And now we have two

Al Franken, escorted by his senior colleague, Amy Klobuchar and by a former holder of Minnesota’s Class II U.S. Senate seat, Walter Mondale, went to the front of the Senate chamber and was administered the oath of office [on a Bible formerly owned by another predecessor in that seat, Paul Wellstone] by that body’s president, Joseph Biden.

There were some questions one might have raised. Why Mondale? Most senators just use the state’s other. Wellstone used Mondale, but that was because he was disgusted with the ethics [or lack thereof] of his colleague, David Durenberger. And, Didn’t he have a Bible of his own?

Now we have two senators. Never mind that more than four of every seven who bothered to vote last year voted against o9ne of them, if we believe some of the muttering we have heard the last few months we are now at Nirvana.

Politicians, their lawyers, and Equal Protection

Eric Black of MinnPost says it well this afternoon.

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, Repub of Texas, who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Committee and might therefore be viewed as less than an impartial commentator, says that Dems who tell Coleman to give it up are guilty of "blatant hypocrisy" because their current position -- don't count any more ballots -- contradicts the position they took -- keep counting -- in 2000 when the U.S. Supreme Court canceled the Florida statewide recount thus making G.W. Bush president. In the interest of brevity, Sen. Cornyn did not find space to comment on the hypocrisy of Repubs who have made an opposite switcheroo between the Bush/Gore and the Franken/Coleman cases.

He has a good point. Politicians take the side that looks good at the moment and attorneys argue whatever point of law is on the side of whoever is paying them. Do you really think things would be much different if the numbers were the other way around?

I doubt whether Norm Coleman or Al Franken reads anything here.

So I won’t try to tell either of them what to do next. [After all, even if one of them happened upon this place, there is no reason to believe they would pay attention to what I am writing.]

[Old time SNL watchers: Remember when the 1980s were going to be the “Al Franken Decade”? Are we now looking at a “Al Franken recount decade”?]

I am tired of the hypocrisy on both sides. It’s just that the hypocrisy on the Coleman side stands out worse because of one simple matter: FRANKEN HAS THE VOTES AND IT IS UNLIKELY THAT HE WON’T WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE.

Our election laws and procedures have been shown to be remarkably good. An election this close will show the imperfections and we need to be willing to react to what we have learned, but we do darn good. It is just that there is no good tool available to measure something so close adequately. It is like trying to guess who wins an Olympic race when clocks measuring thousandths of a second cannot distinguish a winner.

But Norm’s claim that not all ballots are being counted equally, while perhaps somewhat true, misses a big point. We do have more equal treatment of ballots statewide than we have ever had before. We once had a mixture of hand-counted paper ballots, machine counted paper ballots, lever machines [which left no paper trail], and [if I understand correctly] even a few jurisdictions using punch card ballots. Now we all vote with paper ballots which makes a recount like we have just seen possible, with every ballot and ballot application open to review by observers of all/both sides.

I will try to avoid this subject for a while. It’s getting tiring.

Can Norm take a hint?

After three month’s delay caused by his taking a dubious case to court, Norm’s margin of defeat has grown from 225 votes to 312.

Al Franken may not be much, but it is looking like it has to be him or nobody.

Can Norm take a hint? Or is he still too obstructionist? Or too well funded?

Three comments on the recount

Today the State Canvassing Board certified that the numbers add up to Franken.  Norm’s attorneys threaten suit.  We’ll see what happens.  In the meantime, here are three interesting posts elsewhere about the Coleman v. Franken recount.

After suggesting that Norm should run for Governor in 2010, Zach Stephenson in MNPUBLIUS, comments:

If Norm concedes next week, he’ll look gracious and avoid the “sore-loser” label that will plague him if he fights in court. Polls have shown that Minnesotans approve of the recount. They think the election was fair. I don’t think the public will get behind a court challenge. Moreover, Norm’s own words are really going to haunt him. Remember, right after the election Norm called on Al to concede. He said it was time to heal. If Norm takes this to court, he’ll be a hypocrite.

On the other hand, a concession from Norm would prove that he practices what he preaches. It would reinforce Norm’s self-styled image as a moderate and a uniter. I would expect that his favorability ratings would shoot up significantly.

From Dave Mindeman in mnpACT’s Progressive Politics Blog:

A 225 vote lead is not very big...but its value increases when you become a campaign searching for new votes. The official recount tally is over and even with the court challenges that Coleman has been talking about, there just doesn't seem to be enough numbers to overturn what is officially in the books now. . . .

The only way Coleman could possibly win now is through a prolonged and protracted court action which will do neither side any good.

Eric Ostermeier of Smart Politics, in a post noting the ineffectiveness of the Franken campaign notes

The rationale of their discontent was simply this: in an election year in which the top of the DFL ticket carried the state by a double-digit margin, why is the DFL even in a position to need a recount to win its Senate race?  [emphasis his]

There is also an interesting chart showing how previous DFL Senate candidates did against the head of the ticket and asserting that Franken is the fourth worst ever.

Our growing religious stewpot

Last month I was at a Baptist funeral at which a rabbi sang “Eagle’s Wings.”  That seemed strange.

 

At an event I was at earlier today somebody mentioned that it was a sign of the times that we were having such a hard time deciding which Jewish man with a Catholic wife should be our senator, that a previous generation would never have given either much hope.

 

As one who remembers when back in the pre-Vatican II days when my Catholic neighbors were told by the sisters at their school that they shouldn’t even go into a nearby Protestant church for a non-Sunday, community event and heard similar cautions mentioned by Protestants about Catholic campuses, events like these do indeed make it seem like we are making progress in tolerance.

 

But I just noticed a post from a Muslim woman in the Washington Post’s and Newsweek’s On Faith which outdoes that all.  It describes a Muslim event at which Rick Warren, Obama’s invocator, spoke and Melissa Etheridge sang.

 

To quote Yakov Smirnov, “What a country!”

Can we hold back on the posturing and just get them counted?

Pat Kessler of WCCO television has noted that Norm Coleman gained more over Walter Mondale when the final numbers came in six years ago than Al Franken has gained on Norm this year, but nobody really noticed or cared. But this kind of difference is close enough that it makes Norm uneasy and causes him and his attorneys to carp daily and keeps Franken’s hopes alive for a while. I do not doubt that if the numbers were working the other way around that Franken would posture similarly.

We may find votes which did not register because people did not mark ballots correctly. Our election laws do not require that ballots be marked for the convenience of optical scanner, their inventors, or users. They require that the best effort be made to determine the voter’s intention.

Properly counting these votes may produce some interesting results in a race this close, but the law neither requires that the voter be smart enough to follow instructions nor that they be conformist enough to fill out the ovals. [Not everybody did well at coloring within the lines when a child.]

And it may be that there may be enough of these ballots to make a difference. Democracy is not always pretty.

I am already tired of this senate election

I am a bit surprised that Dean Barkley has not moved up in the polls considering all the invective that Franken and Norm and all of their surrogates have been using. I do know that they have convinced me to send the former Senator back to D.C.

And I am already tired of this election.

There have just been too many strange things in this campaign, whether one refers to the untimely filing of a suit against our senior senator which we are supposed to believe that the comedian from Gotham had nothing to do with or where Norm sleeps [I rented a basement bedroom when I was in college and it did not make me a member of the household and at least he did not pull a Durenberger and bill the government to stay in his own residence] the idea that corporate owners are more concerned with workers’ rights than their unions are [and the radio commercial refers to “America under Al Franken” like he was running for President].

I have always considered CCM as more idea-based than candidate-based and have not used this place to endorse candidates, although I suspect that sometimes people can make their inferences, such as in last year’s Helgen-Haas race.

But I guess I’ll vote to return Dean Barkley to Washington.

Also notable: Dean Barkley and Al Franken are both too old to become new senators because by the time that they have enough seniority to do much they will be too old. However, Barkley, because of his previous service, would go in at the top of the class.

Barkley as stealth candidate?

KEVIN DUCHSCHERE of the MSJ&T wrote Monday that their Minnesota Poll shows that Franken is catching up to Norm, but that Dean Barkley, while way behind, seems to be gaining from both.

I certainly am not ready to suggest that Dean Barkley be returned to the U.S. Senate, but there are things to be said for him.

He already lived here so did not have to move here just to run for office and he has demonstrated that he can return here when his service is over. Almost any other former Senator who can combine his former Senator’s floor pass with a law license stays around the District of Columbia and makes himself a lot of money, but Dean Barkley came back and drove a Metro Mobility bus.

Al Franken and Norm Coleman continue to throw a lot of dirt around. Earlier we were concerned with whether Norm’s wife actually lived in Saint Paul with him and later we got tied up in whether he was sleeping unscrupulously in Washington. Now we know that Al Franken uses foul language. I’m sure that Norm has used bad language too and I am certain that his love of a worker’s secret ballot is entirely feigned and know that Al cannot figure out where to send his taxes. [And note that his ad in defense only notes that he paid the state where he lived and does not mention which state that is.] And do we really think that Norm will end Social Security or that Al will stop Medicare.

And Dean Barkley seems able to stay above them. Maybe it is a long shot, but it may be a winning strategy.

My Lord, what a daughter

What is there about Priscilla Lord Feris that would make anybody who should be voting in an DFL primary want to vote for her?

She is not Al Franken and that may be a plus, although the only people who were willing to be publicly identified as DFL people chose Franken. She is a lawyer so she loses that advantage that Franken has over Norm. And she is very old to become a freshman senator. By the time that she could be a second term senator she would be almost the same age that McCain is now.

I remember when Hubert Humphrey [the real one, not Skippy], Gene McCarthy, and Bobby Kennedy were running against each other for president, but that ended forty years ago this June when Senator Kennedy was killed. Somehow she is telling us that they all were her people, but even if it is true, how relevant could it be now? And to most people those names are just things in history books. How old does she think the average DFL primary voter is?

[NOTE: Some recent posts have been delayed or gone unposted while I fight the Blogger software. This may continue for a bit. I won’t know until after things are actually posted.]

Can a Candidate Conquer by Creating Class Confusion?

Norm Coleman has a lot going for him that Al Franken does not. He lives in a city [ours] while Franken has demonstrated his enmity toward city people by living in a suburb. [I know, Al was raised that way, but city people who vote for suburbanites generally do themselves disfavors.] Coleman has experience that Franken lacks and has demonstrated that he can get big things done. [Whether they ever needed to be done is another matter. Think of Lawson Commons.] He has spent his adult life here. He did not move here specifically to seek office.

Of course, Franken has things going for him also. He’s smart and likely would be in the majority caucus. He is not a lawyer. These really should all be thought of as big plusses.

CCM is not endorsing a candidate yet and may not ever. But it should be noted that despite the advantages that he has that Coleman’s use of the intentionally misnamed “Coalition for a Democratic Workplace'” to slur Franken really cannot be justified. It is very misleading, although Coleman will claim that they are not the direct lies a viewer might reasonably infer and that they are “independent” spots. Remember, “legal ethics” is an oxymoron.]

If enacted, the Employee Free Choice Act would not take anybody’s secret ballot away. Although some observers doubt that it will be coming for a vote in the next Congress, Coleman and his management cronies have decided to pounce on this non-issue.

And using this issue as a wedge does Norm no glory.

A Minnpost article on the matter can be found here.
A labor-friendly description of the Employee Free Choice Act can be found here.

Franken as panderer

Al Franken want to forbid former congresspeople from ever becoming lobbyists and is spending a lot of money letting us know that. I question whether that is good policy, but really don’t need to write about my reservations, because it won’t happen. If you can believe that proposal has a chance of coming about, you probably could be led to believe that George Carlin was runner-up to Cardinal Ratzinger in the Sistine Chapel in 2005.

It won’t happen. It is so pathetically predictable that politicians will pander to us and Franken is just doing his part.

Politicians, especially non-incumbents, take on lobbyists and “special interests.” Other professions also have professionally-mandated positions to take which we also expect to hear.

Preachers rail against sin. Dentists advocate flossing. Librarians urge reading. Safety commissioners push seat belt usage. Aging sluggers who don’t have good legs anymore advocate the designated hitter rule. Teachers support learning, at least learning the right things.

We expect these things. But on these things, there is an outside chance that these some one’s actions might actually be changed. Some sins might not be committed when the exhortations of preachers are taken to mind. Some teeth may be flossed because of a dentist’s ongoing urgings. Some poor sap who otherwise is not scared by “buckle up” laws might actually click a seat belt together because his government suggests it so persistently. Sucker sports fans will continue to come and root for guys who really are no longer baseball players. Somebody may help their child or grandchild or neighbor with his/her lessons.

But there ain’t no way that Congresspeople and Senators are going to limit their future employment opportunities for the rest of their lives. It just ain’t a going to happen. Franken knows that. [And if he doesn’t he shouldn’t be in the position of being considered a serious candidate for any office, much less a major one.]

But people of any party can pander and Al Franken is demonstrating this well.

I only read Playboy for the articles

I outgrew the Playboy phase many years ago and have not seen Al Franken’s article from January 2000 titled "Porn-O-Rama!". From what has been reported in the media the last two days, it seems to have been an article of dubious literary value. However, I suspect that the literary value of the article has become largely irrelevant. The article apparently contains material which might be offensive to many, both of constituencies to which the DFL caters/panders and the “pro-family” groups that usually ignore DFL candidates, but who could use this issue to their advantage well.

In a Minnesota Monitor article posted today [Real bottom line in Franken's Playboy snafu: Mike Ciresi is making his move] Steve Perry seems to feel that the timing of this story is part of a coordinated to bring the former candidate who ethically made himself rich with money which should have belonged to the state back into the race. Doug Grow in MinnPost seems to suspect that there might be a Ciresi surprise in the primary even if Franken is endorsed.

I remember that when Ciresi was in the race that he promised to support the endorsement this time, but I guess that the former candidate is not bound by what he said when he was a candidate. [Of course, if/when he is elected he will be a former candidate again. Look out!]

Perry and Grow may be right. I really do not know.

I just wonder about some things.

Like, isn’t there one aged former adolescent in the DFL leadership who knew about the article and bothered to read it without being distracted by the visual distractions the magazine affords before the vast majority of the party leadership had signed onto the man from New York’s campaign? Late revelations hurt but this would have had to been a lot easier to know about than the GOP’s learning in 1990 that Grunseth was unsuited

And if he had had even the remotest idea of ever entering political life in this or any other state why would have Al Franken have written it?

And, of course, why was this obviously available fact withheld from the marketplace of the news until a week before the DFL state convention?

As I noted earlier, I have not seen Franken’s article and likely won't, having to settle for whatever summaries are made available in the various media by analysts who have managed to read it without the distractions for which Playboy is noted. Being in that magazine is not necessarily fatal to a candidate. Some of us remember the famous Jimmy Carter interview which came out just before the 1976 election.

But this whole deal cannot be a boon to a candidacy which was trailing Norm before this all came out and that is probably what the Ciresi people will remind us.

As David Brauer quoted Congressperson Keith Ellison in another MinnPost story today, "If you're explainin', you ain't gaining."

I mentioned earlier March 15,

[B]etween the two of them [Coleman and Ciresi], there would have been no problem for me in deciding whom [Coleman] to support. And I would like to think that I would have taken the same position, no matter what imaginary enemy Ciresi and Skippy had taken on.”

With Franken it will be different.

If the DFL expects me to vote on their line in November they will have to have somebody who is not Ciresi but who isn’t extremely flaky. It is a good trick being flaky enough to win DFL support and not turn off the general electorate.

For city people to support a suburbanite over a city resident is always a dubious enough situation anyway and Franken is not making his case well so far. I guess that still holds and we will have to see what develops.

Other earlier post http://ccmusings.blogspot.com/2008/03/ciresi-out.html [March 10]

Al Franken's return to New York City

I saw Al Franken’s appearance on Letterman’s show last night. I don’t see anything inherently evil in the appearance, but it does remind me that show business takes care of its own sometimes. Remember Schwarzenegger on Leno?

But I do wonder if Norm couldn’t have given just as good a showing and certainly understand the frustration some of his people may have.

New York doesn’t seem interested in electing its own senators. Remember Robert Francis Kennedy from Massachusetts? Pat Moynihan from Massachusetts? Hillary Rodham from Arkansas?

Maybe his trip there is Franken’s assurance that if elected, that he’ll give New York back a senator they are missing.

Mike Ciresi and Norm Coleman, some observations

Midway Barb left a comment to my post ["Ciresi Out” 3/10/08] ago to which I have responded.

It occurs to me that perhaps the whole matter really merits being a post of its own, so I am excerpting her [or his] question and my reply here.

Midway Barb said

Isn't it true that your dislike of Ciresi comes from his role in the tobacco suit? If he had saved us from some other community nusance wouldn't you like him?

This is my response:

I think that Mr. Ciresi’s opportunistic exploitation of the cigarette industry is not the reason I could never support him for anything.

And it would not be because he is a trial lawyer. A lot of lawyers do good things and working on contingency is often the only way some litigation could be brought about.

Poor people or people of moderate means often hire attorneys on contingency when they have wrongs that need addressing. On big successful cases the attorneys make a real bundle, but it is often the only way that poor folks have access to the court system for redress for real wrongs.

But if I am to choose between Ciresi and Norm, there really isn’t much choice. One is a lawyer who used his profession to make a lot of money which should have belonged to either the stockholders of the tobacco companies or the taxpayers of Minnesota, depending on how you view the merits of the case. Norm worked for a salary for the attorney general’s office.

Politicians often try to scare people into helping their careers by citing bogus enemies or crises. [Remember W on Saddam or JFK on the missile crisis?] When Skippy wanted to find a bogus enemy to propel him to the governorship and decided to sue tobacco for wrongs to the citizens of Minnesota, wrongs more detectable from intuition than from any fact that the companies had forced smoke into people’s bodies, he wanted to make a real big splash and get money in ten or eleven digits. He needed to find a way to make billions in punitive damages. He doubted if any of the lawyers in his office could do the job, so he made a deal with Ciresi and his Robbins law firm. He and Ciresi hoped that if they could sue for enough money and tie up the tobacco companies’ law departments long enough that they could pick up a small fortune. Skippy really wasn’t concerned about how much money Ciresi got as long as he could get big headlines about billions scared out of what they called “Big Tobacco.” They had no problem ignoring the inconvenience to the taxpayers paying for the suit or needing the real attention of the Ramsey County courts and the poor people conscripted to be on the jury, pushed their dubious case. Ciresi knew the contingency business and must have liked his chances and Skippy likely was figuring that it was now or never for his gubernatorial dreams so it was time to take the shot.

When tobacco finally surrendered, Ciresi was allowed to walk away with a very big chunk thanks to a wonderful contract he and Skippy had arranged beforehand which sent money the plaintiff [supposedly us] would receive straight to the Robbins firm instead of to the legislature. Other money was diverted to a state foundation instead of the body our constitution charges with deciding how to spend state assets.

I don’t doubt that this was all done legally and I don’t doubt that this was all done ethically when viewed in the narrow perspective of legal ethics [often a lovely oxymoron]. After all, it was written by smart lawyers, at least on Robbins’ end. But it stunk and it still stinks.

Norm Coleman also worked as a lawyer for the state and he prosecuted some really provable enemies of Minnesota while doing so. But Norm only took his salary, which may have been generous, but was never more than the low six figures, if that high.

When Norm has run for office he has had to do it the old-fashioned way by begging contributors for donations. State service had not given him millions in his own private vaults.

While I think that neither way of funding a campaign is the best, Norm’s is surely the better. It is one that you don’t have to be a lawyer to use.

And between the two of them, there would have been no problem for me in deciding whom to support. And I would like to think that I would have taken the same position, no matter what imaginary enemy Ciresi and Skippy had taken on.

With Franken it will be different.

RS

Ciresi out

Both metro area newspapers and Minnesota Monitor are reporting that Mike Ciresi is dropping out of the Senate race. That means that we will likely not have to choose between trial lawyers in this year’s election.

And it means that Ciresi who, with the help of his friend [at least he ought to be his friend] Skippy [the imitation Hubert Humphrey], found a new way to arrange public financing, will have to stay in his suburban home with a bit less of his public financing in the bank.

This may not be good for Ciresi, but can anybody question that a Franken vs. Norm race ought to be interesting [and likely dirty]?

And we might even see some speeches or ads we cannot all understand since either of both of these guys with their New York backgrounds may well make reference to something we poor Midwesterners cannot understand.