Getting the most views by a long ways isn’t necessarily good, as evidenced by how the video of Mike Parry’s “pill popping” comment got about 100 time the views of the other videos the New Ulm Journal posted from that fundraiser, but that doesn’t mean there was nothing interesting in the other videos. Was there something else, something just as politically explosive, something that just got missed but now I’m about to show it to you? Is there?! Is there?!?!
Um, no, nothing as fun for bloggers and news junkies. But not nothing either. Parry’s successful opponent Allen Quist was his “Bachmann the Beta Version” self, Kurt Bills again made me sorry for the students in his economics class, and there was a bonus state senator making a pretty obvious factual error. I sat through their fundraiser speeches so you don’t have to, though of course you can, and maybe you should to make I got my facts right, so I guess I am saying you have to. Sorry. Anyway, I think I’ll start with the state senator because that’s the easy one.
Sen. Gary Dahms said California raised taxes on the wealthy and that’s why their shortfall got worse. It’s at 3:15 in the video. If you’re going to cite California, wouldn’t you check on this? Even if you don’t follow California much, the one thing you know is they can’t raise taxes— the legacy of Prop.13. Two-thirds of each house have to agree to a tax increase plus the gubernatorial signature. As ought to be guessed, but here’s the confirmation, the obvious happened and Republicans blocked tax increases. The Democrats are putting a tax increase on the wealthy on the ballot, but that’s not what Dahms said.
Then there’s Kurt Bills who doesn’t have a realistic chance of beating Amy Klobuchar, but has a very realistic chance of reinforcing misinformation about Medicare and Social Security. Bills said in his speech, 2:30 into the video:
“Mr. Bills,” kid, Arctic Cat Polaris jacket wearing guy, who’s working at Apple Vally Ford 30 hours a week, “Mr. Bills, why am I paying into Social Security Medicare when it’s insolvent?” That’s a tough question
No it isn’t. They’re not insolvent, which should be easy for an economics teacher to understand. Since the self-proclaimed economics expert apparently doesn’t know what “insolvent” means, (he wouldn’t twist facts and leave misunderstandings just for ideological correctness, would he?) “insolvent” means they can’t pay their bills. Except they can, which is pretty much the opposite of insolvent. The trust funds are projected to run out if current trends don’t change, but funny thing, Obamacare changed the trends for Medicare. Obama gave it another decade before the trust fund runs out. Normally when you’re running out of money, taking a measure that gets you another decade is pretty good. But in case Bills sees this and doesn’t get why I feel sorry for his students who are being taught crankery instead of economics, here’s a financial dictionary definition of “insolvent”.
The reason I call Allen Quist “Bachmann the Beta Version” is because he was one of her mentors, passing on the paranoid fantasies and actual looseness we’ve become accustomed to in his protege. When you see this, the fact he was the more reasonable candidate tells you all you need to know about how lousy Parry was.
Quist says interest on the debt is 20%. It’s 6%. here’s one source but if you don’t like that, Here’s another. If you’re running on the debt as your signature issue, and you’re that wrong on the impact, well, I guess you’re Allen Quist.
Then Quist said SNAP (food stamps) discriminates against married people and allows unmarried couples with two kids up to $49,000 in income to be eligible. It’s $29,000 and there’s no marriage penalty. I suppose the facts are inconvenient for a candidate who keeps saying, twice in this speech, that Obama is trying to destroy America by turning it into a European welfare state. By the way, that reminds me, you know what I heard? Obama was really born in Norway. Isn’t that true, Ole Obamasen?!