I'd like to say this was rare, but it's not even CLOSE to rare.
GOP talks about free access for it's own people to ambush people (like Brodkorb) - but is extraordinarily unethical in it's treatment of dissenters, or even just those who film them.
Yeah, I think that MDE's complaint was specious.
I think that the Democrat party has as much right to restrict access to it's functions as the GOP does.
And I think they should restrict it; there are often kids at GOP party functions, and I don't think it's a good idea to have moonbats around them.
BTW. In case anyone missed it, MDE has the big time
He was also mentioned on CNN yesterday...nice.
Bad link. Here's the scoop:
http://ap.google.com/article/
ALe...wJaoBwD90DGFE80
I'm with Flash and leftout.
And regarding the following:
"There are often kids at GOP functions, and I don't think it's a good idea to have moonbats around them."
Nice try, Swiftster, but that suggestion falls even more flat than normal. ("Hey, we've got kids here, and though this is an American political event, we nonetheless need to put our kids into a moral-political-aesthetic safehouse...or something.... Yeah, yeah, that's why we have to restrict access. Yeah, yeah, that's it.")
What a steaming pile of horse manure that "reasoning" is....
"...and though this is an American political event, we nonetheless need to put our kids into a moral-political-aesthetic safehouse.."
It has nothing to do with political safehouses, Hass...my kids know everything there is to know about socialists, communists, anarchists, barking moonbats...you know, the whole "progressive" circus.
The problem is that moonbat stains are almost impossible to remove once they're set, and telling kids not to go near the "funny people", well it just doesn't work.
You know how kids are.
Swiftee;
With all the traffic that Minnesota Blogs are getting these days your special brand of hate about "all things Democrat" and personal attacks on posters who have an opposing views will help the moderates, the independence, and fence sitters see just how far "out there" the MNGOP base has gotten.
Keep up the good work.
PS
Are you saying that a few of your offspring lean to the left?
I can see it now Swifster's kids picketing in front of the Republican Convention Har Har!!!!
To be fair, Brodkorb said publicly that Republicans should be more open.
Brodkorb did make a big deal out of a Republican who was booted out of Walz's endorsing convention. It turns out, the person was booted for trying to agitate Al Franken.
In the case of both DFL and GOP conventions, visitors and media do need to be away from the floor.
BTW, according to Larry Schumacher, no video/audio is allowed at the Mark Olson/Mary Kiffmeyer battle today.
But you, or one of your DumpsterDivers will be hiding in a well positioned trash can to take it all down, won't they, Eva?
jezzie, you didn't read carefully enough.
I said my kids know everything there is to know about moonbats, including knowing not to be anywhere near one when the cops are swinging batons.
We'll all be enjoying the spectacle together on Fox News at 9.
Swift,
You've reached (degenerated) to troll status. I think you have achieved "deserves nothing but being ignored" at this point. All, Swift simply says what he says to antagonize, there's no intelligence, no wit, nor any substance, behind it. I think it's time to treat Swift as he needs to be treated, as will drive him 'batty', by not paying any attention to him at all. I realize it will be a little challenging, as stripping Swift bare is like throwing apples at pigs, enjoyable for a little bit, but in the end, not really satisfying.
Swift, just to be clear, the GOP has a policy which is both utterly unAmerican, un-patriotic, and unethical, but yet again, you stand by them, even when, by contrast, the Democratic party is FAR better (btw Swift, the word , the adjective is Democratic , not Demorat - I know you've drunk the grape kool-aid, but it makes you look like you don't know what an adjective is from a noun- in short, it paints you as an idiot.
A question for you Swift, over the past 30 years, real wages have fallen, taxes on the middle class have been reduced by an aggregate 4-5% percent, on the wealthy by more than 50%, discretionary programs outside of Soc. Security, Medicare, and Defense have ALL sharply declined, unions are MUCH smaller, and far less powerful (union membership in 1975 was about 30% of the workforce, it's now 11%) - there are FAR more Billionaires... all of this has come about throug conservative rule. In short, we've returned to the gilded age... people's free time is much less, we're suffering through gas prices not matched since the Oil Embargo.. tell me Swift, is this what you hoped for?
BTW - that's rhetorical, you're not smart enough to figure out your own answer, perhaps you can get your kids to talk to a moonbat so that you can buy a clue and get an answer. Til then..ta.
"A question for you Swift, over the past 30 years, real wages have fallen.."
Mine haven't.
The fact is that I'm currently earning more than I ever have. Of course, last year I finished another ISA professional accreditation course, as well as about half a dozen seminars and classes (which I paid for) to make sure that my skills continue to be what the market is looking for.
"..taxes on the middle class have been reduced by an aggregate 4-5% percent, on the wealthy by more than 50%.."
I don't know where you're pulling your numbers out of, but if you're suggesting that the middle class needs a big, fat, juicy tax cut...I'm there with you.
Let's write a letter to Betty McCollum, you and I!
"discretionary programs outside of Soc. Security, Medicare, and Defense have ALL sharply declined.."
Set aside that you've listed the three largest expenditures the fed makes and my response is "good!"
"unions are MUCH smaller, and far less powerful (union membership in 1975 was about 30% of the workforce, it's now 11%)"
Goody, good! Now we just need to get to work on the NEA, MAPE and AFSCME.
I say instigate another government worker strike that no one notices, and point out to people that no one is noticing.
Be a great series for MDE to lead the MSM to.
"there are FAR more Billionaires..."
Goody, good, good!
"..all of this has come about throug conservative rule."
You're very welcome.
"...tell me Swift, is this what you hoped for?"
It can always get better, but things are pretty good for the Swiftee family, thanks for asking.
leftout,
You're right, Swiftee has become a troll and needs to be ignored until he learns how to participate in a civil discussion. As you yourself said, it will be hard to do, but I was hoping that you'd be able to refrain from giving in to that temptation within the same post. 
Right. Like you just didn't do, right mlw?
pffft.
Well Swiftster--you'll eat your words some day--Kids love to rebel in their own way, especially if they have a know it all parent.
MLW, good point, if I intended to reply to anything the little churl wrote in response.. my questions were rhetorical.
A better quetion for all of us.. just got done reading Paul Krugman's "Concience of a Liberal", outstanding book from someone just a touch more qualified than Michael Meved, or Savage, or Ingram.. etc.
His point, the one others have made, but less convincingly, this pursuit of the second gilded age (aka conservatism) has lead to what the first gilded age succeeded in, radically less opportunity and equality for the middle class, far more ultrawealthy, and a far weaker safety net for the poor. In 1968 there were 13 Billionaires, contrasted to 32 in 1930, and 20 in 1900 (defined as someone with a worth 20,000 times that of the average worker's wage) - in 2001, there were/are 160 - the policies of the 80's, 90's and through to today - they are doing exactly what was intended, distracting us with concerns about media, about abortion, about the 2nd amendment, and boo hoo taxes on the ultrawealthy, and of all of them, the only one the conservative leadership actually cares about, is the last. The rhetorical question posed to Swift is really one for all of us.. if you look at the outcome of 30 years (about) of conservatism like that which we had 100 years ago - taking all the rhetoric aside, is that we've reinvented an ultra-priveleged class, while seeing the well-being of the middle class fall.
Commenting by HaloScan
