Taxpayer Support of Stadiums

A few weeks back Gov. Dayton announced that increasing taxes will not be an option to help fund a new Vikings stadium. Recently, a number of options have been floated that include a heavy gamble proceed angle. For more than three decades tribal casinos have held a monopoly on gaming in Minnesota. With that monopoly tribes in Minnesota have been able to improve their reservations - granted some have done better than others. Today the Star Tribune, http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/133748223.html, had an article talking about the new proposed ideas of a casino downtown and allowing the two race tracks in Minnesota to have slots with the revenue going to pay for sport stadiums and school funding.

Personally I don't care if Minnesota keeps the Vikings but I do care on how the new stadium is funded. For years I thought the NFL and the players association missed the boat by not requiring that 10% of all TV revenues be put in a kitty for updates to stadiums. That being said, if a new Vikings stadium is the catalyst to breaking the tribal gaming monopoly I am all for it.

I also found this article, of all places, on Politico - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68160.html - to which I think it is about time as well. Taxpayers for years have subsidized professional stadiums and when teams cannot sell out they have not been able to watch the team they subsidized per NFL rules. While I can understand why the NFL has a rule that they want the stadium sold out because that is where they get a lot of revenue. At the same time, I wonder how much TV revenue is lost by not showing the local game. I say that as long as taxpayers subsidize the stadiums then no more blackouts.

GOP - Small Government, right?

Yesterday the Star Tribune reported that the Minnesota State Legislature is debating a bill that would ban all abortions after 20 weeks unless the health of the mother is in danger. My first thought when reading the article was, "Didn't people vote in GOP candidates to reduce the size and scope of government?". I struggle with the topic of abortion because my unscientific view is that the decision should be between the female (and her support staff) and her doctor. Government should not dictate if abortion is legal or illegal.

That being said, taxpayer dollars should not be used to pay for abortions or anything that related to abortions. Why should the Government be involved in abortion decisions?

Target doesn’t bend to special interests!

Today comments I sent into the Star Tribune were published on the topic of Targets donation to a pro-business group that subsequently gave money to Rep. Tom Emmer's campaign for Minnesota Governor. The comments posted today is the second time my comments were published by the Star Tribune on this topic. My comment from July 29, 2010 (http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/100939139.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:Ug8P:Pc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr) were:

 

The uproar by the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community over Target's $150,000 donation to a group that has placed an ad for Tom Emmer is questionable. Target is one company that recognizes the plight of the GLBT community by offering domestic partnership benefits and donating money to pride parades.

The donation by Target is to back a candidate who is probusiness.

Why is it OK for the GLBT community to focus on one issue when backing a candidate, but not OK for Target?

Since that time advertising and negotiations have been taking place trying to force Target into donating similar money to groups and candidates that a friendly to the GLBT community. After hearing that Target said they would not cave to pressures from outside of Minnesota I wrote this(http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/100939139.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:Ug8P:Pc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr):

 

Kudos to Target executives for not being baited by the Human Rights Campaign into an attempt to extort money by a single-issue group ("Target balks at counter contribution," Aug. 17). Does the HRC not realize that Target offers benefit programs that are friendly to the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community while also giving money for the annual Pride festival? Or is this just another case of an outside force coming to Minnesota to push its weight around?

Target executives made a business decision to give money to a probusiness group that in turn helps probusiness candidates get elected. Target did not donate money to an anti-GLBT group. Will the HRC hire all the workers that Target, or any other company, has to let go if the environment in Minnesota becomes too toxic for businesses to thrive?

To paint Target, or any other business, has being anti-GLBT is pathetic. People are boycotting Target as well because of their donation choice. Don't people understand that in order for Target to thrive and offer jobs that it will back pro-business groups? Just take a look at the West Coast. Recently Utah raised their top level tax rate to 11% and the result was many businesses left the state and revenues dropped by $600 million. We need businesses in our communities to keep tax revenue flowing and if that means they donate money to a pro-business candidate then so be it. As I originally posed, "Why is it OK for the GLBT community to focus on one issue when backing a candidate, but not OK for Target?"

 

Pride Festival allows Brian Johnson to partake

Over the weekend the Twin Cities saw the GLBT community celebrate with a "Pride Festival". Last week the group was looking to bar Brian Johnson from being involved because of his views on homosexuality. After hearing of "Pride Festival" stance, I wrote the following to the Star Tribune (which was published in Saturday's paper): http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/97195119.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:Ug8P:Pc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr

The feud over Johnson smacks of hypocrisy. The Pride festival touts, on its website, that "nearly 400 vendors and exhibitors set up at the Pride Festival each year. From food and beverage to arts and crafts, employee groups and local nonprofit organizations, you can find just about anything you're looking for at the Pride Festival." But if the judge had not ruled, you would not have been able to find Brian Johnson.

Where did the tolerance, diversity and compassion go with Pride organizers? Jim Kelley, Pride festival manager, stated in the Star Tribune that "free speech and liberty belong to everyone. We are leasing this space, and if someone came into your home and started telling you what an awful family you have, [they] can have that opinion; [they] just can't have it in your house."

Again, where is the tolerance? What better place to discuss, openly, the topics concerning the community than at Pride? Or is tolerance of others only saved for the oppressed, downtrodden and castoffs of society?

When I opened the Sunday paper I was happy to hear that Johnson and his group were allowed to walk among the Pride Festival. From all accounts that I have read both yesterday and today, of the Pride Festival is that Johnson's group did not create the type of disruption that officials thought might take place.

The Ardent Viper receives hate mail!!!!

A few weeks back the Star Tribune printed one of my letters to editor. The title of my entry was "Marriage is not a Right" which ran in the paper on May 14^th. In the event you missed it here is what it said (http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/93729454.html?page=2&c=y):

It is time for Minnesotans to recognize that government involvement in the institution of marriage is the problem. Everyone has the right to choose a partner in life. It shouldn't be up to government to determine the makeup of that choice. We need to repeal all aspects of marriage from government and leave it to the religious institutions. It is time to replace the marriage license with a partnership recognition certificate that will give all legal aspects that the current marriage license does.

Why you may be asking yourself am I bringing this up now? It is not to toot my own horn about being published in the Star Tribune rather in response to a piece of mail I received earlier this week. A normal white envelope appeared in my mail box on Wednesday May 26^th with my name and address and a return address of American News Center 55401. At first glance I paid it no attention as I figured more junk mail. Thursday I decided to open it. Inside the envelope were two news articles. The first article was "Bonin guilty of four more road slayings" an AP story from Santa Ana, California. The second was "Sordid, gay-on-gay murder ignored in marriage debate" from WorldNetDaily dated January 1, 2010.

As I said, I really gave no thought. Then yesterday I asked my wife if she had seen what someone sent me in the mail. To which she had and didn't make sense. On closer inspection of the envelope she discovered a cartoon with the title of "The lower end of the Behavioral Spectrum". The cartoon depicted a normal man then a queer ape then a queer supporter ape with human head. My wife immediately thought hate mail to which I brushed off. So she did an internet search on the mysterious return address. Come to find out that it is hate mail in response to the letter to the editor posted above.

Here are some additional bloggers that received similar hate mail from American News Center 55401.

http://www.wilderoastcafe.com/diary/2006_01_01_archive.shtml

http://theangrycraig.blogspot.com/2008/03/american-news-center-55401.html

http://blueminneapolis.blogspot.com/2006/05/hate-mail-brought-to-you-courtesy-of.html

I am all for free speech and association. I recognize that with all the freedoms we take for granted we also must accept the fringe elements of every cloth among us. What raises my ire a bit, not much, is the anonymous factor and ignorant message the envelope sent. Personally I do not care who others choose as their life partners. My religious upbringing raises questions about why one may choose a same-sex partner and aspects of the teachings discuss its sin. Regardless of that, we live in a land where freedom reigns, at least for now, and with any free society there will be elements that we disagree with. I have on several occasions discussed the Same-Sex Marriage debate and offered an alternative solution that, I feel, will put the conversation to rest. What is so wrong with removing the "Marriage" license from our Governmental and Legal documents and replacing it with a certificate of partnership?

I understand we have over 200 years of institutional marriage red tape to unwind but the solution seems so obvious as to appease the Religious factions in America while ensuring the basic freedoms that our Founding Fathers intended to exist. No longer will there be an IRS box for marriage, no longer will the doctor's have to discern relations, no longer will we need to debate the sanctity of marriage as it will be preserved in religious ceremonies, and no longer will the Justice of the Peace be used to oversee marriage or any other type of union between two people. Everyone wins, right?

LGA dependence endangers City Budgets

Sunday morning is a time when I am able to get caught up on the prior week events and prepare for the upcoming week. As I am making breakfast, sausage and waffles, I read this headline in the Star Tribune's Twin Cities +Life section: Excelsior looks to lease out city land. City Council member Mary Jo Fulkerson is quoted as saying, "We do have lake property that everybody in the county uses and it's a potential revenue stream. Everybody is suffering for this lack of local government aid. We are looking at various things to be able to balance the budget." Fulkerson is correct that many cities around Minnesota are seeing a budget crunch because of cuts to local government aid.

Yesterday I had a conversation with one of Hamburg's City Council members about, among other items, local government aid. As cities around Minnesota plan their budgets the unknown of how much local government aid (LGA) is on the mind of every City Clerk. We both agreed that LGA funds need to be viewed as a bonus or potential money and not be factored in to the city budget. Much like a bonus one may receive from a job. It is okay to keep it in mind, the bonus or LGA Funds, but should not be counted on becoming reality until it happens. This does not mean City Councils should not earmark how to use LGA funds instead City Councils should not count on it as part of their operating budgets. The same philosophy needs to be applied in St. Paul too. By looking at LGA money as a bonus and not part of the operating budget cities should not experiencing deficits going forward.

The other aspect of the article that raised my ire was the statement by City Manager Kristi Luger, "We literally get nothing from the state now…We need to look at all of our resources and one resource we do have is land." Several years ago a decision in Excelsior was made to eliminate softball tournaments at the Excelsior Commons. The City of Excelsior made it increasingly more difficult for organizers to attract teams that once flocked to the Commons during the summer. Many summers of my youth entailed several trips to the Excelsior Commons to watch my dad and mom participate in softball tournaments. One of the biggest tournaments was Carmichaels which attracted hundreds of people. The place was packed starting Friday evening until the final game on Sunday afternoon. Now, I recognize that softball tournaments alone will not make up for the loss of LGA funds but it definitely would benefit the city and businesses of Excelsior.

Responsible government is the order of the day and for our local governments to become dependent on LGA is a microcasm of a greater problem of American co-dependence on Big Government solutions.

Debt rises to incredible heights yet Americans are blind

This morning I am reading Star Tribune and various other news sites I follow when I came across this headline: CBO report: Debt will rise to 90% of GDP (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/26/cbos-2020-vision-debt-will-rise-to-90-of-gdp/) in the Washington Times. The headline enough raised my ire and should every American. Now, I have been railed against for my push of smaller government, more freedom and lower taxes platform. I hope this article puts things in perspective for those that believe I am "chicken little" on the size and scope of government.

The article notes that the Federal public debt when Obama took office was $6.3 trillion or $56,000 per household. That number has expanded to $8.2 trillion or $72,000 per household today. The CBO estimates that by 2020 we are on path to reach a debt of $20.3 trillion or $170,000 per household. I understand and acknowledge that Republicans, especially under Bush, lost their fiscal conservative way which lead to the historic election of Barack Obama. I recall last year when the unemployment rate hit 10% Vice President Biden noted that the Obama administration did not realize how bad the economy was and their numbers were off.

James Horney, a federal-budget analyst at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said, " The biggest part of the deficit difference [between the Obama's administration and CBO numbers] is lower tax revenue due to the different economic assumptions." Horney is correct that the Obama administration has a rosary outlook but it is that thinking that tripped them up last year as unemployment surpassed 10%. We need to get Americans back to work and being productive. Too many of our manufacturing jobs are being outsourced and due to our mounting debt America is put in a conundrum. The conundrum is protecting America jobs while not alienating our ATM; China.

Sure the Fed could print money hand over fist but that will only lead to inflation and a deeper recession. So how do we jump start the economy and reverse the trend this article warns? To start we need to demand that our government go on a diet and that Americans be held accountable for their actions. Right now Obama is proposing incentives that will encourage banks to rework mortgages that are underwater for those that are unemployed. This new incentive will create more debt for taxpayers and further our co-dependence on Government solutions. It is unfortunate that people are losing their jobs and making the house payment is tough but that does not mean the government is the answer.

When will Americans realize that entitlements, cash for clunkers, tax credits and health care reform legislation are only hurting the future of America? We need to wake up and demand that government shrink and allow the private sector be allowed to work. We need to demand that more States Attorney General join the fight for State Rights against the growing tyranny of the Federal Government. Obama did not start us down that road but he is standing on the accelerator with both feet.

President Obama’s State of the Union address

Last night President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress by giving the annual State of the Union address. Unfortunately I was not able to watch it as I was out trying to build my business but I did take a moment to read what the Star Tribune had to report. While I recognize this is just one source, even though they do import from other sources, I think they do an adequate job at hitting the high points. I will write more on this topic once I have more other outlets read. That being said, I did see a tidbit in the Star Tribune that caught my eye on what President Obama said last night. President Obama has a renewed focus on jobs and the creation of new jobs.

The area that President Obama plans, or suggests that Congress, focus in on is passing legislation aimed at the green sector. Even though reports from Europe have accurately displayed that green jobs are a net loss, I do applaud President Obama for doing something. The question will be is if he will have the political clout to pull it off after spending it on failed races, a failed bid for the Olympics, and on the Stimulus package that has save nothing. Another aspect of the article about Obama's speech that caught my eye was the announcement of spending freeze to take place in 2011.

In building my business this week I have heard the speeding freeze talked about on various radio stations. My understanding, prior to reading the Star Tribune this morning, that the spending freeze was going to take place this year and last three years and be only freezing 18% of the overall budget. When I first heard that President Obama was looking to enact a spending freeze it made me happy then I heard what was being frozen and that baffled me. As I wondered how he'd be able to get health care, energy, and job bills passed without spending more money but after last night's speech and the announcement of the freeze not taking hold until 2011 I found my answer.

So the plan is then to increase spending this year to heights never seen before and then freeze it at that level. Sounds great but hasn't anyone learned that expansion of government and increased spending does not create sustainable jobs nor does it turn around the economy? I did notice that President Obama mentioned his inheritance, an inheritance similar to President Reagan, and I asked myself why this is relevant. The man ran on hope, change and transparency which not one element has been implemented in this administration. Do not get me wrong, I applaud Obama for looking to freeze the budget but that is just not enough to turn around our economy. More to come but I thought I'd get the ball rolling. What are your thoughts on President Obama's speech? What are your thoughts on his first year in office? What do you think we need to do to move the country forward?

I recognize that the anonymous posting is getting a little out of hand as of late. I hope those that post will continue to post not as anonymous but as another more identifiable name. Please remind yourself that we want to have open, honest and respectful dialogue on The Hamburg Post.

Minneapolis School Board decision is not a Segregation policy

Yesterday the Star Tribune ran an article titled "Downsizing schools, increasing segregation?" The plan, approved last year by the school board, is to close four schools and transform four magnet schools to neighborhood schools. The changes are reported to save the district more than $6M a year. I understand many of us hear million and think chump change as our Congress grows our debt to $13T. In an age where Americans have become increasingly dependent on the government it is no wonder that parents in the school district claim the changes will restrict their choices of schools. School Board member Chris Stewart is quoted in the article as saying, "Doing things like restricting access to [better schools] and closing off doors with the promise that we're going to make the ghetto better is not what parents want to hear."

Mr. Stewart, who voted for the closings, what are you talking about? I understand that tough choices were made and with Minnesota's open enrollment program, how is this decision "restricting access"? What I am hearing is that parents are concerned that "poorer" schools will be left behind and that will have disparate treatment toward minorities. Parents need to get involved. Get involved with the school, the district, and your child's own learning process. 2010 needs to be a year that we hold ourselves accountable and not push blame off on someone else. And it starts with not placing blame on the school board for making the choices they did. The article discussed that "school board members have pressured administrators to correct inequities among high schools" because the school board has reduced the number of choices for parents in the district.

First off, school board members live up to your decision and not place stipulation or attempt to spread the blame to others in the district. Secondly, what do you mean by correcting inequities? I know the article alludes to the number of advance courses offered at Southwest vs. North. Parents, school board members and administrators need to understand that basics are all that is required and if those are proving inequities between schools in the district then those inequities ought to be changed. Correcting the inequities in advance courses is not something to be considered. If student demand is there, meaning if the school is limiting the learning power of their more intelligent students then looking into the cost/benefit of adding the course is required. At the same time, parents can assist their intelligent children by doing more at home.

At the end of the day, do not hide behind limited choices or the fear of segregation to "handicap" your child. Be accountable, be involved and assist your child in their learning regardless of their surroundings. Where I live my children have one choice of public school unless I want to drive them to a nearby community or enlist them in private school. That being said, I won't allow my kids to use that as a crutch for not learning the basics that they need to be productive members of society. I hope that those in the Minneapolis school district understand that the savings realized will open up dollars to update school material and needs that will ensure their students will learn the basics. And if their child wants to learn more either drive them to another school that offers the classes your child needs or show them where the public library is. It is amazing how much one can learn from the books that line the shelves at a library.

Increases in Westerners attraction to Taliban philosophy similar to 60’s anti-establishment movement?

I was reading headlines of the different national and international media outlets this morning and came across one on MSNBC "Taliban sees little need for foreign fighters" and it got me thinking about the recent defections of Western persons to Taliban and Al-Qaeda camps in the Middle East. Over the past six to eight months the Star Tribune has been reporting on the mysteries behind several Somali-American men that have left Minnesota only to be later to be discovered to have a hand in bombings in the Middle East. Just this past week, a story circulated that four Americans, turned in by their parents, left for the Middle East, namely Pakistan, to train with Al-Qaeda. The reason of my focus on these events is I wonder if the escalation of Americans going to the Middle East to join Al-Qaeda or the Taliban is similar to the tensions that existed in the United States during the late 60's.

During that time we had the Weatherman Underground, many protests in the United States over the Vietnam War, and the march for civil rights by Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr, and others. Are we experiencing a similar movement in regards to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Or is this a bigger war being waged on Western ideals? I will admit that I was not born until 1971 so I did not experience the 60's as my elders and have to revert to their recollection of history and what can be gleaned from history books. So I pose this analogy to my elder readers: Are the events we see with the migration of Americans to the Middle East to gain terrorist training creating the ground swell of anti-establishment sentiment that engulfed the late 60's and early 70's in the United States?

Open Enrollment: A win for free market society

I know that President Obama spoke last night (my children were upset as they were looking forward to Charlie Brown) about troop escalation in Afghanistan, Tiger Woods overhyped situation, and the shooting of police officers to the commuting of a 16 year-old racist are all viable topics for today. BUT I must acknowledge the hailed school reform established 20 years ago; open enrollment. The Star Tribune ran an article on the front page yesterday called "Big school districts lose big as students leave." According to the article 12,000 students fled the Minneapolis Public school system resulting in a loss of $154 million of funding for the system. The focus of the article is on the "downward spiral" of school budgets due to student losses and state government budget cuts. Why? I understand that as students go so does the budget for the district.

The focus on the dollar aspect is what drives bad companies out of business and appears to be driving poorly run districts out as well. Yesterday the school district that I reside in held a referendum to approve a bond sale, see "ISD 108 Superintendant Corlett visits Hamburg to discuss $10.2 M bond referendum" post November 18^th for more information, to excavate the elementary school and update the middle/high school ventilation, heating and cooling systems. All major expense items that do not get consideration for earmarks within the original budget process for school districts. Per the Star Tribune article the reported budget for the Minneapolis public school system is $500 million.

Now if one had an annual budget for $500 million and did not have to worry for about capital expenditures, can someone help me understand how difficult it would be to retain business? The trouble with budget cuts, and other tough decisions, made by School Boards and Superintendant's is the teacher's union noose they find themselves in. Many of the cuts to personnel in the school system are made on a Last In, First Out process which keeps higher, longer tenured staff on the dole instead of trimming the fat of under-performing staff members. In order for districts, like Minneapolis, that is seeing a decline in enrollment it is time to take a systematic quality approach to stem the tide.

Yesterday I did take a moment to send in similar comment to the Star Tribune and they were published in today's paper or you can see them online at http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/78275577.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:UHDaaDyiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr. My comments start at the bottom of the webpage and extend to the next page. Open enrollment is a win/win situation for parents, students, and schools as it demands that educational pursuits are at the forefront of all school board decisions. If that means that not every sport or after school activity is offered in all school districts then so be it. Where my children go they do not have hockey or lacrosse and if my children decide they will want to participate in such activities I will find a place for them to do that; not demand the school develop a program. The focus of schools need to be on education; starting with providing educators worth their salt and not tenured fat cats. Am I alone in this thought?

Obama Deficit reaches new heights with more to come!!!!

Normally I do not blog on Saturdays but when I walked out to get my paper and read the headline in Star Tribune "Deficit Surges to New Records" I felt compelled to write. The 2009 deficit reached $1.42T which is three times more than any year in the history of the United States. The spin on Capitol Hill is that it is less than predicted, $1.6T, by the CBO. Then again the CBO had counted on the passing of Health Care and Cap and Trade in their projections. Imagine where our deficit would be if these two piece of legislation passed as the Democrats wish. The new service article in the Star Tribune said the deficit mark is "more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada's, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman and child in the United States."

So please, everyone send in your check so we can pay down our debt. If the Democrat led Congress does not turn fiscally responsible, we will need to send in bigger and bigger checks to the government or see an economic ruin far worse than the "collapse" of the financial markets. Again, please send in your share of the deficit that the Democrats have increased to new heights or prepare for an onslaught of new taxes; i.e. fat tax, sin tax, and health care tax.

The Favre Circus has landed

Well the years, months, and days of speculation have ended for Viking fans as Brett Favre is at Winter Park in a red #4 jersey. The circus has finally come to town. The road has been a long one, even taking a detour to New York for a year, to obtain the missing link the Vikings needed to be a contender. To gauge the impact that Favre will have on the success of the Vikings is still unknown but the impact on the local economy is already evident.

Within hours of the announcement 2,500 season tickets and 8,000 single tickets were sold. Star Tribune reported a spike in traffic of their website from the average 100,000 hits per day to over a million hits as the news broke. Favre #4 jerseys are sure to be a hot retail item as well that will assist local stores suffering from the recession.

Zigi Wilf gave Favre a two-year deal worth $25M. Favre will see $12M this year and $13M next season. Intrigue continues as the Vikings most likely will not carry four quarterbacks for the season. Both Jackson and Rosenfels have been reported to demanding a trade if Favre became a Viking. Both quarterbacks will have to wait though. Favre is 39 years old and will turn 40 turning the football season that combined with his shoulder and arm issues may force the Vikings to keep four quarterbacks.

Neither Jackson nor Rosenfels looked overly impressive during the first preseason game. Rosenthal did have decent numbers but it was against scrubs. Jackson on the other hand was completely horrible. Taking the two of their performance into consideration, shock should not be the order of the day.

In questions from the media, Jackson and Rosenfels tried to play off the signing by attempting the high road. “It’s something that wasn’t a total shock. Obviously this had been three months in the ongoing sort of thing. So for me personally this wasn’t what I was hoping for,” said Rosenfels in reaction to Favre showing up at Winter Park. While Rosenfels has it right that it wasn’t a total shock, his timeline suffers. The deal to bring Favre goes back over a year when Favre announced his retirement from the Packers only later to change his mind; thus being traded to the Jets.
Jackson responded to the Favre intrusion by saying, “I really don’t have a reaction. I’m just taking it day by day right now.” The only day by day action that Jackson will be taking is how to hold the clipboard or get the Gatorade for his elder. The potential biggest loser in all this is John David Booty.

John David Booty is still green, per NFL standards, and has been regulated to throwing a collection of stiffs since joining the NFL. Booty did score a few dollars I am sure for giving Favre #4 and taking #9. At the end of the day, Booty may be the happiest though. If the rumors are true about Jackson and Rosenfels demanding trades if Favre is signed, Booty may find himself the #2 based on attitude alone. Then again Coach Childress has a hard on for Jackson and by trading him or letting him go would be admission of poor judgment.

Now that the circus is done, the question remaining is how far will the Vikings go? The speculation in Viking faithful heads has to be similar to those purchasing lottery tickets today for the Powerball; if I win what will I do? Well the Vikings appeared to have “won”.

August: The month apathy died in American politics

August brings a much needed break for legislators from the politics of Washington; except for this year. With a president attempting to solve Wall Street gluttony, climate change, energy independence, and health care reform. The Senate still has a few more days of work to perform before the August recess but House of Representatives have already headed home. Many Representatives are not finding a warm welcome upon their arrival.

At Farmfest Rep. Tim Waltz (D-MN) was challenged on the issue of health care as a “step toward communism” instead of addressing the issue Rep. Waltz took offense to the assertion by saying, “I didn’t spend 24 years in the military to be called a Communist, I can tell you that”(Star Tribune, 8/6/09). In a press release, on July 24, 2009, Rep. Walz “encouraged constituents to contact his office with their opinion about the health care reform debate in Congress.”

If Rep. Waltz is serious about constituents to contact his office, why does he become defensive when pressed on the issue of health care reform? Rep. Waltz is not the only Representative running into unfriendly receptions at town hall meetings. According to the Star Tribune, Democrats getting an earful on health care during recess, Rep. Keith Ellison “struggled for control of the microphone” and Rep. Betty McCollum “felt the wrath from both ends of the spectrum.”

At Rep. McCollum’s meeting at Highland Park a participant stated, “I don’t trust Democrats. I don’t trust conservatives, liberals, or politicians with my health care. I trust two people, that’s me and my doctor” (Star Tribune, 8/6/09). Similar words are being said across the nation at similar forums and Democrats finding it difficult in getting their message out. Some even feel that national groups, i.e. Freedom Works, are “planting” disruptors at these town hall meetings. Is this paranoia on the part of the Democrats? Perhaps!

“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain mails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov” is written on the White House’s webpage (www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/). Things that seem fishy is an interesting choice of words.

Are the Democrats attempting to make full use of the Patriot Act to remove any opposition voice to government takeover of health care? While a lot of disinformation is being floated around the viral net, on both sides of the aisle, it will be up to each party to re-inform the populous. Having fellow citizens rat each other out borders on tactics utilized during Nazi Germany. Do not succumb to the pressure of the White House.

We all agree that reform is needed. A group of Senators, bipartisan, have crafted a compromise which include tax your health care benefits and not having a public option. Whether you agree with this compromise or not, get out there and participate. Have your voice heard no matter if agree or disagree with the one sticky point in bill going through Congress of the public option.

Minnesota is in full county fair time. That will be just one location to meet and greet your representatives. Another location will be busy with political buzz is the Minnesota State Fair. Many shunned the Tea Parties earlier this year because it was viewed as wealthy white persons getting together. I was at the Tea Party, which I blogged on, at the Minnesota state capitol and observed first hand that it was not a group of angry, white, wealthy men.

Apathy is not the answer to what is going on in Washington D.C. President Obama is hoping that apathy, which has plagued America for decades, continues as he transforms America from a Capitalistic society to one of bigger government, more taxes, and less freedom. Show the politicians that Americans are not apathetic to their actions. Get out to your county fair, to the state fair, and any forum in which politicians are at and make your voice heard.

The next smoking ban: Military personnel

Monday morning is here again. As I sip on my green tea, I came across a small news article in the Star Tribune that had the tag line “Can soldiers handle combat pressure without smokes?” At first I thought this question silly until I read the details. According to the article, a study done by the Institute of Medicine reported that “30% of active-duty military personnel and about 22% of veterans use tobacco.” The average in civil life is 20%.

While I understand having a strict code and chain of command in the military, I fail to see where an outright ban of smoking will benefit the morale of the company. Set aside the health risks – current and future – have on the soldier. Gary Stein posed this question in his article, Military should butt out of troops’ smoking habits, “The U.S. military can send brave and injured troops home to incredibly hellacious hospital conditions – or have you already forgotten about the Walter Reed Army Medical Center scandal?”

That is just part of the intrusion being made. A soldier, especially fighting in the Middle East, has bigger threats facing them as they try to keep the peace and/or eradicate the terrorists. I cannot imagine the stress that one experiences while being under the constant threat of death. Retired Gen. Russel Honore quipped on CNN, “When you’re tired and you’ve been going days on end with minimum sleep, and you are not getting the proper meals on time, that hit of tobacco can make a difference” in response to the relief smoking can give the stress soldiers are under.

While suicide rates are on the rise among those in the military since the start of the war efforts in the Middle East. I am not saying that smoking is a cure or a determinant to suicide. Retired Gen. Honore acknowledges what many who smoke in America already know, the hit of tobacco can bring a perceive calm to the day. Now if a man or a woman in the military feels the need to light up a cigarette after the stress of combat so be it.

Now if tobacco was illegal than we have a different conversation on the topic. The call for the ban is political correctness gone too far. With the big push by the Obama administration in overhauling the health care system and it is reported, by the Pentagon, that smoking in the military costs $846M a year in “medical care and lost productivity”. Let’s not confuse the argument.

Simply put. Tobacco is legal, some, 30%, of active-duty military personnel use tobacco to relieve the stress of the day. While everyone understands the health effects on a person, at the end of the day it is a personnel choice not something the government needs to determine.

Obesity: Americans become active before the Government Mandates it.

I walked out this morning to get my paper, Star Tribune, and read the headlines as I wondered back into the house. The headline that caught my eye was “More fit than fat: State’s kids No.1”. A report was released by Trust for America’s Health on Wednesday. Minnesota did score well in comparison to other states; adults are 31st while youth (10-17) is No. 1. The report suggests that in order to combat obesity is to provide “less junk food at schools, more home cooking and less eating out, more gym time for students, limits on children’s computer and television time, and more workplace wellness programs.”

As the President Obama pushes his “single payer” public option for health care, we will see more accountability stripped away from the general public and put on the government. A hint to this is a quote by former Medicare Administrator Mark McClellan made when talking about Medicare and the report findings that people in the 55-64 age range are “much heavier than today’s seniors”. McClellan said (New report warns obesity in America is still growing problem, http://www.ky3.com/news/local/49632427.html), “Add to that the fact that the latest evidence suggests that people with obesity have healthcare costs that are 20- to 30- percent higher than people who aren’t obese and you’ve got the markings for an even more severe financial challenge.”

I am disturbed by the list suggested to fight obesity. The first point is to provide less junk food in schools, while this makes sense but is that really where the fight of obesity should start? Right now the Senate is considering a federal tax on soda and other sugary drinks as a potential revenue stream to offset the cost of President Obama’s “single payer” public option for health insurance. The trouble with this approach is it will not dissuade people from drinking these drinks; rather it will just increase the cost of their consumption as companies, like Coke, will pass along the tax onto the consumer. As Susan Neely, president of the American Beverage Association appropriately points out, “Taxes are not going to teach our children how to have a healthy lifestyle” (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124208505896608647.html).

If we are to get the youth off the obese track, adult Americans need to be accountable and role models. Granted schools can assist by implementing the some of the suggestions as less junk food and more gym time the success of any obese combating program falls on the shoulders of those taking care of the youth. During last summer Olympics a lot was made of the number of calories Michael Phelps consumed on a daily basis; 8000 to 10000 calories a day. A lesson can be learned here that it does not matter how many calories are consumed; rather is how active one is during the day.

To consume more calories in the day that one will burn will lead to weight gain. Some argue that part of one’s body chemistry is genetic. Although that may be so, we all have the ability to influence it. Adult Americans themselves need to get off the couch, away from the blackberry, and get outside. Little things can be done. A walk after dinner, throwing the ball around with a child, participating in a recreational sport, or go for bike rides at the local park are all good ways to work off calories consumed. Incorporating these activities into family life will assist in raising kids that are more active and less likely to sit in front of the television or computer.

Taxing “unhealthy” food will not make our society to change their actions. It will only make it more expensive for those that do eat and drink the “unhealthy” foods. It is a personal choice on what you want to eat and if you want to exercise. Just as it’s one’s choice to be obese. The trouble is that as Government establishes a “single payer” public option that choice will be stripped away. As it was stated above by Mr. McClellan that obesity will increase health care costs, those that want a public option will not want to pay for your choice of consumption or lifestyle. So get out there and set the example before the Government mandates it.

City of Minneapolis vs. Bar Owners (Gabby's)

On Friday the Star Tribune ran an article reporting that the City Council of Minneapolis was considering adding an ordinance that would make bar owners responsible for the actions of their patrons when they leave the premises. I commented to Star Tribune after reading the article and it was printed, with a few slight modifications made by the Star Tribune, in the paper on Saturday. Here is the link in case you don't get the paper.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/49237137.html?page=2&c=y

My original email was:

Is the City of Minneapolis serious in their attempt to hold bar owners liable and accountable for actions undertaken by patrons that leave their premises? I see their attempt to place such ordinance in place an abuse power and an attempt to strike back at Gabby's bar for the lawsuit they lost. Shame on those on the Minneapolis City Council who see this attempt as a viable option to deal with the issue at hand.

Medical Marijuana passed by Minnesota Senate

April 29th the Minnesota State Senate passed Senate bill SF0097 with a 36-28 vote to allow the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Many believe that marijuana is a “gateway” drug. The use of medical marijuana is meant to assist those suffering from the pains of cancer and HIV/AIDS; not for recreational use. How is the use of medical marijuana different then one in a hospital bed pushing the morphine button?

In the article, Minnesota Senate approves medical marijuana by Mark Brunswick, former county sheriff Sen. Bill Ingebrigtsen is reported to have said, “I’m here to tell you there is a potential opportunity for abuse here, and kids are watching to see what we in the Legislature are going to do.” Sen. Ingebrigtsen is short-sighted and raises a sky is falling approach. With anything there is a chance for abuse. Every person entering into the policy academy brings along with them an opportunity of abuse. Are we not more intelligent or respectful of each other to go beyond the argument of potentially abuse?

My own Senator, Julianne Ortman, was quoted in the article of her concern of theft and violence. I attempted to contact Sen. Ortman last week but have not heard anything back on her concerns. Adding medical marijuana to legal activities in Minnesota is not going to increase theft or violence, this is just another sky is falling approach.

The bill has moved onto the House. I did contact Rep. Kohls to get his position. Rep. Kohls echoed the concern of protection. Rep. Kohls is opposed to the current form of the bill because of the way it prescribed and dispensed and if one has a doctor note it does not prevent them to buy it off the street. “If we could get that done, my concerns would be resolved,” stated Rep. Kohls.

I applaud the Senate in passing a medical marijuana bill and it is time for Minnesotans to display accountability when dealing with this issue. I agree with Rep. Kohls that tighter control on dispensing of medical marijuana to ensure those suffering from cancer and HIV/AIDS are obtaining their marijuana from legal avenues. Hopefully the House can correct this piece to the legislation passed by the Senate.

Homosexuals beware

The Star Tribune conducted a poll of Minnesotans about same-sex marriage. According to the poll, published in May 1, 2009 Metro section, a “slight” shift is taking place in regards to same-sex marriage. Many states, most recently Iowa, have rewritten law to allow same-sex marriage. The topic of same-sex marriage is a lightning rod and a polarizing conversation. Although homosexuals are celebrate every state that passes law allowing same-sex marriage; homosexuals need to be leery of “progress”.

President Obama’s Stimulus Bill earmarked money to assist in making all medical records electronic. Another goal of President Obama is universal health care. On the surface these two items appear to be mutually exclusive and harmless. As medical records become electronic it will make it easier create a national medical record system. The guise of creating a national data bank for medical records will be for the ease of sharing client files.

Don’t be fooled. The push for electronic files, national databank, and universal healthcare are all signs of increase intrusion into our personnel lives. One may be asking themselves how this adheres itself to same-sex marriage.

Back in 1993 the journal Science Dean Hamer, PhD, reported the discovery of a “gay gene”. In an article posted on WebMD Health News(Jan. 28, 2005), Brian Mustanski, PhD at University of Illinois, stated, “It builds on previous studies that have consistently found evidence of genetic influence on sexual orientation, but our study is the first to look at exactly where those genes are located.” Dr. Mustaski is referencing a study done to compare chromosome of both parents to help identify DNA that supports the existence of the “gay gene”.

Now if a “gay gene” does exist and the government establishes the national databank of medical files and universal healthcare, how soon will a test be created to discover if the unborn fetus contains the gene? I typically am not a conspiracy theorist but I am a big picture thinker. Looking at all the small pieces that are being put in place, homosexuals need to be aware of the consequences of what they seek.

Now, I am not saying that if you decide to live your life with a member of the same-sex that it is right or wrong. I am merely putting all homosexuals on notice. As I have stated in a previous blog post, the government should not be in the business of marriage. As more states allow same-sex marriage only furthers the government’s ability to track, record, and identify homosexuals.

Combine the same-sex marriage license data, national medical database, universal healthcare, and the identification of a “gay gene” and we have a recipe for genetic manipulation to eradicate the United States of homosexuals. It is time for homosexuals to stand behind the flag of smaller government and demand a shift from marriage licenses to certification of civil unions.

Business Owners Right to Operate

The comments of mine below were the Letter of the Day in the Star Tribune March 19, 2008.

As bar owners continue to host "theater night" and pack in people, when will the message reach state agencies and the Legislature that Minnesotans' rights as business owners are being restricted by intrusive legislation?

The state Department of Health, in the March 5 article, claims that bar owners are violating the spirit of the ban ("Health officials to bars: No more theatrics," March 6). Why is it OK for the "spirit" of free enterprise and the constitutional right to pursue happiness to be ruthlessly savaged by the state of Minnesota's governing bodies?

The notion that smoking is bad for you and those around you is a debate of agreeable differences. The fact that society wants to trample upon the rights of a business owner is tragic. The state should reverse the smoking ban and replace it with an ordinance that requires all bars and restaurants to display on the outside of their building if they are smoking or nonsmoking establishments. If society truly believes that smoking is bad, then the smoking establishments will lose patronage and employees. Let the market dictate the rules of the game.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/16819996.html?location_refer=$urlTrackSectionName

Since the time of my article, bars have lost the loophole of “theater night”. Government still has no right to restrict a business in their service of a legal product. The demand for smoking in bars exists and many bars have established “smoking lounges” to help accommodate their patron needs. Personally I know my patronage to the local watering hole drastically decreased since the ban went into effect. The reduced patronage is a direct result of not being able to smoke in the bar.

Any interesting dilemma is taking place with regards to smoking, as reported last night by WCCO, as additional taxes are being charged. A $0.62 tax per pack went into effect on April 1st. The belief is that by pushing the price per pack above $5.00 it will deter smokers and price cigarettes out of younger smoker’s budgets. The question that WCCO pondered was at what point will tax revenue suffer?

The issue is not the right to smokers vs. non-smokers or if second hand smoke is bad for you. Two issues are at play here. The right for a business to offer an environment for a legal product to be used and the hypocrisy of Government to demonize tobacco while relying on tax revenue to meet budget needs.