Bravo!
I think the main characteristic of Al Franken on display in this matter is his inattentiveness to details.
When you have a business presence in multiple states, which is hard to avoid these days, especially if you are a national entertainer, the states will try very hard to tax your business activity; California is one of the best, or worst, in this department.
There isn't any allegation that Al or his company was ever domiciled in California. One of the common ways to contest these matter is to deny the the state has any basis for asserting tax jurisdiction. But you can't do that when you are running for the Senate.
What I find amazing is the Franken campaign has been too stupid to make this point. They don't seem to understand Vince Lombardi's rule: "the best defense is a good offense."
Truly, a bit of cheesehead wisdom, Eva.
Good dog Spot!!
Actually, Linda, MNO wrote the post.
You can't get out front on an issue if it means you might give your endorsement opponent an opening. Franken's running on the "inevitability" card, which means no one-on-one debates, low media profile (each time the media mentions Franken they sort of have to mention Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer), etc.
Franken's state taxes are a pretty minor issue. The Republican party's inability to balance their own books is just a bit more significant.
But either way, Franken will keep this on the back burner rather than take any chance at all at some of his state endorsement convention delegates having second thoughts.
Really makes you wonder just what the 'pugs have in store for Al come this fall....
Taxes are for little people...
"...it might want to consider turning those same inquisitive minds on its own financial dealings."
And here I thought you were talkin' 'bout Laurie Coleman and the missing info from Norm's Senate Financial Disclosure page....
...I was only bein' half-facetious, on this one:
http://www.mnblue.com/node/1445
Commenting by HaloScan
