Most Commented
-
30 comments
-
26 comments
-
26 comments
-
22 comments
-
21 comments
MinnPost is a nonprofit, nonpartisan enterprise whose mission is to provide high-quality journalism for news-intense people who care about Minnesota.
Donations and pledges totaling $25,000 or more have been made by each of the families and foundations listed. For a list of all donors by category, see our most recent Year End Report.
Voters expect legislators to provide facts and clarity, too, but the partisan Voter ID bill did not. Most Minnesota do not have confidence in the outcome of voting for this a amendment for that reason, and it should fail.
You are right, Sean. The author lost credibility on how the amendment will be addressed in law when he fails to mention anywhere that voter ID legislation had been proposed (and vetoed) already by this legislature.
.ID. Today can be utility bills. Those aren't government ment issued, and would be invalid if the amendment passes. Is that your point?
But judges disagreed, and so they legally lost the arguments. And those issues were on ballot admissions, not voter fraud, and which was not alleged. Complex, but true.
Dennis, with your latter statement, you are agreeing with Obama, who said exactly that. Private sector hiring, and big business profits have been up for months (certainly the big business profits). Obama then said that small business owners have not participated as much in the recovery. It's a spectrum thing.
Your former statement looks like lint out of the spin cycle, sorry.
Paulsen and the rest of the GOP House rotters have voted that way up to now because it can't make it past the Senate. Playing to the base. Perfectly legitimate to call out that these pols are on the "Akins" diet, especially since many have co-sponsored his bills.
Rasmussen is just the poll to show Akin behind 10 points. Maybe it should have said 20 points., get them check-books opened wider.
... about how voter fraud swept Republicans into office in the 2010 elections.
Nah, I know that "Right to Work" [for less] is not what is meant, here, but the pun is too tempting.
I am kind of with Senjem on the "MN is an At-will employment" State. MB's manager was canned (role change) , and his services were no longer needed. Why are we paying for this, again?
Feature presentations of "MN GOP Exposed" are going to be attention-getting, this Fall.
That language could also be construed to support outlawing serial monogamy. No where does it say that "one at a time is Okay".
Then the Bible bangers would rue the law of unintended consequences.