Skip to Content

Support MinnPost

Eric Black

Minneapolis, MN
Commenter for
6 years 51 weeks

Recent Comments

Good piece Adam Wahlberg. Personally, I hesitate to conclude that the change in ownership or the fact that Fleet Farm is an advertiser are the key factors. And it's okay for Scott Gillespie to stand behind a policy of not discussing how the editorial board came to its conclusion. The place to explain that would be the endorsement itself. But if you read the editorial with this in mind, the writers were unable to cite...

For those who missed it, here is a policy-heavy interview with IP Senate candiate Kevin Terrell by your humble and obdt. ink-stained wretch:

http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2014/05/ip-candidate-kevin-terrel...

...

Posted on 12/09/13 at 04:08 pm in response to Jason Lewis: Majority rule is undemocratic

Responding to Ron Gotzman above: Yes, I favor allowing majority rule in all cases other than those with supermajorities required by the Constitution.

Posted on 12/09/13 at 06:21 pm in response to Jason Lewis: Majority rule is undemocratic

Responding to Jeff Michael above: Yes, you are 100 percent right. The southern senators who used the filibuster (or threat of the filibuster) to block civil rights legislation for decades (until their own leader, Lyndon Johnson, became president and signed the major Civil Rights laws of the mid-60s) were Democrats. I don't believe there is anything inaccurate about describing them as southerners, nor any secret agenda in describing them that way. The main point I was making is that those who...

Posted on 10/06/13 at 09:13 am in response to Charlie Cook: Dem hopes of taking House control are slim to none

Charlie Cook is right in his comment above. His column didn't mention Larry Sabato. I've adjusted the post to reflect that.

Posted on 12/04/12 at 01:45 am in response to No amendment allowed: A constitutional problem we’re stuck with

I very much enjoyed the discussion above, but I do want to nod some agreement to Peder Defor, who does the mostly liberal crowd in these parts a great service by offering always-reasonable, always-civil conservative perspectives. Peder doesn’t advocate for the kind of conservatism that would recreate the Articles of Confederation, and I feel a little abashed at having suggested more than once that righties secretly desire a return to a national government that had neither taxing power nor...

Posted on 11/08/12 at 02:25 pm in response to Margaret Anderson Kelliher, Vin Weber assess the vote

Just wanted to reply to Paul Udstrand above (and thanks, Paul, for all the good comments of the past). Kelliher Anderson didn't say the things you inferred about the Repubs overmuch reliance on spending cuts. Those were my words, paraphrasing her, and I didn't tape the event. But as I heard it, her whole point in that remark was to push back against the idea that DFLers will reflexively raise taxes and show no restraint on running up the state budget. Rather, she said, they stood and stand...

Posted on 05/16/12 at 09:12 am in response to Guessing where Kurt Bills stands on the issues

but the kind of budget the Senate can pass with less than 60 votes has no effect. It's explained here -- although your eyes may glaze a bit. Anyway, I stand by my point. Candidates should talk about how they can contribute to actual lawmaking and buedgetmaking in today's deadlocked climate.

Posted on 05/16/12 at 11:22 am in response to Guessing where Kurt Bills stands on the issues

who knows more about politics and Senate procedures than I do. I already supplied a link to the Economist (here it is again)  explaining why a Senate budget resolution passed with fewer than 60 votes has no effect. The piece starts from the very Wash Post piece Mr. Droogsma cited.

It would be fine with me, in fact it would be good, if the Senate (by which we mean the Senate Dems) would adopt...

Posted on 05/16/12 at 11:56 am in response to Guessing where Kurt Bills stands on the issues

who knows more about politics and Senate procedures than I do. I already supplied a link to the Economist (here it is again)  explaining why a Senate budget resolution passed with fewer than 60 votes has no effect. The piece starts from the very Wash Post piece Mr. Droogsma cited.

It would be fine with me, in fact it would be good, if the Senate (by which we mean the Senate Dems) would adopt...