Wednesday, September 30, 2009


"Any level of government will work better than 'enterprise.' All we have to do is get Republicans out of it."
- Old Scout of Scouts' Honor -

I warned you about this guy some months back. He is Tim Pawlenty, current Minnesota Governor, who mistakenly believes he has what it takes to be President. Media pundits are hinting at a run by him for the GOP nomination, and they are also incorrectly touting him as a moderate Republican. Consider this your second warning about him. He is now galavanting all across the country making speeches and appearing in support of conservative Republican candidates everywhere in a Nixonesque attempt to build party support for his own 2012 presidential candidacy. In the process, he has abandoned his responsibilites as Chief Executive of his own state in the best Sarah Palin tradition, the only difference being he has not officially resigned his post.

The man is not to be trusted. He is a conservative Republican wolf in moderate Republican sheep's clothing.

No, he doesn't use inflammatory rhetoric, refer to President Obama as a socialist, or brandish posters with swastikas. His tone and demeanor are far more sedate and civil than that. But he is a bedrock social conservative in the best Bush/Cheney/Palin tradition. He is one of your typical "tax-cuts-for-the-rich-and-big-business-will-solve-everything" Republicans who opposes social spending and who doesn't care at all about ur ubderstand the struggles of the poor, working, and middle classes in this country. His supply-side brand of economics was rejected nationally by voters in 2008 and should be rejected again three years from now.

But who is Tim Pawlenty, what is his vision, and what has he done to deserve the presidency? There is nothing remarkable, original, or inspiring about him. He is, lock, stock, and barrel, your typical Republican. Son of a milk truck driver, Pawlenty grew up in suburban St. Paul. He earned a law degree and entered public office first as an appointee to a city planning commission and later as a city council member and state representative. He, like all his GOP cohorts, despises taxes and pledged no new income taxes during his terms as Governor. But just like most modern Republicans, he then engaged in doublespeak, as when he raised the tax on cigarettes but called it a "health impact fee." Other "fees" he raised (or caused to raise) were property taxes and state college tuitions. He has relied heavily on budget-cutting over the years. Columnist Robert Novak once correctly pegged him as Minnesota's most conservative Governor since the 1920s. His budget cuts to higher education have resulted in double digit increases in tuition paid by individual students for several years running. Other non-education "fees" rose well over $300 million during his tenure. Hos major budget cutting occurred in the areas of transportation, social services, and welfare. He used or threatened vetoes in 2005, 2007, and 2008 on highway expansion, maintenance, and infrastructure repair, good little belt-tightening Republican boy he was. After the collapse of the I-35 Mississippi River bridge on August 1, 2008 due to inadequate inspection, he ihdicated he might rethink his position on an increase in the gas tax to fund more road and bridge repair. But what did he do? Why, he vetoed that, too! The state's Department of Management and Budget estimates that, due to declining revenues caused by high unemployment (and his failure to have had enough tax revenue due to steady refusal to raise such revenue), his successor will have to deal with a massive $4.4 BILLION shortfall in the state budget beginning July, 2011. Rather than levy a temporary tax or staying at home to help devise an alternate funding mechanism, Pawlenty has decided instead to call it quits to run for President. Now THAT'S responsible leadership you can believe in!

Tim Pawlenty is not the great red hope the GOP might think may help them turn blue Minnesota red in 2012. He eked out narrow election victories in his races for Governor. Both times he was in three-candidate races, and both times his vote total was below 50% (at 44.4% and 46.7% respectively). A just-released Minneapolis Star Tribune "Minnesota Poll" has indicated very soft support for his presidential run. When asked "Would you like to see Tim Pawlenty run for President in 2012, or not?", only 30% of state respondents said yes. 55% said no. Among Independents, the total was only 34% yes and 51% no. (Of course, among Republicans, the figure was 75% yes, but let's face it: they are so blindly faithful, a huge majority of them would vote for Daffy Duck if he were the designated Republican candidate). When asked if Pawlenty did indeed get the GOP nomination, only 25% of state respondents said there was a "good chance" they would vote for him, with only 25% saying "some chance." A sizable 43% said there was "no chance" Pawlenty would get their vote. His job approval rating currently stands at 49%, with his disapproval rating at 38%. These are hardly rousing numbers of support. They are as lackluster as he is and as mediocre as his performance has been.

So don't be fooled by Tim Pawlenty's "new face" or seemingly moderate tone, national Republicans and Independents. We Minnesotans have had paw-lenty of Mr. Pawlenty, and with good reason. This guy is a total dud, with nothing new or of substance to offer this country. He is Mr. "Same old, same old", and a waste of our time. His is not fresh new leadership but warmed-over Reaganomics. Look elsewhere if you must have an alternative to President Obama.


SJ said...

true, this guy seems to be the likely front-runner. Pawlenty's only chance is to try and come off as something he is not: a moderate.

Stimpson said...

Ventura, Pawlenty ... Minnesota seems to have a thing for electing governors who don't think the office is a full-time job.

Novak's description should be thrown at anchors and "pundits" whenever they describe him as a moderate.

Jack Jodell said...

@SJ and Stinpson:
Great points, guys. I just don't see Pawlemty having the "ooommph" to get the nomination or win the election, but he'll be trying...

Beach Bum said...

Heard him speak on television one time and the only thought I had was that he seemed as slimy as Romney, another "moderate".

Oso said...

great post.
I'd heard the guys name but didn't know anything about him-and now I do !

Jack Jodell said...

@Beach Bum:
Yes, he's pretty sneaky to be sure. Just another upper-income conservative who is cluelss as to how the overwhelming majority of the country lives.
Thanks for stopping by, and glad I could be of help. I've seen your comments on other sites and have noted they are always intelligent and well reasoned. But I notice you haven't started your own blog yet. I encourage you to do so---our world needs to hear from more folks like yourself! :)

Oso said...

Hi Jack,thanks I appreciate that.I post on

and am waiting for the afternoon slot on Fox after Beck.
Ok made that part up.

Max's Dad said...

Great information, Jack. i always thought Minnesotans elected nice,moderate Republicans like Arne Carlson or Rudy Perpich types. It baffles me how Pawlenty pulls it off. Catholics turned Bible thumpers are not to be trusted. Go Twins!

Vigilante said...

I'm sorry, Jack. No disrespect, but I no longer read long articles about Republicans..........

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your post. Everything you mentioned is exactly why he would be a great president - better than all of your moonbats - especially the one at the head of the table.

SJ said...

celebrating "hypocrisy as virtue" is one reason the GOP lost control of the Senate and lost the White House in an unprecedented history making election.
Too bad the pickings are so slim on the Right.

Jack Jodell said...

LOL! I'll look for you on Mad Mike's and Swiftspeech, Oso---keep up the good work!

Jack Jodell said...

@ Max's Dad,
Yeah, our GOP has been hijacked by the far right, too---that explains Bachmann, Kline, and Pawlenty.
I know where you're coming from, brother, but don't you thonk it's important to know who you're opposing? :)
I'm with you, my friend.

Marc McDonald said...

Personally, I believe Palin could very well win in 2012.

The Dems underestimate her at their peril.

She's regarded (correctly) as a joke by any clear, rational, thinking American.

But then, Reagan was regarded as a joke by many before he was elected.

And if America could elect a complete clown like GWB twice, then yes: Palin could very well be elected.

(Yes, I realize that GWB wasn't really elected---but as Greg Palast has pointed out, elections can only be stolen if they're reasonably close).

Make no mistake: Palin is the GOP front-runner and she WILL run in 2012.

I also fear the economy could still be in terrible shape in 2012. The economic fiasco that Obama inherited is so great that no matter what course of action Obama takes, the economy is likely to remain in the toilet for many years to come.

And if the economy is still in the toilet in 2012, it's difficult to fathom how Obama can prevail.
Palin is a complete and total idiot---but I fear she will be our next president. And she is an extremist who will make Bush look like a moderate.

TomCat said...

If he's a moderate, then I'm a dawg!

Jack Jodell said...

I agree that if the economy is still in poor shape in 2012 Obama WILL be in hot water. As far as Reagan goes, he was indeed regarded as a joke but won overwhelmingly. The difference between he and Mooselini is that he did, on occasion, display an air of confidence (as opposed to vanity); he could and did talk coherently with the national media, and showed at least some depth and reasoning power; and he had already had a track record as governing (and seeing his term through all the way) our most populist state. As for GWB, he had a lot of daddy's friends to fall back on and put them to good use, as well as a brother running a very key state, in stealing the 2000 election. Palin has none of these strengths, is a proven quitter, and has displayed none of the knowledge necessary for her fingers to be placed on our nuclear button, and all but the wing nutsin this country know these I hope you're not correct on that assertion, but we'll see...

Jack Jodell said...

My point exactly! :)

SJ said...

@Marc McDonald,
Too true.
The bar is always lowered for GOP front runners somehow after Nixon. While I don't think Reagan was a dope; he certainly gave off a calculated air of folsky simplicity that made him look like an idiot... and somehow that was desirable at the time.
No Democrat or Independent could ever get away with being that unsophisticated, ignorant and dim.
All I've learned about Sarah Palin since she was thrust on to the national stage, was that she shouldn't have been Governor of Alaska. -And now the old girl has quit, surprise, surprise.
--Yet, Palin has that peculiar mix of dumb indignation, and unfounded self-righteousness that too many Americans seem to find admirable and appealing.
She'll be there, somewhere in the mix in 2012.

Gwendolyn H. Barry said...

Oh hell YES! Ring this bell! :-) I would ditto all comments... save Vig's comment... LOL and exception to the cranky righwingnut you've caught on your line...
I am 'editing' my coverage for blood pressure's sake this week... Like I thought last night... JAIL? FUPPING JAIL? for mandatory / tax induced health coverage?

Funny how wingnuts are 'anon..' when they stop by... it's another form of their nictitating (or masking). Rather teenie weenie of him/her.

Jack Jodell said...

Gwendolyn, it would seem that the wingnuts are anon either because I know them and they don't want me knowing who they are, or because their arguments are flimsy and unsupportable. I'm glad I rarely get wingnut comments here. I'll gladly discuss things with conservatives on a logical, point by point basis, but when I get vague, cliche-ridden nonsense unsupported by fact from them I don't even bother responding, for in cases like that they are wasting my time.