Skip to Content

Support MinnPost

Jon Erik Kingstad

Afton, MN
Commenter for
4 years 19 weeks

Recent Comments

There's some truth in your comment that "governments end up controlling the people for the good of the economy." I disagree that the Left has no problem with that. Except that the Left would say that the Right has no problem with the government controlling the people for the good of the rich, substituting the word "rich" for the word "economy."

Maybe part of the misunderstanding between the Right and Left is in defining what has exactly been the trend and how the rich have become the...

Is to replace the current slate of ideologue justices on the US Supreme Court that will overrule the bad decisions Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas (and Lewis Powell too) and the rest have hung us with. Corporations are juridical entities and have no "free speech" rights. Period. There needs to be stricter legislative controls. Justice Black and Douglas once wrote a dissent in which the laid out the case for overruling the 1884 Santa Clara County decision where the Court simply declared that "...

Posted on 06/07/14 at 11:50 am in response to Franken and Ted Cruz on a campaign-finance constitutional amendment

I'm disappointed the Al Franken is touting this amendment as a cure to Citizen's United and McCutcheon. Having an amendment authorizing Congress to regulate "political contributions" begs the question of what exactly are "political contributions" and sets the stage for a totally needless confrontation with the First Amendment. A Supreme Court construing it would undoubtedly side with the First Amendment. This proposed amendment would likely resolve nothing.

Citizen's United was a bad...

Posted on 06/09/14 at 07:54 am in response to Franken and Ted Cruz on a campaign-finance constitutional amendment

Even the Supreme Court didn't find "all campaign finance laws" unconstitutional." If all campaign finance laws were a violation of the First Amendment, why wouldn't laws prohibiting influence peddling and graft be unconstitutional as well?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/203

I mean, why should it be against the law to pay a member of Congress to for "...

Posted on 06/10/14 at 08:06 am in response to Franken and Ted Cruz on a campaign-finance constitutional amendment

You are right to say receiving or spending unlimited amounts of money on a political campaign does not constitute fraud. A member of Congress receiving unlimited amounts of money or spending unlimited amounts of money on a member of Congress for the purpose of placing the private interest of the spender or the receiver above the public's or nation's interest is called corruption. Fraud has little or nothing to do with what makes this conduct a crime. Which is not to say that part of the...

What is "CAGW"? What is the "CAGW crowd"? And where in the article is any "CAGW position" even mentioned, as if such a thing even existed? What is the "CAGW position" this column so vainly overreaches to support?

Your comment about the damage in the photo not being from rising seawater recalls to mind the position of the insurance industry after Katrina denying claims for hurricane damage if it was from flooding and water surges not force of wind. As if floods and water damage cannot...

"CAGW" as you have now helpfully defined it so I understand what you mean, is not a simple "yes/no" or "either/or" issue. It is a complex of issues. We humans have no shortage of arrogance in plenty of categories and I'm completely in agreement with you that arrogance of any one person or group of people should not drive policy or debate about "CAGW" or any other issue for that matter. And I can agree that we do need to move beyond any hysteria and have an open and honest debate about the...

I cited a couple above which you chose to ignore: international conventions on banning chemicals that would deplete the ozone layer and acid rain. There are others of course, many having to do with limiting use of certain weapons in wars, which are remembered today primarily for their violation, like the use of chemical and biological weapons.

The issue of climate change, which I gather you do not deny, could have been addressed in 1998 by the Kyoto Convention but the USA refused to...

Posted on 05/20/14 at 12:47 pm in response to Confused by net neutrality? What you need to know

Let's not forget who paid to have the "Internet" created: it was the US taxpayer through the ARPANET and other defense related projects which created the technology and ideas for the internet. Left to the "marketplace", we'd still be using computers as wordprocessers and maybe with private isolated corporate and government networks. The "Internet" is the superhighway created under government leadership and funding, including the FCC which allowed the development of computer technology to...

Posted on 05/19/14 at 01:19 pm in response to Steinhafel's 'causeless' Target exit earns $16 million payday

Obviously another sweetener for Mr. Steinhafel so he can qualify for unemployment benefits.