICANS LEAK PURPORTED SENATE DFL BUDGET PLAN”
By Ryan Flynn | March 12, 2009
“Brandishing a paper that he said was the ‘intercepted’ Senate DFL budget plan, House Minority Leader Marty Seifert, R-Marshall, said today the plan revealed that Senate DFLers intended to raise taxes by $2 billion and cut education by nearly $1 billion over the next two years.
Senate DFL caucus spokesman Eric Steen said the document, dated March 3, was already ‘obsolete’ and that Senate DFL leaders would talk about ‘honest principles’ to address the state’s $4.5 billion budget later this afternoon.
‘This plan confirms what everyone has been waiting for,’ Seifert told reporters this morning as aides handed out copies of the document. ‘It’s the worst of both worlds … They’re raising taxes and cutting K-12 to protect the welfare state.’” Source: Star Tribune, March 12, 2009
To read the complete story click here.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 74 Comments »
74 Responses to “STAR TRIBUNE: “REPUBLICANS LEAK PURPORTED SENATE DFL BUDGET PLAN””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
March 12th, 2009 at 2:34 PM
Hackers!
March 12th, 2009 at 2:44 PM
How so mrw? Is it possible to “hack” a piece of paper?
March 12th, 2009 at 2:58 PM
It is funny that the day after you complain about unknown people spreading info they found on a public website, you have no problem commending republicans for sharing info they have apparently stolen.
March 12th, 2009 at 3:20 PM
Not to mention the fact that the document is outdated. I know it can be hard here, but could we wait until the DFL actually does something wrong before we release the dogs? This story holds about as much water as when Cranky Carey holds a press conference.
March 12th, 2009 at 3:23 PM
“Apparently stolen” Leroy? Please explain. I believe it is apparent that a Democrat supplied this information to them. That would make it legal obtained.
And, as usual you try to compare two completely different situations and try to make them equal. We have a right to know what our political leaders are doing while being paid by us taxpayers. Tell me Leroy, what right do you have to know credit card information from private citizens?
Your facist tactics will not go unchallenged Leroy.
March 12th, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Leroy,
It’s amazing how shameless you are. There is a hell of a big difference between credit card information of private citizens being published on the internet and a memo of DFL proposals to raise taxes.
Integrity,
And it’s amazing watching you twist yourself into knots defending these clowns. It’s time for them to lay their cards on the table and let Minnesotans know what they propose to solve the budget deficit. Will it be billions in tax increases, cuts to education, cuts to health and human services or something else? Minnesotans deserve to know.
March 12th, 2009 at 3:26 PM
P.S. It’s hard to imagine a document less than ten days old is obsolete. Regardless, it’s time for them to put their cards on the table and let Minnesotans scrutinize their plans (that is, if we’re still allowed in the Capitol).
March 12th, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Chris:
Twist myself in knots? I don’t get it. I agree, Minnesotans deserve to know what we are going to do about the budget issue. It’s too bad that the ReBublicans are sticking to the plan of working against the majority rather than attempt to work with them. I am confident that just like every year before, Minnesota will have a balanced budget.
I thought that you liked the idea of cutting education by the way? Don’t we pay those lazy greedy teachers enough? We give education more money, and see no results, so the thing to do is cut their funding…I know I’ve heard these arguments before…so you can’t possibly be upset if the DFL does decide to make education cuts, can you?
March 12th, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Integrity,
OK, so when the Dems are in the majority, it’s the job of Republicans to accede to their agenda and their demand. But when the GOP is in the majority, it’s the job of Dems to oppose and obstruct them until they can get back into the majority and make the Republicans do what they say?
What I like is to see the Democrats have to pick and choose between all of the special interests that send them campaign cash: Education Minnesota, AFSCME, the AFL-CIO, tribal interests, ACORN, etc. So far, it looks like the Dems are favoring increasing the welfare state over educating our young people. It’s pretty sad because over 90% of Education Minnesota money goes to Dems.
As for the notion that Republicans don’t care about education, let me remind you that it’s Pawlenty’s budget that increases education by $150 million. It’s Republicans that are fighting to send more money to rural Minnesota classrooms (over the objection of the Minneapolis-St. Paul DFL bloc).
March 12th, 2009 at 4:03 PM
“This story holds about as much water as when Cranky Carey holds a press conference.”
Uh…maybe you haven’t seen, but the DFL did officially release its budget plan and its pretty much the same.
Tax increases galore.
Cuts to K-12, public safety and veterans.
A new low for Minnesota Democrats.
March 12th, 2009 at 4:13 PM
““Apparently stolen†Leroy? Please explain. I believe it is apparent that a Democrat supplied this information to them. That would make it legal obtained.”
I believe “intercepted” is the key word in the story. Ryan seemed to think so as well seeing as he highlighted it. You tend not to “intercept” something that was purposefully sent directly to you. You also tend not to intercept a piece of paper (unless you tackle some guy carrying it).
Is it the same as publishing credit card information? Probably not. But, it once again highlights the numbskullishness of the MnGOP. Why would you highlight the fact you “intercepted” private DFL data the same day you are harping about someone stealing private data?
March 12th, 2009 at 4:23 PM
It should be entertaining to see which special interests get their funding cut. If it’s Education Minnesota, you will see multiple articles, TV reports, etc. threatening to cancel all extra cirricular programs, special ed., and countless other things. What you won’t see is them cutting needless, make work positions, that never existed when we were in school and protected by the union.
Whoever receives these cuts will be back in the next cycle asking for a lot more claiming years of neglect and underfunding.
Glad the DFL will be taking the hits on this one.
March 12th, 2009 at 4:37 PM
PlymouthDem,
It’s amazing how shameless you people are. There is a hell of a difference between targeting private citizens (through their credit card data in the case of Norm Coleman’s supporters) and releasing a memo from a DFL staffer (paid for by the taxpayers) about their plans to raise taxes.
March 12th, 2009 at 5:08 PM
“It’s amazing how shameless you people are. There is a hell of a difference between targeting private citizens (through their credit card data in the case of Norm Coleman’s supporters)”
Which is why I hope you are outraged that Norm Coleman put that information on a public web server with no encryption or security.
But, you can’t run fomr the underlying issue I raise: that the GOP is complaining about stealing and publishing data the same day they are patting themselves on the back for stealing and publishing private information.
March 12th, 2009 at 5:16 PM
PlymouthDem,
Go sue the GOP, I dare you. It’s amazing how you schmucks equate the financial data of private citizens to the work product of your government. They are not both private information.
I am outraged over how your side goes after private citizens (whether they be Norm’s supporters, Rush Limbaugh, Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin’s children, et al.). What happened to hope and change?
March 12th, 2009 at 6:29 PM
“Go sue the GOP”
Actually, I think the only ones that likely face the prospect of civil litigation is Coleman for recklessly placing people’s personal financial information on the interwebs and then not taking adequate action to inform those whose personal information was leaked.
Do I think the GOP should be sued because they intercepted a DFL memo? Hardly. I just find it comical that the GOP chooses TODAY, the same day they make a huge uproar over the Coleman supporter link, to pat themselves on the back for intercepting a private DFL memo.
“am outraged over how your side goes after private citizens (whether they be Norm’s supporters, Rush Limbaugh, Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin’s children, et al.). What happened to hope and change?”
Oh please, stop your preaching. First, I can’t think of a single person “on my side” who is going after Norm’s supporters. COLEMAN’s the one who let their personal information get downloaded by anyone who wanted to get that information whether democrat, republican or none of the above.
Second, the republican party has been in the business of personal slander as long as the democrats.
Finally, everyone else on your list is hardly “private citizens.”
March 12th, 2009 at 6:42 PM
PlymouthDem,
Your arrogance is truly amazing. No, don’t blame the thieves who stole the credit card numbers from Coleman’s website to publish it on their own. Don’t blame the same politically motivated people from sending out now five e-mails to intimidate Norm’s supporters.
And on top of that, go ahead and have a government employee leak confidential information about a man who dared to ask Obama a question (Joe the Plumber), go ahead and question the maternity of an infant baby and the private decisions of teenagers, and then go ahead and attack and slander a radio talk show host and his synidication partner. And finally, go ahead and audit the guy who dares to put out a website that says Tim Geitner is a tax cheat. It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when anyone who opposes Barack Obama is no longer a “private citizen.” You know what, PlymouthDem, they’re all private citizens. All of us are who aren’t elected to public office.
March 12th, 2009 at 6:56 PM
“Your arrogance is truly amazing. No, don’t blame the thieves who stole the credit card numbers from Coleman’s website to publish it on their own.”
First, I think it’s a stretch to say someone who downloads something sitting on a public webserver as a “theif.” Second, I’m just saying don’t give Coleman a free pass. This was a problem entirely of his own doing. He made no effort to protect the database. Kept it on a web server. Store personal information including CC security codes so that personal information could readily be used. And then made no effort to inform his supporters that their personal information was recklessly made public.
“Don’t blame the same politically motivated people from sending out now five e-mails to intimidate Norm’s supporters.”
I see no evidence of political motivation. Self-promotion? Perhaps.
“And on top of that, go ahead and have a government employee leak confidential information about a man who dared to ask Obama a question (Joe the Plumber), go ahead and question the maternity of an infant baby and the private decisions of teenagers, and then go ahead and attack and slander a radio talk show host and his synidication partner. And finally, go ahead and audit the guy who dares to put out a website that says Tim Geitner is a tax cheat. It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when anyone who opposes Barack Obama is no longer a “private citizen.†You know what, PlymouthDem, they’re all private citizens. All of us are who aren’t elected to public office.”
Again, please. Here’s a newsflash: anyone, republican or democrat, who steps into the spotlight exposes themselves to scrutiny. You can’t make yourself a public figure, embrace your notoriety, and then complain when you can’t live a private life. Joe the Plumber was a tax cheat and was unlicensed. He made himself a public figure (and continues to embrace it), people are going to look into him. Rush is OBVIOUSLY a public figure. As for the Palins, criticism was directed at the parents (who, quite frankly, were hypocrites), not the children. For every example you come up with I can point to examples where the right did the same thing.
March 12th, 2009 at 7:02 PM
PlymouthDem,
My mailbox is in public view (and on public property). It’s also unlocked. Does that give you the right to look in my mailbox and see my mail?
As for Joe the Plumber, Rush and the Palin children, thank you for acknowledging the Obama smear machine. Joe the Plumber was not a tax cheat or unlicensed. He didn’t pay a tax bill that he never received and he worked under someone else’s license, which is perfectly legal. He was minding his own business when Obama walked up to him and shook his hand. He didn’t ask for Obama to come to his neighborhood and he didn’t ask for the television cameras to be there. What he did ask was a great question which revealed Obama to be socialist. Rush and the Palin children may be public figures, but they are still PRIVATE CITIZENS. And they are taking abuse at the hands of people in our government and particularly from the Obama smear machine.
March 12th, 2009 at 7:06 PM
P.S. PlymouthDem,
The maternity of Trig Palin was questioned in the media. The question of whether Sarah Palin (if she was the mother) should have aborted Trig (the Down’s Syndrome baby) was discussed in the media. And, of course, Palin’s teenage daughter’s pregnancy was more than discussed in the media. These are children — not even adults and certainly not the candidates themselves.
March 12th, 2009 at 7:16 PM
“My mailbox is in public view (and on public property). It’s also unlocked. Does that give you the right to look in my mailbox and see my mail?”
No, because it’s a felony to remove mail from a mailbox. It’s not to download information off of a public website.
“As for Joe the Plumber, Rush and the Palin children, thank you for acknowledging the Obama smear machine”
As long as you recognize you are a hypocrite to complain about it happening to republicans and not acknowledging it happens to democrats.
“These are children — not even adults and certainly not the candidates themselves.”
They were discussed because Palin injected abstinence and abortion into the public debate.
March 12th, 2009 at 7:44 PM
PlymouthDem,
First, it’s a felony to publish private financial data. There’s no difference, you idiot.
Second, private citizens do not deserved to be smeared by people in the government. Joe the Plumber had confidential data downloaded and distributed to the media by government officials. They are being sued. The term “public figure” only relates to differences in defamation law – it has nothing to do with government officials smearing and attacking people. The issue of who is the mother of Trig Palin has nothing to do with abstinence or abortion.
It’s amazing how low Dems like you are willing to sink into the gutter. Perhaps that’s why Chris Dodd is behind in the polls along with Joe Biden’s son and Gov. Corzine. And those are all in hard blue states.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:06 PM
Chris, The democrats don’t sink into the gutter, they live in the sewers below the gutter. The far leftwing liberals that post here care nothing about anything but obtaining power for their party. They do not care what it does to this country or society. They don’t care who they attack or how it impacts the person – they just want power.
The good news is this will be their down fall. They will continue to over reach and will surely fail. In the end good will win over their evil.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Republicans suck!
March 12th, 2009 at 8:57 PM
“First, it’s a felony to publish private financial data. There’s no difference, you idiot.”
Putting aside the fact that you’ve now switched from downloading the data to publishing it, it is not necessarily a felony to publish private information. If it were, Coleman would face felony charges since he published that information by placing it on a public website. It is absolutely a felony to remove and investigate someone’s mail from a mailbox. So, you’re analogy is still stupid.
As for the rest of your blather, I’m not going to respond until you acknowledge that you are a hypocrite since both republicans and democrats target non-politicians. Hell, this very website made a business of going after, for example, campaign staffers.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:01 PM
BC
Your IQ revealed.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:50 AM
PlymouthDem,
You’re an ass. Name the comment where I said it was illegal to download the financial data. There is a prize if you can find the comment (hint, I never said it, so there is no prize to be awarded). It is also a felony to re-publish private financial data. Since the list belonged to Norm Coleman’s campaign, they didn’t violate the law about re-publishing private financial data. The same, quite possibly can’t be said of Wikileaks and others who have re-published the list.
My analogy is not stupid because it’s as illegal to steal mail out of a mailbox as it is to re-publish private financial data taken from a website. It doesn’t matter that the data was hidden in plain sight, you moron. It’s the same as a lawyer sending out an e-mail or a fax to the wrong address. They always put the disclaimer that if the e-mail or fax was received in error that the recipient can’t use and must destroy the information. So much for your finders keepers, loser weepers argument.
As for the GOP targeting non-politicians, there is a hell of a difference between going after a guy who you walked up to in his driveway and going after campaign staffers. That analogy is stupid. I can only imagine how loud you’d have squealed if Karl Rove polled Rev. Jackson or then-talk show host Al Franken or even George Soros and attacked them from the White House based on polls. That’s exactly what Obama has done to Rush Limbaugh. And the MSM went after Joe the Plumber (whose slander you repeated), Sarah Palin’s children and especially Rush.
March 13th, 2009 at 1:09 AM
Q: What does the hacked database and the leaked DFL budget plan have to do with one another?
A: Both are attempts by liberals to steal money!
Leroys and his broken moral compass, always protecting criminals. Tax-cheats, child molesters and terrorists – should not fear. Leroy the Lobbyist is here.
March 13th, 2009 at 6:58 AM
As always, the ends justify the means with liberals/Democrats.
March 13th, 2009 at 7:19 AM
“You’re an ass. Name the comment where I said it was illegal to download the financial data. There is a prize if you can find the comment”
‘My mailbox is in public view (and on public property). It’s also unlocked. Does that give you the right to look in my mailbox and see my mail?’
This who discussion started based on this comment. I get that you have since changed your position when I pointed out how stupid the analogy was since DOWNLOADING data is not the same as peering in someone’s mailbox.
“It is also a felony to re-publish private financial data. Since the list belonged to Norm Coleman’s campaign, they didn’t violate the law about re-publishing private financial data. The same, quite possibly can’t be said of Wikileaks and others who have re-published the list.”
So, now you agree it’s not necessarily a felony to publish personal financial information and you are falling back on criminal copyright infringement? Their is just one problem with your crack legal analysis, assuming that the list warrants copyright protection, there can be no criminal act unless that copyright is registered.
Seriously, this would be a lot easier if you would just stick to an argument instead of change it everytime it is exposed as being terrible.
“It’s the same as a lawyer sending out an e-mail or a fax to the wrong address. They always put the disclaimer that if the e-mail or fax was received in error that the recipient can’t use and must destroy the information. So much for your finders keepers, loser weepers argument.”
It’s not anything like that. Attorneys put that disclaimer on correspondence to protect the attorney client privilege. It has nothing to do with the illegality of downlading information from a public website (your original theory), the publishing of private information (your second theory) or the illegality of using and republishing someone else’s property (your third theory).
“As for the GOP targeting non-politicians, there is a hell of a difference between going after a guy who you walked up to in his driveway and going after campaign staffers. That analogy is stupid”
Where do you draw the line? I’m just confused considering you previously drew the line at ELECTED OFFICIALS and, as you said, everyone else is a private citizen. Again, your inability to stick to a position anytime it’s pointed out as ridiculous. Further, the notion that the Bush administration didn’t go after the “llberal media” personally form the whitehouse is ridiculous. And, what was Valerie Plane? Was she a public figure under your definition?
You are a complete moron if you actually think republicans don’t do the very same thing you are complaining about.
March 13th, 2009 at 7:43 AM
What’s just amazing is it doesn’t cross democrats’ minds that purposely and maliciously taking and posting their fellow citizens’ credit card data is just plain wrong.
Who knows, it might fit into some legal limbo where laws haven’t caught up to technology … but that’s not the core issue.
The volumes that dflers write to defend this cyber-terrorism speaks volumes to their lack of a moral compass.
This core dishonesty will not be reasoned out of them. They support this dishonest activity because they are dishonest at their core.
Maybe they were born that way, or maybe it’s habit coming from decades of excusing the inexcusable, but I’ll leave that up to Dr. Phil.
I mean really …. ask your third grader (or maybe you republican neighbors third grader) if this was the right thing to do.
March 13th, 2009 at 7:49 AM
Plydumb, you can defend your comrades all you want. Pretend it was simply and exercise of free speech and totally within the law.
Aside from legal issues, do you think that what they did was wrong?
March 13th, 2009 at 8:15 AM
“What’s just amazing is it doesn’t cross democrats’ minds that purposely and maliciously taking and posting their fellow citizens’ credit card data is just plain wrong. Who knows, it might fit into some legal limbo where laws haven’t caught up to technology … but that’s not the core issue.”
What just amazing to me is that republicans fail to also point the finger at Team Coleman who actually PUT people’s credit card information on a PUBLIC SERVER UNPROTECTED IN THE WIDE OPEN and is now lying to try and cover up his blunder.
Look, to answer Chile’s answer, do I think the group (who is NOT necessarily democrat or republican) should post people’s credit card information? No. I’m not even sure if they have. Is it fine for them to report that they’ve obtained that information because of Coleman’s recklessness? Sure. Is it fine for them to inform people on the list that they’ve obtained that information, especially when Coleman won’t show the fortitude to inform his supporters that he let their data out? Yes.
But, stop acting like this is all the doings of this independent media outlet. None of this would have happened had Team Coleman not been idiots and put it out there for anyone to download.
Why is it that most organizations can be proactive, apologize, and even offer identity protection services when they leak personal information but Team Coleman won’t admit they screwed up, hid that they screwed up, and now is trying to wash their hands of their screw up? And why can’t republicans at least acknowledge that Coleman did in fact screw up?
March 13th, 2009 at 8:22 AM
.. and it’s worth noting that Coleman’s lies about his technology is clearly a pattern. Let’s not forget that this whole debacle occurred because Coleman’s web team broke their webserver and put all of this data on the public website. Team Coleman, of course, tried to claim that their website just crashed because of traffic which anyone with any knowledge of computers quickly pointed out as a complete fabrication.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:34 AM
PD. Lies, all lies. Many people with knowledge of current technical knowledge of computers pointed out that you lefties were spreading lies and exposed your lack of knowledge about technical computer issues.
Did Coleman screw up? Not according to the Secret Service. They reported that no contributor data was exposed. Did the Secret Service screw up? Very possible.
March 13th, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Pete..
Do they have computers out where you live?
Incredible!
March 13th, 2009 at 9:46 AM
danbrome, have you ever been to rural Minnesota? They have computers! They also have less crime and fewer welfare queens. If you ever visit there, you might want to try to act less flambouyant: Advice from Yahoo Anwerers, http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090216204632AA1GhIE
danbrome: Ignorant
March 13th, 2009 at 10:00 AM
PlymouthDem,
You’re being absurd. I NEVER once said that it was illegal to download the information. For someone who calls everyone else a liar, you’re lying about what I said. I will donate $50 to the DFL if you can find where my original theory was about downloading the information. I said it was illegal for someone to take the information from Coleman’s site and re-publish it. It’s not a copyright issue, you ass. It’s an issue of distributing private, sensitive personal financial information.
As I said before, just because the information was on Coleman’s website does not make it appropriate for someone to take the info and re-publish it on another site.
Finally, attorneys, banks and real estate agents all use the disclaimer to not only protect attorney client privilege but also to protect against people wrongly using CONFIDENTIAL private data. If you received an e-mail from an attorney, bank or real estate agent and re-published it on the internet, you’d be just like the people who took the list from Coleman’s site and re-published the data.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:17 AM
chile..
If I’d have to act like Pete, I’d prefer to stay in the city.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:22 AM
“You’re being absurd. I NEVER once said that it was illegal to download the information. For someone who calls everyone else a liar, you’re lying about what I said. I will donate $50 to the DFL if you can find where my original theory was about downloading the information. I said it was illegal for someone to take the information from Coleman’s site and re-publish it. It’s not a copyright issue, you ass. It’s an issue of distributing private, sensitive personal financial information.”
I gave you where you asserted the wrong was the downloading. I can’t be any more explicit than I’ve been. I do see you’re now back on distributing private information seeing as distributing other poeple’s property (copyright) is a no go. Unfortunately, you can’t overcome the fact that IF THAT WERE AGAINST THE LAW (it’s not necessarily) then Coleman would have violated that mythical law because he did just that.
“If you received an e-mail from an attorney, bank or real estate agent and re-published it on the internet, you’d be just like the people who took the list from Coleman’s site and re-published the data.”
Hardly. Coleman’s data included no disclaimer about the confidentiality of that information. He just put it up there like he put up the names of voters who’s ballots were rejected.
What you may be thinking of is the “Electronic Communications Privacy Act” which does not cover downloading publicly available information on website, but instead… wait for it, “intercept[ion] of any wire, oral, or electronic communication.” Which, brings us full circle doesn’t it. Downloading data is not intercepting communications. INTERCEPTING communications (as the GOP is patting themselves on the back for doing” is intercepting communications. Again, that seems to be the word Ryan is highlighting.
March 13th, 2009 at 10:42 AM
danbrome – refuses to act like a man, stays in the city. Rural areas of the state rejoice. Film at 11.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:10 AM
If I recall correctly, back in January, when that database was available, the log files were not on the computer. So when the Secret Service says they could not find any evidence, well probably not if the log file was not there at the same time!
Also, if WikiLeaks redacted the first part of the credit card number and only published the last 4 digits and the security code, did they technically re-publish financial data?
The other thing about WikiLeaks that I find interesting is this:
“Our servers are distributed over multiple international jurisdictions and do not keep logs. Hence these logs cannot be seized.”
If this is indeed true, than I think the Coleman team – or anyone – is going to have a hard time tracking this down. And compared to some of the other items on WikiLeaks, this is small potatoes.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Chris, you say it is illegal to download the info right here:
“Anyone who re-publishes private information…is as guilty as if they took the information in the first place.”
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2009/03/11/urgent-group-threatening-to-post-private-coleman-database-information-online/#comment-284212
You do backpeddle later in the thread though.
March 13th, 2009 at 11:25 AM
“You do backpeddle”
Chris backpeddling? Shocking!
March 13th, 2009 at 11:44 AM
“I will donate $50 to the DFL if you can find where my original theory was about downloading the information”
So, Chris, when will you be writing that check?
March 13th, 2009 at 11:46 AM
You two are really stretching things. Anyone else notice that liberals find it impossible to admit they are wrong – ever?
Why don’t you get together, big hug now, and get back to the home before they miss you.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:00 PM
“Anyone else notice that liberals find it impossible to admit they are wrong – ever?”
Isn’t this whole spat about Chris not admitting he is wrong? Or Republicans not willing to put some blame on Coleman?
March 13th, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Plydumb, this thread is about the Democrats wanting to raise taxes again. It was Leroy-the-jackass diverted the topic to the criminal behavior of Democrats. danbrome-the-gaywad, then began insulting rural Minnesotans.
It’s time to get back on the topic: The DFL Budget Plan and the lying SOBs behind it.
March 13th, 2009 at 1:20 PM
At least the senate DFL plan balances the budget with the goal of making it last four years. Pawlenty’s plan is to borrow against the next budget to make this two year plan work. So then in years 3 and 4, we will get screwed again. Brilliant.
Also, the DFL senate plan cuts spending more than Pawlenty proposed. How can that be? I thought all they knew how to do was spend?
March 13th, 2009 at 1:40 PM
AC, the DFL plan is two steal from the taxpayers for the next two years, as well as year 3 and 4.
Interesting the DFL chooses welfare over schools. Local school district may make up the difference with operating levies, but the fact remains that the DFL refuses to cut welfare.
March 13th, 2009 at 2:41 PM
Like everything the Democrats are doing these days our kids will pay the price. Obama on the national level is putting all this debt on our kids and now the state Democrats are doing the same thing.
The more you learn the more you earn. I guess the Democrats are afraid to create a stronger working middle class because they know we tend to vote Republican.
It is the people you keep dependent on goverment spending and the elite that vote Democrats.
Once again the Democrats fail. Thank God many people who voted for this so called “change” are have buyers remorse. Even Obama is changing his tune now that his poll numbers are headed down. He is less popular than President Bush at this same time in his administration.
Once again the liberals are worshiping the wrong deity. I guess Obama is the “Chosen One” after all.
March 13th, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Pete, with Pawlenty’s plan, our kids would pay the price even more.
March 13th, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Pete..
“Thank God many people who voted for this so called “change†are have buyers remorse.”
You really need to find a better news source you idiot.
March 14th, 2009 at 10:29 AM
danbrome, is the Wall Street Journal a credible news source:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The affirmative action approval rating is going down faster that you would in the back seat of Aswhin Madia’s Prius, – it’s going to be a long four years.
March 14th, 2009 at 2:06 PM
The Wall Street Journal is a fine source for the conservative Republican slant, sure. I agree.
I read the entire article before you posted it. The interesting tidbit was this in their conclusion:
“Finally, what probably accounts for a good measure of the confidence and support the Obama administration has enjoyed is the fact that they are not Republicans. Virtually all Americans, more than eight in 10, blame Republicans for the current economic woes, and the only two leaders with lower approval ratings than Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are Republican leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner.”
Pete’s suggestion that Democrats who voted for President Obama now have buyer’s remorse is both too general and too absurd to let go.
Sorry to have called him out on it.
March 14th, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Actually, to be honest..
I don’t think the Presiden’t approval rating is all that important during a crisis. What truly matters is that he governs with accurate information, a strong team, and with courage to do what is necessary for ALL the people.
With that criteria, I have confidence in his ability.
March 14th, 2009 at 4:20 PM
danbrome, once again when did I say Democrats had buyers remorse? Democrats like you are too stupid to understand what you have done to this country.
Obama is a liar just like you. Accurate information? None available from the White House. Strong Team? Where? Courage? Chicken Shit just like danbrome.
March 14th, 2009 at 8:01 PM
“Thank God many people who voted for this so called “change†are have buyers remorse.â€
March 14th, 2009 at 9:05 PM
danbrome, which word in that quote is spelled Democrat?
Do you like going through life as a idiot? I must say you are good at it but is that what you want on your tombstone? Here lies danbrome, he was a complete idiot?
March 15th, 2009 at 7:11 AM
“I don’t think the Presiden’t approval rating is all that important during a crisis.”
During times of crisis, Presidents often see spikes in their approval rating. Obama is in over his head. He is a liar and an idiot. No wonder danbrome supports him.
March 15th, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Again, Pete said:
“Thank God many people who voted for this so called “change†are have buyers remorse.â€
March 15th, 2009 at 8:10 PM
President Obama is no idiot. Stay tuned.
March 16th, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Obama: IDIOT
March 16th, 2009 at 6:34 PM
danbrome, still can’t admit he is wrong. danbrome = Idiot. Obama = socialist idiot who will be a one termer.
March 16th, 2009 at 8:54 PM
Pete, we’ll start admitting we’re wrong as soon as you pony up to that bar. But I don’t think that will ever happen. You’re too full of yourself.
March 16th, 2009 at 10:40 PM
AC..
Look in the dictionary.
It’s called pompous.
March 16th, 2009 at 10:45 PM
danbrome is no idiot.
Ask somebody who doesn’t worship Sean Hannity (Pete).
March 17th, 2009 at 7:46 AM
I did Pete. And now I know what you look like. Your picture next to the word pompous looks a little dated though. You really should send them a newer one.
March 17th, 2009 at 7:50 AM
OK, major bad on my part danbrome. I was laughing too hard at post 66 and just assumed it was from Pete. So post 68 from me probably makes NO sense. But you get the idea…
March 18th, 2009 at 9:24 PM
AC, none of you posts ever make any sense so need to ever point that out. Everyone is aware of that fact. All BS, all time AC.
March 19th, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Yet somehow my posts get under your skin and you constantly have to reply.
Glad I’m having an impact on you.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:00 PM
Under my skin? I keep yanking your chain and you are getting under my skin? You are like the retarded cousin. She doesn’t make any sense but we talk to her because we love her.
Except we don’t love you – I guess thats the difference isn’t it.
March 20th, 2009 at 11:24 AM
I see you’ve added the word “retarded” to your repertoire of zippy insults. Right next to calling people “gay.”
Classy and mature as always.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Why are you insulting my cousin like that? You jackass! If anything she should be the one (God rest her soul) who should be insulted by my comparing her to you.
You are so gay…