I don't want to get into an endless back and forth volley of dueling letters with Mr. Haluska in the Fridley Patch, (http://fridley.patch.com/articles/unlike-gov-dayton-local-gop-activists-got-nuthin) but it appears that he and his ilk are the one who are compensating for their lack of substantive ideas with equally vapid and self-serving rhetoric. His last letter tends to support my contention that his crowd does not understand basic economics or the proper role of government in a representative republic. This is not surprising - the candidate he worked for (HD50A Representative Carolyn Laine) actually asserted in a public forum that the Constitution is a "suggestion" and that legislators should not be bound by it. The nut obviously doesn't fall far from the tree.
Although Senator Goodwin, Representative Knuth, and Representative Laine do a very poor job of representing the interests of their constituents and the state, it is the liberal, socialist, and statist policies they support and are attempting to perpetuate that are largely responsible for many of the problems our state and nation are dealing with. They did not invent left-wing ideology and are not the exclusive practitioners of it, but they are the implementers and promulgators that we the citizens (note we are citizens, not subjects) in Senate District 50 have the direct power and civic responsibility to vote out of office.
Note to Mr. Haluska and liberals in general: this meme of blaming President Bush for everything from the current economic troubles to the three month old potato salad in your fridge smelling kind of funky is wearing awfully thin. Bush, a Republican but in no way a Conservative, made many mistakes and implemented some unwise policies, many under the auspices of his "new tone" mantra as "compromise" with liberals and socialists. Get over it! We are now over half-way through the first (and hopefully only) Obama Administration. Obama has doubled-down on many of the mistakes of his predecessor and has introduced new radical left-wing policies that have exacerbated a bad situation into one much worse. Factor in the policy-driven carnage since the Democrat take-over of the House and Senate (check out the economic stats pre vs. post Pelosi/Reid) and there is plenty of blame to go around at the federal level.
There are parallels to this at the state level. Pawlenty, a Republican but hardly a prototype Conservative, did some good things but was also responsible for a lot of bad policy (e.g. going along with the ethanol and green mandate nonsense championed by Knuth and her leftist colleagues) and we on the right have chastised him rather harshly at times. Regardless, the bulk of the blame that can rightfully be attributed to Pawlenty is largely the result of his compromises with the DFL. It is also interesting to take note that prior to the DFL take-over of the legislature in 2006 the state had a $2-3 billion surplus even with Pawlenty as governor. This was transformed into the current shortfall orchestrated by the DFL and their large majority. In any case Pawlenty is gone and his successor appears to be hell-bent on making the situation worse by increasing government spending and intrusion into our daily lives. It's been said that socialism is viable until it runs out of other people's money and folks, the money has run out.
Mr. Haluska accuses those who responded to his letter of not offering any solutions in the way of legislation to help the people. Actually his implied premise that legislation will solve the critical problems our society faces is indicative of the underlying cause of many of the problems. Bad legislation has created the bureaucracy that disproportionately taxes those who produce wealth and earn the money and redistributes to those who do not. Bad legislation has led to economic and liberty strangling regulation that is often very self-serving to political power brokers. Bad legislation is produced by bad legislators, and we have no shortage of that at all levels of government. District 50 is a prime example of this.
As far as solutions offered by the right it's really pretty simple and it works every time it has been implemented. For those like Mr. Haluska who have not yet learned these fundamental concepts, here is the executive summary: limit government to its constitutionally empowered duties and obligations, tax the citizenry only enough to fund the legitimate functions of government and levy the taxes in a way equitable to all citizens, respect and enforce lawful contracts and private property rights, and allow the free market to operate with minimal regulation. Simple, but effective which is exactly why liberals will fight its implementation every step of the way because once implemented the perceived need for liberals, socialists, social engineers, and other governmentally empowered busy-bodies will fade away.
Finally, the age old leftist "Jesus is a liberal" schtick is both amusing and offensive at the same time. There are many interpretations of scripture and history is full of examples of it being twisted to justify any position imaginable as, not coincidentally, is warned of within scripture itself. It should be noted that most religious organizations, Christian or otherwise, accept that 10% of one's income is adequate to support their good works while most governments demand much more. It also comes to mind that Jesus efficiently produced a commodity that contained alcohol that people actually wanted and He did not require a government mandate or subsidy to do it ;).
Mr. Haluska poses the question "What would Jesus cut?". I certainly don't know and, as Jesus is wiser than any of the creations of his Father, I as a Christian would not be so presumptuous as to speak for Him. Maybe Senator Goodwin could arrange another exclusive appearance with the "Atheists for Human Rights" organization and take it up with them.
Under the assumption that Mr. Haluska's question is rhetorical rather that literal, my guess is that the cut would not be to any program or policy per se, but rather to the notion that our rights and well-being come from the whim of government bureaucrats rather than our God-given rights and the liberty to exercise them within the bounds of personal responsibility and accountability.
