Up to the minute Amber Alert Information

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

A Zero for Kalin

Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B) received a zero from the Minnesota Family Council, meaning he voted against the family.

The Minnesota Family Council ranked each Representative’s votes on 13 pieces of legislation in 2008 that affect the family. Kalin voted against the family in each of the 13 cases, securing for himself a big fat zero.

You can find the legislative scorecard here. The voting record of each Representative is first in the scorecard. The 13 issues are located at the bottom of the document.

Listed just above Kalin in the record is Rep. Rob Eastlund (R-17A: the other half of Senate District 17) who has a 100% family voting record in 2008.

We need to replace the current anti-family Kalin with Don Taylor, a pro-family man.

___________________________________________

Response to Independent and Undecided Anonymous

Anon said: "Can't you guys discuss specific issues, rather than how another right-wing pro-republican website/foundation/think tank rates Republicans vs. Democrats? There are serious issues that should be discussed, rather than the link in this post (Really - look at that table. Objective? Hardly.). . . "

When I point to the scorecards of other web sites, I do it because it is impossible for me to sift through all the legislation to compile the voting record of a legislator. Some people do this for a living and create the databases that give helpful and usable information to the rest of us.

Providing links to the rating of a candidate by various entities is valid. These scorecards are handy starting points for you to investigate more on a particular candidate. Obviously they are not meant to be the be-all, end-all in a debate. I expect my readers to do some investigation on their own.

The scorecards do have objectivity because all legislators are compared to the same standard. The ratings point out the general direction that a legislator takes because they are based on actual votes. A legislator may step out of a voting pattern on occasion and that can be investigated.

So I do not apologize for pointing you to scorecards. Use them and you may learn something. Further, I do not just dabble at the "scorecard level" on this blog. I have written in detail on many specific issues on this blog. Based on the above, my writing is not "empty headedness" as you charge. Go back and read more of my work.

Bringing up a new topic in the comment section is not necessarily a red herring. But the way it was done in the case you referenced, is a red herring. Funding the Positive Alternatives Program does not answer voting against the Finstad amendment. Bringing it up attempts to divert attention from the Finstad amendment. A red herring is a logical fallacy.

You said, "Undecided voters want to hear about moderation." If you limit yourself to moderation, you will not be listening or reading most Democrats. And you may not be listening to "moderate" John McCain either, because his position on the use of nuclear energy is radical to many leftists. In Minnesota it is illegal to build a new nuclear electrical generation plant, thanks in large part to radicals. Get used to reading and listening to radicals; the political and academic world is full of them. I hope you are more interested in being right than being moderate.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can't you guys discuss specific issues, rather than how another right-wing pro-republican website/foundation/think tank rates Republicans vs. Democrats? There are serious issues that should be discussed, rather than the link in this post (Really - look at that table. Objective? Hardly.) I think you underestimate the desire for intelligent discussion demanded by the voters this election. For instance, Sarah Palin says she would not support throwing a woman who got an abortion in jail; that she, the daughter of a science teacher, believes evolution is an accepted scientific principal and should be taught as such. Undecided voters want to hear about moderation. Not hate. Not belittling. John McCain believes nuclear power should be acted upon quickly. Nuclear power is great as far as carbon emissions go. A combination of hybrid autos, moving toward all-electric, with modern nuclear plants added to the grid could move us a long way to energy independence. But instead you point to a web site that mimics your own message. It is like two mirrors facing each other. Grow up. This independent voter will continue to be turned off by such empty headedness. And if bringing up a new topic through comments is considered a Red Herring (which it isn't), then lets serve 'em up, pickled in cream sauce! It's better than commenting on "Look! Our right-wing friends say Democrats are bad! See the link?"

Anonymous said...

An independent doesn't have ideas like you just spewed. Admit you are another frustrated democrat that is afraid to admit you are one. If I am correct, I think this is a Pro-Republican website. What is your moveon.org? An unbiased only fact web site? Come on you little coward, stand up for your left-wing democrat friends you voted for. Or are you ashamed of yourself. Shame, Shame.