Skip to Content

Paul Landskroener

Minneapolis, MN
Commenter for
5 years 8 weeks

Recent Comments

Posted on 05/09/13 at 04:45 pm in response to Gay marriage: Songs, signs and noise throughout Capitol as all await historic House vote

God may move the heart of a king, but apparently not Warren Limmer. Sigh.

Posted on 04/23/13 at 08:37 am in response to Why it’s increasingly likely Michele Bachmann will retire

You write: "Bachmann spent more than any other House candidate in the country and barely survived." On what?, I wonder.

Posted on 04/16/13 at 09:02 am in response to Local talk-radio jock Davis tells Newtown families, 'Go to hell'

I feel compelled to remind readers that Bob Davis' radio partner is Tom Emmer, the blowhard who came within 9000 votes of becoming Minnesota's governor. Unless he responded promptly and critically to Bob's rant, he shares responsibility for his partner's crass statements.

Posted on 11/19/12 at 12:30 pm in response to Why should the unelected Supreme Court get the final say about our laws?

Lincoln has it about right, I think. The Court's decision has to be the last decision in the particular case, but that does not by itself foreclose dissent in the nation as to whether the Court correctly interpreted or applied the Constitution. (Robert Jackson said it best when he said about the Supreme Court, "We are not final because we are infallible; we are infallible because we are final.")

That is, while the Court has to be the final word in particular cases, and its opinions...

Posted on 11/17/12 at 09:29 am in response to Bikes mean better business

A friend of mine is a market researcher for a large New York firm. As many as seven or more years ago, he was engaged by a consortium of Japanese auto firms to predict the US automobile market. Their extensive research was summarized in one provocative statement: Driving is the new smoking.

They found that among young people in particular, driving is becoming a socially negative activity, a necessary evil perhaps, but an evil nonetheless. I think they're onto something.

Posted on 11/27/12 at 02:30 pm in response to Put legalizing same-sex marriage on the fast track

I stand with the do it now crowd.

But if that's not to be, the DFL should at least take steps in the right direction.

First, repeal the part of the Minnesota DOMA that prohibits recognition of valid same sex marriages concluded in another state. Second, recognize same sex domestic partners in all public employee benefit plans. Third, pass a robust civil union law providing all benefits and obligations to registered same we couples, including protection for adoptive parents...

Posted on 11/01/12 at 09:28 am in response to Whatever happened to the campaign song?

And how could you forget this classic campaign song of 1802 (?), sung to a well-known fiddle tune that now goes by the name of the campaign song, Jefferson and Liberty. We need more songs about "hoards of harpies", "fiery bigots" and "gorging jaws."

The gloomy night before us lies,
The reign of terror now is o'er;
Its gags, inquisitors and spies,
Its hordes of harpies are no more

Chorus:
Rejoice, Columbia's sons, rejoice
To tyrants never bend the...

Posted on 10/23/12 at 04:16 pm in response to Many Christians do not see same-sex marriage as an issue of 'fairness'

I think many commentors are being unfair to Pastor Douglas. The argument in his essay is far more subtle and positive than may appear from reading his conclusion in isolation. As a fellow Christian, I appreciate his devotion to following God's way rather than his own.

That said, his argument is nevertheless flawed in several fundamental respects. Perhaps the most obvious flaw is the conclusion he draws in the following syllogism: "God created man male and female and commanded them to...

Posted on 10/08/12 at 09:38 am in response to On same-sex marriage, the times they are a changin' — or are they?

That's all I have to comment: Well said.

Posted on 10/08/12 at 09:35 am in response to Voting amendment debate produces familiar questions — but no agreement on the answers

What makes this tricky is that the proposed amendment will require enabling legislation to put it into effect.

If the DFL wins control of the Legislature and the amendment passes, it will likely enact legislation that will interpret the phrase "substantially equivalent" and "valid governmnet-issued ID" very broadly to minimize the disenfranchisement of eligible but insufficiently documented voters. The GOP, if it retains control, will also likely interpret the termsin such a way as...