Comments are moderated due to a certain persistent troll. Please be patient, and your comments will be posted. We welcome comments from Michele Bachmann supporters, and publish comments regardless of political slant. Comments reflect the opinion of the commenter and do not reflect the views of the Dump Bachmann blog.
--The volunteer team at Dump Bachmann.
Is Mark Swanson another product of home schooling?
I quote:
*It was aledged that Legislative staff...*
His edits smell of what Stephen Colbert would deem 'truthiness', and he can't spell worth a damn.
He's also an "active Republican activist".
Here's another classic Swanson statement:
http://dumpmarkolson.blogspot.co...id-
transit.html
"... the false “expert” Ken Avidor (left wing author of numerousblogs..."
You are a false expert. Almost everything you say about PRT has been debunked.
"Swanson changed the heading "Domestic Assault Arrest" to "Personal Legal Notes"."
If the paragraph that follows the heading is about the arrest for domestic assault, switch it back on him on Wiki, Avidor. The guy's nuts if he's proposing the heading Personal Legal Notes. Did he propose changing the heading on Dr. Lecter's "Cannibalism" to "Dining Preferences"?
If you can show that the editor was indeed Swanson, and that he has official status in the GOP--that could be a news story. It's happened before--party officials who get caught "scrubbing" politician's Wiki entries often get written up in the papers, and Wiki editors frown on that kind of pathetic crap.
If you can show that this guy is GOP, I hope you printed that in the article's "Discussion" page. The Wiki "police" are always very interested in that kind of deceptive "damage control" by campaign personnel and partisan staffers.
Thanks Ken, I had June 4th down for some reason.
I have NO sympathy for Olson OR the people that elected him multiple times but I hope his poor wife and family are taken care of and have access to the kind of counseling Mark didn't take advantage.
His goose is cooked with a decent judge if they can prove he has a history and did not do the work ordered. Time to learn to play the harmonica, and experience the thrill of bigger boyz "putting you down" at least 3 times. Oh yeah, that's the way I like it, un huh un huh...
I also can't believe somebody that obviously intellectually challenged hasn't done even dumber things "professionally". Hitting a woman is easy, what do you do for REAL power and control as a rep?
Mark was also Olson's campaign manager, and chair of sherburne co. repbs.
Mark also believes the earth is a few thousand years old, Gays can be prayed straight, and children without health care should "pull themselves up by the boot straps.
Mark offered a "no comment" when asked by a reporter if he still supported Olson shortly after his arrest last winter. Of course at that time it was assumed that Olson would see trial before the session ended. It was also assumed and stated by the leaders of the GOP that they would remove him if found guilty.
What does this scrubbing mean comming from Mark?
It means the repbs think Olson has dodged a bullit. It means that Olson will not step down even after his conviction. It means the Repbs will endorse him again and he still has a lot of support.
This shows the real meaning of "pro family values" as seen by the repb chair of cd 6 and the sherburne co. chair. "Pro family" means wife beating is ok and even endorsed if she has it comming.
ATE,
If you think PRT is a good thing and Ken thinks its a bad thing then he is more of an expert then you.
Beckfield: this is a mindless statement. My position on PRT is wholly irrelevant to the question of Ken's alleged "expertise".
There are plenty of examples that show Ken's basic lack of understanding of PRT - this is indisputable. I'll provide details if you like.
It's not about me. I've bored everyone about the PRT boondoggle.
It's Bachmann's turn to answer questions about her support for PRT.
Since PRT crashed and burned in the MN Legislature back in 2004, Bachmann hasn't said a word about why she authored PRT legislation and promoted PRT in the media with Olson and Zimmermann.
Maybe the few people left who support PRT like ATE will write to Bachmann and urge her to explain why she supported PRT.
The "few people"? Does that include the European Union?
http://ec.europa.eu/research/
env...cle_2650_en.htm
As for your claim that it is a boondoggle, it might carry more credibility if you actually knew what you were talking about. I'm not going out on a "LIM" to say that you still have very little clue how PRT designs work...
http://innovative-transit.blogsp...out-on-
lim.html
A true skeptic is an expert on that which (s)he debunks. You are neither expert nor skeptic.
That's what all the "wedge issue" folks say.
According to Intelligent Design promoters, if you haven't read all the books on ID, you can't be a skeptic of that either.
Naturally, PRT was promoted by the Darwin-deprived Discovery Institute.
Anyways, this post isn't about PRT. It's about the MN GOP 6CD Chair Mark Swanson scrubbing Olson's Wikipedia page.
MN Publius has picked up the story:
http://www.mnpublius.com/2007/05...more-palatable/
Again, irrelevant. This has nothing to do with Intelligent Design or the Discovery institute.
It has to do with a transportation "expert" who doesn't even know what a linear motor (LIM) is, despite the fact that many modern systems use them (including trains - search on Bombardier ART)
http://dumpmarkolson.blogspot.co...it-and-
lim.html
How can a transportation expert know nothing about linear motors? You further reveal your lack of expertise by claiming "The pod actually rides on dorky, little rubber tires" - as if the use of tires automatically precludes the use of LIM.
Anyone who actually understands these systems knows that tires may be used in an LIM vehicle - LIM provides propulsion along the track independently of the tires, while the tires provide support and emergency braking.
Do you really not know this, Ken? How can you claim to be a transportation expert and not know this simple fact?
Would you like me to go on? There's plenty more I can cite.
ATE, with proponents like you, PRT doesn't need skeptics.
Do you care to explain why a transportation expert doesn't know what a linear motor is?
Folks: Please don't feed the troll, ATE. Also, ATE, your comments
are irrelevant to the thread (Avidor didn't discuss PRT), so please
take your vendetta against Avidor to your own blog. Thank you.
Does the Discovery institute really promote this thing?
Does the EU know this?
ATE that an impressive mile of track they built. What did it cost?
If the Discovery Inst. is backing this why hide it? I would think it could use all the help it can get.
one of the reason I hate the PRT is because Olson and Swanson like it and they have yet to be right on anything so I figure the laws of averages says this must be a really bad idea also.
sorry bill
With all due respect. Bill: when Avidor posts an ad back to his PRT smear blog, I will respond. You will notice that I never comment if he avoids promoting his anti-PRT campaign - but when he does, it's on-topic.
I am not a troll. Follow those links and explain to me how a transportation expert (which Avidor claims to be) can err so blatantly on transportation technology. He claims to be an expert, but he is not. He is a propagandist with an axe to grind.
I'll repeat in case you are tempted to write me off as a simple troll: when Avidor advertises his smear blog here on DB, I will call him on it. The facts are on my side: his arguments against PRT have been debunked many times, and his embarrassing LIM statements are just one example.
Avidor can speak all he likes on Olson's legal troubles or Bachmann's suspect activities in Washington - but when he tries to draw a shaky line from Olson and Bachmann back to his relentless anti-PRT campaign, I will be here to rebuke him.
Whatever...
ATE sez:
With all due respect. Bill: when Avidor posts an ad back to his PRT smear blog, I will respond. You will notice that I never comment if he avoids promoting his anti-PRT campaign - but when he does, it's on-topic.
EY: That's why I consider you a troll. The only time you comment here is about PRT, and attacking Avidor, and myself personally. If you'd actually comment about the topic of the blog, you'd actually be making contributions on non-PRT topics.
This isn't a blog about the PRT debate - it's a blog about documenting Bachmann's antics.
Eva, if this is a blog about Bachmann's antics, why is there a post about Olson's assistant changing Olson's Wikipedia article? Really, please enlighten me as to how this is on-topic for a Michele Bachmann blog.
Even if you could justify that link, Avidor goes even further here in the comments section - linking directly back his anti-PRT blog. Again, what exactly is the link to Bachmann? Ken himself admits that "Bachmann hasn't said a word about PRT since she was elected and I doubt she will," - yet he continues to use this space to promote his anti-PRT agenda.
Why is it somehow OK for Avidor to draw increasingly tenuous links between Bachmann and Olson/PRT, but it's not OK for me to respond to it?
I'm sorry, but I have no interest in the other topics covered on this blog. I don't live in Minnesota and I don't care much about politics, so why would I comment on the other entries? Since when is a troll defined as someone who only comments on one topic? Do you even know what a troll is?
The simple fact is this: when Ken Avidor promotes his anti-PRT campaign here, I will respond - and I will respond reasonably and factually. That's not trolling, that's just free speech.
Please don't feed the trolls...
AnswerToJob: I am not a troll. When Ken Avidor stops spreading lies here, I will go away.
Note: Comments here are temporarily moderated to prevent vandalism by a certain persistent Troll. Please be patient and your comments will be posted as soon as we can get them. Clown art by Hebiclens / WMxdesign
--The volunteer team at Dump Bachmann.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
