Coleman stoops low with child in his commercial

I always knew Norm Coleman was lower than a snake’s belly, but I didn’t think he could go any lower, but now he has done it by putting a child in his commercial to sling his dirt so that would put him underground as a gopher. He wouldn’t be in office now if Wellstone had not died, which a lot of people are still puzzled about. He hasn’t done much of anything since being in office except kissing butt and following in someone else’s footsteps. I think it time for a really, really big change and who wants to vote for a gopher anyway.

I think a law should be that someone has to be so old to be in a commercial of that type. Shame on anyone who would teach child hatred like that on television or anywhere else. We don’t like gophers in Minnesota anyway. They just leave a mess behind them!

Linda Tronnes
Leonard
(Bemidji Pioneer, 10/18/08)

---

Too bad it takes collapse to get Coleman’s attention

Now that taxpayers have to bailout Wall Street to the tune of $700 billion, Norm Coleman and the GOP have realized that regulation and oversight are needed. Unfortunately, it’s taken the collapse of Wall Street to get their attention.

I realize that the Iraq war is not front-page news right now, but let’s go back in time because it shows a pattern in the lack of regulation and oversight. To date there is approximately $15 billion unaccounted for because of fraud, waste and corruption by no-bid contractors in Iraq. When Sen. Coleman was chairman of the oversight committee and should have held hearings regarding this, he did not hold a single hearing. Why, perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Dick Cheney who handpicked Norm Coleman to run for the Senate is the former CEO of Halliburton, which is one of the companies involved in the corruption. Sen. Coleman has also received $100,000 from Halliburton and other companies in Iraq. Sen. Coleman receives $100,000, cost to taxpayers, billions.

In 2004, Sen. Harry Reid and Sen. Byron Dorgan decided to form the Democratic Policy Committee to hold oversight hearings because the GOP administration and GOP Congress would not do their job. They have held 18 hearings so far. As a veteran, I will be supporting Al Franken because of his passion and integrity to do what is best for our veterans and our country.

Roger Wing
Pinewood
(Bemidji Pioneer, 10/18/08)

---

Coleman just appears bipartisan

Is Norm Coleman the one we want to represent Minnesota? Since he was elected senator six years ago he has voted with President Bush nearly 90 percent of the time.

When you’d see Bush on television, Norm Coleman was many times by his side. He said he’s not a big believer in coattailing. However, he said, “But I think it makes a little less difficult to fight the tide.”

How can you be a Vietnam War protestor and then support the Iraq war in 2002? He was late to call for the resignation of Attorney General Gonzales. When the resignation was sure to happen, the party put Norm in the middle so we would think he’s bipartisan. Senator Klobuchar had called for the resignation months before. Just last week we finally saw a special prosecutor named to investigate Gonzales’ behavior in turning the Attorney General’s office into nothing but Republican cronyism.
RELATED CONTENT
West Central Tribune Talk About It Icon Article comments (1)
Since the last election, when Democrats took control of Congress he seems to work more with Democrats to appear to be bipartisan. He votes with his reelection in mind, as most of the votes are on very selective issues. He flees the kitchen at the first sign of heat.

He supports Bush’s policies but now runs from previous positions to hold onto his job. His trademark throughout his career has been political agility in order to get elected, including switching parties to find an easier path to higher office.

I believe the party tells him what to do - nothing real drastic to hurt the party but just so he looks good to Minnesotans that we might think he’s bipartisan.

Carolyn A. Moore
Sunburg
(West Central Tribune Online, 10/13/08)

---

Coleman following Bush’s poor lead

I have some bad news for Laurie Coleman. Her husband, Sen. Norm Coleman, is a rubber stamp for the president. He votes with Bush 92 percent of the time, according to his own campaign Web site. We saw another example of that recently when he approved immunity for the telecom industry, which the American Civil Liberties Union defines as violating every American’s 4th Amendment rights.

Coleman says he knows times are tough. He should. He helped create these tough times. The U.S. wastes $12 billion every month on Bush’s Iraq war. This waste creates a budget deficit.

Few have embraced Bush’s Iraq war more enthusiastically than Coleman. He compared Saddam Hussein to Hitler. He voted against bringing the troops home several times. He refuses to support legislation for stronger penalties on war profiteering. When asked in a June 16 press conference if he was wrong about supporting the war based on what we know now, Coleman stammered, “No”.

The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy worsens the budget deficit. That makes the U.S. a bigger credit risk that increases the interest we pay and weakens the dollar. Because oil is traded with weak dollars, the price of oil rises and further ruins the economy. Coleman has said he wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

Coleman, like Bush, serves lazy unimaginative rich folk who have only one passion. That is to have more money, and the most efficient way to do that is to steal it. There are many opportunities for theft during war. Did Coleman, as chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, hold any hearings on waste or fraud committed by Halliburton or other Iraqi reconstruction contractors? No.

I’m voting for Al Franken. He knows what is truly obscene and will work to end the obscenity that Bush and Coleman have created.

Mike Kuitu

Duluth
(Duluth News Tribune, 8/3/08)

---

Hockey's real heroes

Regarding Sen. Norm Coleman's claim that he "brought hockey back" to Minnesota, it must be noted that Coleman proposed this more than 10 years ago, when he still was the Democratic mayor of St. Paul.

Credit must also be given to the Democratic-controlled City Council and to the DFL-controlled Legislature. Without them, the Xcel Center would not have been built and NHL hockey would not have come back to the State of Hockey. It was a total Democratic Party effort!

So what has Norm Coleman accomplished since then? He switched to the Republican Party, lost to Jesse Ventura in the 1998 governor's race, won a seat in the Senate thanks to the death of Paul Wellstone and has supported President Bush on the Iraq War. He also supported Bush's economic policies, which have caused a huge national debt and a recession.

But he does take out the garbage.

Gary Thompson, St. Paul
(Star Tribune, 7/19/08)

---

A record to run from?

I just saw an ad for Norm Coleman on the morning news Wednesday -- it claims he "brought hockey back" to Minnesota.

For an incumbent U.S. senator to be touting something he helped to achieve as mayor of St. Paul as an accomplishment of his time as senator is sad. He must not have much to be proud of from his six years in the Senate.

Melanie Ueland, Minneapolis
(Star Tribune, 7/17/08)

---

Coleman is a partisan in centrist’s clothing

Many of us remember how Sen. Norm Coleman acted as President Bush’s U.N. attack poodle with his merciless and scurrilous assaults on the U.N. and on Kofi Anan over the behavior of Anan’s son. It was Coleman’s attacks on the UN that helped swing the balance in favor of our illegal war in Iraq.

Now Coleman seems to have been caught ignoring ethics rules in his own associations with lobbyists, as the Associated Press reported its July 1 story, “Watchdog group files ethics charge against Coleman.” What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. Give Coleman the same considerations he extended to the U.N., Anan and their supporters in this country under even less questionable circumstances than his.

Coleman has been trying to put on a cloak of moderation and reason for the upcoming elections, but when practicing his politics of destruction for the Bush administration he was anything but. Don’t believe me? Research the reporting of Coleman’s questionable tenure for yourselves.

Coleman’s overzealous partisan behavior and the damage it has done to America is a matter of public record. I believe we all make mistakes, but Coleman’s behavior transcends mistakes, and I personally don’t believe in rewarding bad behavior.

Erwin Levings
South Range, Wis.
(Duluth News Tribune on 7/14/08)

---

COLEMAN'S D.C. APARTMENT

Sweet deal has a smell

So Jeff Larson provides Sen. Norman Coleman with a deluxe townhouse to live in, right on Capitol Hill. When questioned, Coleman and Larson allege "It's only a cramped bed, crammed into the corner of a basement, used for only three hours a night."

I've got friends who live in Takoma Park, just miles from Capitol Hill, who rent out a basement bedroom with no kitchen for more than $1,000 a month. It's dingy and moldy, and I wouldn't leave a dog there overnight, but the going rental rates are ferocious.

Dave Porter, Minneapolis
(Star Tribune, 7/3/08)

---

Franken understands Americans' concerns

Debra Hogenson, Brewster, Worthington Daily Globe
Published Saturday, June 28, 2008

As I watched and listened to Al Franken accept the nomination for U.S. Senate at the Democratic convention, I was filled with pride for my state.

Al spoke to the delegates and the people of Minnesota about the need for affordable health care, tax fairness, adequate benefits for our veterans, preserving the environment, affordable college education for our children, accounting for the funds paid to politically connected military contractors and, of course, bringing our young men and women home from Iraq.

Al understands that Americans are worried. We are worried about the economy and what it means for our retirement, and our children’s future. We are worried about the environment and the stewardship of the planet. And we are worried for our soldiers who are serving in harm’s way, and lost opportunities to promote peace. But Norm Coleman and the Republicans aren’t taking about these issues. They are talking about Al’s career on late night television.

Article comments (1) Coleman became a U.S. Senator after the tragic death of Paul Wellstone, a man of great courage and conscience. This year, Minnesota has the opportunity to correct that mistake. We all recall Coleman’s tactless comment that he was a 99 percent improvement over Paul Wellstone, and his later clarification that he merely meant that he had a 99 percent better working relationship with the Bush White House. Minnesotans watched in disbelief as Coleman proved that 99 percent was understating his obeisance to Bush and Cheney, and we are done with it. Coleman is not the best our state has to offer.

Minnesota voters aren’t interested in Al’s career as a comedian on SNL. We are adults and understand the difference between entertainment and issues, and we get satire. Minnesotans will judge Al Franken by what he is: an intelligent and caring son who is working for the people of our state. Al Franken is everything we could hope for in a candidate to represent Minnesota. He will serve in the tradition of Humphrey, McCarthy, Mondale and Klobuchar — all smart, caring, brave, independent leaders. That’s the choice: An empty suit who votes in lock-step with party hacks, or a return to our proud tradition of sending someone special to the U.S. Senate from the great state of Minnesota.
(Worthington Globe, 6/28/08)

---

Coleman the chameleon

6/28/2008

Many years ago if a politician were dishonest it was said that "he's so crooked he could hide behind a cork screw."

There is no evidence that Sen. Norm Coleman is dishonest, but who can deny the fact that he is extremely flexible, clever, and shrewd.

Born into a working-class family and a winning Democrat at the start of his political career, he later joined the Republicans when they were winning. Now that they are losing, he is sounding more Democratic, claiming to be "independent" and capable of "reaching across the aisle" and representing both parties.

He once boasted that he would be "99 percent better than Paul Wellstone," but as it turned out he voted 98 percent with Bush. Amazingly, a nearly perfect prediction!

Norm, you are a very important part of the political spectrum! We now have some perspective in deciding whether to vote for a comedian or a chameleon.

Orin Doty
(Rochester Post Bulletin, 6/28/08)
(BTW, I highly recommend the comments to this LTE)

---

Bill O'Brien: Coleman's convictions seem to shift as convenient

The senator's trademark has been political agility, rather than loyalty or principle.

By BILL O'BRIEN
Last update: May 3, 2008 - 4:20 PM

Only now, after Norm Coleman's long tenure as mayor of St. Paul and approaching the end of his first term in the Senate, am I finally able to put my finger on what troubles me about our senior senator. As an attentive voter, one who tries to do his homework about the candidates, I still don't know what makes Coleman tick. For the life of me, I don't know what moves him, what issues make up his political core. I can't tell what really matters to him.

I've also come to suspect that he doesn't know either.

When newly elected as senator, he said he wanted most to reach across the aisle, to forge a more cooperative spirit in Washington. He said that bi-partisanship was his first priority. He says that still in his reelection campaign. But there's very little in his Senate performance that has demonstrated real commitment to that espoused principle.

He has been a zealous defender of one of the most partisan presidents in recent memory, and not just in his voting record. Recall also his confrontations with then-U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. When Annan dared to criticize the Bush administration for abandoning the weapons inspection process in favor of war in Iraq, Bush unleashed Coleman on him. We saw some of the same when Coleman participated as a member of the Republican "truth squad" that hounded John Kerry's nomination. And more still when Coleman served as one of Karl Rove's staunchest defenders. Where in this mix is the cooperative spirit that Coleman claims to hold dear?

More troubling, though, is the chameleon factor: Coleman's well-documented tendency to abandon his purported principles when the political price rises. When the popularity of Democrats was on the wane in the '90s and Reaganomics was de rigueur, Coleman simply changed parties, abandoning one set of political underpinnings for another.

A voluble defender of the Iraq fiasco, Coleman jumped from that armor-plated bandwagon immediately after the midterm elections proved that the electorate is fed up with our Iraq policy. As John McCain and many other defenders of the war held their ground in the face of withering criticism, Coleman withered.

And let's not forget the Rachel Paulose mess in the U.S. attorney's office. Coleman nominated Paulose. He ushered her through the nomination process. He represented to Minnesotans that she was right for the job. When it became apparent that her appointment was mired in politics, that she was in over her head, did Norm stick to his guns? Did he defend the candidate he'd nominated? Hardly. When her appointment came under the hot glare of the house lights, Norm declared Paulose a disappointment and headed for the door.

Coleman's trademark throughout his career has been political agility, an uncanny ability to triangulate between the politics of the day, his party and the electorate in order to maintain his electoral appeal, in order to get elected. No doubt, he's good at that. And if political agility is what we want most in a senator from Minnesota, Coleman should win reelection in a landslide.

If, on the other hand, we're looking for somebody to lead, somebody with some gumption, we need to look beyond Coleman. Too often he has fled the kitchen at the first sign of heat. Too often he has demonstrated agility at the expense of courage.

Bill O'Brien is a workplace lawyer and founder of his firm, Miller O'Brien Cummins.
(Star Tribune, 5/3/08)

---

How long in Iraq will be long enough?

Justin Kramer's criticism of Barack Obama's plans to bring American soldiers back from Iraq (letter published on April 15) recycled a lot of Republican talking points. The oddest one for me is that "we cut and ran" from Vietnam, thereby causing ourselves a "devastating defeat" of a kind that we must now avoid at all costs.

It seems to me the lesson of Vietnam is exactly the opposite. 50,000 Americans lost their lives in a civil war that they had no business being involved in. The side we backed eventually lost. But Vietnam is now a stable country, a trading partner and no threat to us. Isn't that what we want in Iraq? Would Mr. Kramer prefer us to be still fighting and dying in the jungles of southeast Asia? Does he want us to stay in Iraq until 50,000 Americans have died there?

Bush, McCain, and Norm Coleman are using arguments similar to Mr. Kramer's in support of continuing the tragic waste of American lives in Iraq. But by refusing to ask the country as a whole to make painful sacrifices for the war-- by refusing to reinstitute the draft and by a borrow-and-spend policy that shifts most of the costs to our children and grandchildren -- the Republican politicians show that for them the talking points are just empty slogans.

John Rice, Rochester

(Rochester Post Bulletin, 4/20/08)

---

Coleman too cozy with Bush

Published Sunday, February 24, 2008

In the Feb. 19 Forum, Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., wrote of his concern for the weak state of Minnesota’s economy. But his johnny-come-lately, election-year concern for the problems that Minnesota families face can’t hide his record not only of causing those very problems, but of making them worse.

“Well done is better than well said,” according to Benjamin Franklin, and Coleman talks a good game – but his actions contradict his words. While he says that he understands “the rising toll that high gas prices, rising tuition, soaring mortgage payments and falling home values are taking on Minnesota families,” his record shows a different story.

Coleman has protected corporate special interests and the extremely wealthy at the expense of average working Minnesotans. In just one example, Coleman supported President Bush’s exorbitant tax breaks for the richest 1 percent of Americans.

Just how exorbitant are they? According to Citizens for Tax Justice, the wealthiest 1 percent of Minnesotans – whose average income in 2006 was $1,160,000 – will clear an extra $42,000 a year thanks to the tax breaks. But the bottom

60 percent of Minnesotans – with incomes around $30,000 – will see an average tax cut of just $459. You heard right: The Bush-Coleman tax breaks will save the wealthiest

1 percent more than a taxpayer in the bottom 60 percent earns in an entire year.

Moreover, Coleman wants to protect that top 1 percent from paying their fair share by making their special breaks permanent – even though they will saddle future generations with the bill. It’s bad enough that reckless Republican economic policies will almost double our national debt to more than

$10 trillion before President Bush’s term ends. But making those skewed tax breaks permanent, as Coleman wants, will cost another $4.3 trillion starting in 2009.

And when Coleman uses Washington-speak to scare us with tales of “major tax increases” that “will happen in three years if we do nothing,” he’s just expressing his own fear of a level economic playing field, since those tax breaks for the wealthy are already – and always have been – scheduled to expire.

Time and again, Coleman has stuck with Bush and the disastrous Republican Party line on taxes and spending, supporting unbalanced budgets and opposing making the government “pay as you go.” Coleman has gone on a spending spree with the taxpayers’ credit card – a luxury that most Minnesota families don’t enjoy.

I haven’t even mentioned Coleman’s consistent support for the Iraq war and his staunch opposition to any timeline for withdrawal. The war is now costing us $11 billion a month and will add another

$700 billion in interest alone to the credit card.

Toward the end of his piece, Coleman wrote, “The strength of our economy directly impacts every Minnesota family, which is why I have worked hard in each of these areas throughout my time in office.”

Yes, Coleman has worked hard – to protect corporate special interests and the extremely wealthy, straight down the Republican Party line. But working hard for your moneyed masters isn’t working for Minnesota families.

Melendez is chairman of the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party.
(In-Forum News - Moorhead)

---

Douglas A. Johnson: It's past time to end the use of torture

Minnesota's U.S. senators should get behind an effort to set humane, consistent standards in the treatment of prisoners.

By DOUGLAS A. JOHNSON

Last update: February 7, 2008 - 6:33 PM

U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey is unable or unwilling to say that waterboarding is torture. It should not be a hard call: The United States has prosecuted others for using similar interrogation tactics and has protested their use on Americans.

Even Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., believes waterboarding is torture. Yet surprisingly, he has announced opposition to an amendment that would prohibit its use by the CIA.

For those of us who work with torture victims, there is no question that waterboarding is another in a long line of torture techniques relying on principles of asphyxiation. Their terrible impact relies on more than the panic resulting from cutting off the supply of air. They also constitute forms of mock execution, recognized as a separate and distinct type of torture. Our clients tell us that these experiences haunt their nightmares more than the physical pain they were forced to endure.

Torture and cruelty will not make America more secure. FBI, military intelligence and CIA professionals agree that torture does not work. It yields more faulty information than actionable intelligence, leading to poor policy and dangerous missions based on flawed information.

Pending legislation would create one national standard for the treatment and interrogation of prisoners. An amendment to the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008 would hold the CIA to the rules of the U.S. Army Field Manual on Interrogation. The field manual was written by military interrogators and contains their wisdom gained during times of great crisis and threats.

Because of the Senate's rules, it will take 60 votes, not a simple majority, to pass the anti-torture amendment. Coleman's opposition is all the more disappointing because he is a lead sponsor of the Torture Victims Relief Act. He knows better than most the devastating consequences of torture, not just on individuals but on societies.

Congress already holds all Department of Defense personnel to the manual's standards, but not the CIA. Failing to apply consistent standards in the treatment of prisoners causes confusion, unpredictability and dangerous gaps in national policy. Top military lawyers say the executive order approving the CIA program would allow for abuses under the Geneva Conventions, therefore putting troops at risk. The military relies on the humanitarian law standards when they are taken into enemy custody and should have a prominent role in determining how those rules are interpreted by the U.S. government.

Fighting terrorism requires strength of arms, but also strength of character. While maintaining respect for the rule of law and our Constitution, we have prevailed against threats and forces determined to destroy us. Through our example, other nations were moved to adopt the universal principles we lived by.

Minnesotans should be able to count on Coleman's leadership to help restore America as a global leader. He should help pass the amendment to the intelligence bill and undo the practice of torture and cruelty.

Douglas A. Johnson is executive director of the Center for Victims of Torture in Minneapolis.
(Op-ed in Minneapolis Star Tribune, 2/8/08)

---

Coleman's health-care paradox

According to a recent article in the Post-Bulletin, it seems that Sen. Norm Coleman wants to make health-care decisions less daunting.

Does he not realize that he's part of why decisions are so daunting in the first place?

It's paradoxical that a large percentage of insurance company and drug company profits recycle as political contributions which self-perpetuate congressional support. In the last seven years, the administration had two chances to reduce the cost of drugs by allowing Medicare to put drugs out for bids. Instead it has made such bidding illegal. So, we have the daunting infamous Medicare Part D.

The drug and insurance companies have built and paid for the daunting trough from which they enjoy their gross repasts. The vaunted private sector indeed provides a daunting array of options. But no health insurance to 46.5 million poor Americans.

Heracles knew how to muck out the Augean stables. Heracles did not "coordinate public and private efforts." Heracles did not provide "policy assistance." Heracles did not create a Stable Cleanliness "Literacy Implementation Center." Heracles attacked the foul system directly and just cleaned the stables.

Senator, take a lesson from mythology: the best way to make these decisions less daunting is to provide mandatory health insurance for all Americans, paid partially through payroll deductions and administered by Medicare. We'll understand that undaunting system very easily.

(Rochester Post Bulletin, 12/13/07, Bob Maegerlein, Rochester)

---

Where’s Norm?

It is impossible to avoid politics.

The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was delivered to the White House some seven months ago. Vice President Dick Cheney, not President George W. Bush, kept it under wraps, until last week. The report stated Iran halted its covert nuclear weapons program in 2003, though it is busy enriching the nuclear material it possesses. Last October, Bush spoke of “World War III.”

Cheney said, “America cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions.”

Then, President Bush stated that he did not know about Iran ceasing nuclear weapons work until last August, that is, he was advised of “a” change but not what the change was.

Bush did not ask? Who is so foolish to believe that?

Then, almost the next day, we learn the CIA destroyed the interrogations tapes of two high-profile al-Qaida operatives. Presumably they were tortured. This after the White House specifically advised the CIA not to destroy the evidence. Obstruction of justice deja vu, all over again and again!

And where is Sen. Norm Coleman? His silence is deafening, as he weasels around these issues to keep his miserable job as Bush crony. This guy, like so many neoconservatives, sits on his hands and goes along.

No efforts made to get to the truth, no nothing, save spineless cowering. Coleman should take some lessons from Sen. Chuck Hagel and other outraged conservative politicians joining with other honest Americans.

Whether the real “decider” or not, Bush either knew about Iran and the tapes or he didn’t. Like the Plame affair, this shows how insidious these people are and what a tragic mistake Americans have made.

Coleman abets another Bush White House criminal act. Coleman did not pull the trigger but he is just as guilty.

(Winona Daily News, Robert Hively-Johnson, Winona, 12/13/07)

---

COLEMAN'S HOME ACT

A gift to lenders

The proposal Norm Coleman outlined in his Oct. 29 opinion piece -- allowing homeowners facing foreclosure to borrow against their retirement savings -- made me nervous. I got more nervous when I discovered that the Mortgage Bankers Association had quickly endorsed the plan.

The HOME Act would let homeowners take up to $100,000 out of their retirement accounts in order to refinance or avoid foreclosure. The withdrawal would be penalty-free if it's repaid to the account within three years. For people with traditional loans who are victims of a temporary setback or job loss, this could be a valid option for saving their homes.

But for the majority of nontraditional subprime borrowers caught in this crisis, this seems like a great way to persuade a people who are already in a deep financial hole to borrow against one of the few assets -- their retirement account -- that's protected in a federal bankruptcy proceeding. After they've cashed out their retirement savings in a futile attempt to save their home, they get a whopping penalty tax bill when they can't repay the money they borrowed three years earlier.

It seems to me that this bill is aimed more at making more assets available to subprime lenders and the people who bought those loans than keeping people in their homes.

(Mpls Star Tribune, Sara Strzok, Minneapolis, 11/1/07)

---

Your turn: Now Coleman supports health care?

Senator Norm Coleman ironically claimed, in his Monday editorial on improving access to health care, that the "the time for solutions is now." It's nice that Senator Coleman is finally on board with health care reform — just one year from when he is hoping to get re-elected.

But his sudden and convenient willingness to listen to Minnesotans on "how to change and improve our health care system" can't obscure his total inaction on expanding access or improving our health care system throughout his five years in the Senate.

Since President Bush took office in 2001, the number of uninsured Americans has increased substantially. After falling during the Clinton presidency, the number of uninsured people soared to 47 million in 2006. Most Americans without health insurance are in working families. They often don't have insurance either because their jobs don't offer it, or because they simply can't afford it.

Even people with health insurance face enormous financial obstacles to getting care. For example, more than half of personal bankruptcies are related to medical bills. Of those who filed bankruptcy as a result of medical bills, most had health insurance at the time.

Despite this disturbing trend, Coleman sat on his hands. According to Congressional Quarterly, from 2003-06, Coleman stood 90 percent of the time with a president who refused to address the health care crisis. Coleman actually voted in 2003 to cut $10 billion from Medicaid, a program that provides health care for our nation's most vulnerable seniors, children and people with disabilities.

Coleman continues to protect big companies over the interests of Minnesotans.

He voted twice against protecting individuals with high medical bills in bankruptcy filings in 2005. And now he is proposing a tax credit "that can go directly to the private insurer of your choice."

Never mind that tax credits proposed by the Bush administration would still leave health insurance unaffordable for modest and low-income Americans, or that this "solution" does nothing to lower the cost of health care.

Coleman is again trying to pull a fast one. He wants us to believe, one year from the next election, that he is taking action to fix health care — even though he sat silent, actually voting to cut health care for children, seniors and people with disabilities, while millions of Americans lived every day without much-needed health coverage.

Coleman wants us to believe that "the time for solutions is now." Senator, the time for solutions was long ago. The time for holding our elected leaders accountable for their inaction is now.

This is the opinion of Brian Melendez, chair of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.

(St. Cloud Times, 10/12/07)

---

COLEMAN'S ATTACK AD

Free-speech opponent

I would like to personally thank Sen. Norm Coleman for pointing out in his full-page ad on Tuesday that exercising freedom of speech is a ridiculous idea.

In addition, it is comforting to know that with his recent Senate vote he was willing to employ totalitarian means to stifle a constitutionally declared freedom of Minnesotans and Americans everywhere.

Perhaps it is time for Mr. Coleman to "move on."

(Mpls Star Trinbune, 9/26/07, JOEL JACKSON, ST. PETER, MINN.)

---

Listen up

Norm Coleman is truly grasping at straws if the only thing he can find to accuse Democratic Senate candidate Al Franken of is calling a ridiculous Senate vote just that -- ridiculous (a sentiment shared by many Minnesotans).

Coleman would spend his time and his money better by listening to his constituents and voting against the continuation of this disastrous war.

(Mpls Star Tribune, 9/26/07, JANE SIMON, MINNEAPOLIS)

---

Going negative

Message to Norm Coleman: Negative ads already? You better work on your résumé, because we don't like "ridiculous personal attacks" here in Minnesota.

(Mpls Star Trinbune, 9/26/07, ED DILLON, MINNEAPOLIS)

---

His selective outrage

I do not condone the actions of groups like MoveOn.org, which ran the ad attacking Gen. David Petraeus.

But, on the other hand, I don't recall Sen. Norm Coleman running full-page newspaper advertisements or voting for a bill when the Swift Boat veterans smeared Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry during the 2004 election.

(Mpls Star Trinbune, 9/26/07, MARK WEBER, MINNEAPOLIS)

---

BS to Bush's "withdrawal" plan we are not that dumb

To:
President George Bush
Rep. Jim Ramstad
Sen. Norm Coleman
Sen. Amy Klobuchar

September 15, 2007

Most of the intelligent Americans are on to Bush's attempt to frame his plan as a "withdrawal,"

If President Bush can successfully position his 30,000-troop withdrawal as "leaving Iraq," it'll remove all of the pressure on Congress to actually end the war. Whether he succeeds will depend on elites in the media. We are going to call the media accountable by challenging their spin by using headlines like these:

* "Bush says he'll start bringing troops home before Christmas," Los Angeles Times
* "Bush agrees to limited troop cuts," MSNBC
* "Success Allows Gradual Troop Cuts, Bush Says," New York Times

We will drive home that this isn't a withdrawal plan at all. When we elected a new Congress back in 2006, there were 130,000 troops on the ground in Iraq. Then Bush sent 30,000 more into harm's way. Bringing them home now just takes us right back to where we were a year ago. Plus, the president would be forced to bring these troops home anyway. USA Today reported last week, "Pentagon officials have said they cannot sustain this year's buildup of about 28,000 additional troops past next spring because of the stretched personnel demands on the U.S. military."2

All this plan does is run out the clock out on Bush's presidency—leaving the next president to clean up the mess in Iraq. In fact, it's been reported that this is the "central goal" of his remaining days in office.3

We can't wait that long. During Vietnam it took us 7 years to end it after we made the decision. During that period we wasted 27,000 more American lives. Support the troops and bring them home NOW before we destroy more lives and families.

Eden Prairie , MN
Congress.org

---

Dear Senator Coleman:

I am asking this both as a constituent, and as one whose son sacrificed nearly two years of his young life serving in Iraq: With all due respect, would you and Senator Warner quit trying to micromanage the Iraq conflict?

Your call for troop withdrawal, as "symbolic" as it may be, should not be yours, Senator Warner's, Senator Reid's, nor any other senator nor congressman.

That call should be made by the Commander in Chief, in consultation with the generals on the ground.

I can see no reason for your call for a "symbolic" troop withdrawal, other than for political calculation.

You seem to be trying to walk a fine line between pleasing the rabid anti-war folks who will settle for nothing less than unqualified defeat, and those of us who want to stay the course until the mission is complete.

In reality, you are "pleasing" neither side. In reality, you are only complicating things with rhetoric. Our enemy in Iraq (and, incidentally, around the globe) needs to hear the unequivocal message that there is no chance for him to succeed. He does not get that message when he hears heartening news that micromanaging politicians in the United States want to remove the force that is keeping him from achieving domination of Iraq and its oil-rich resources.

In the midst of what can only be called unqualified successes with regard to the surge, your timing couldn't be worse. Let the surge take its course; let General Patraeus and President Bush make their rightful decision of when it is proper to pull our troops.

Sincerely,

Leo Pusateri
St. Cloud, Minnesota
(9/4/07)
(Blogs for Bush)

---

Coleman’s smoke billows over the state

9/3/07

Well, Norm Coleman remains true to form. Our carpetbagger senator has popped his little head into the limelight again, after Sen. Larry Craig’s arrest — for soliciting sex in a Minneapolis men’s room — became public.

Coleman chases the ambulance, calling for Craig’s resignation, seizing another opportunity to appear original.

The key word is “after” Craig’s arrest became public, did Coleman become the righteous man. The question remains, however, “What did Coleman know and when did he know it?”
As has been the case with many “family value” pols who clamored for a past liberal prez’s lynching, another hypocrite is bound for the public stocks or worse, for crimes far worse than any dilly-dallying. It all reminds me of a police officer pal’s observation that most apprehended suspects that say they are God-fearing Christians are the bad ones, indeed.

It seems pols and lots of so-called “God-fearing folks” might do well to heed the old but true advice, “People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.”

Should we be surprised when we find out that Coleman and some other of his colleagues, knew of Craig’s excursions long ago?

The Idaho Statesman (newspaper) and at least one blogger have been on Craig’s tail for quite some time, so Craig’s predatory behavior has been no secret. But, as in the case of ex-Florida Congressman Mark Foley, congressional ethics people ignored the smoke, and the fire soon raged.

Note well, Coleman’s smoke billows all over Minnesota ...
(Winona Daily News, Robert Hively-Johnson, Winona)

---

COLEMAN FUNDRAISER

August 23, 2007

Photo op that counts

I stood Tuesday with the group of people who weren't invited to the Norm Coleman $1,000 entry fundraiser, and who for sure didn't have $10,000 to drop for a photo op with the president.

I greatly appreciated the large number of passing cars that honked or gave "thumbs up" in appreciation of the effort. My part, as a former Army medic and bugler, was to occasionally fill the air with "Taps," because I believe that every time large contributions go to continue the policies we're under, many more people will die or be injured through violence or some kind of neglect.

I personally have trouble with the thought of paying $10,000 to be photographed with any president. If I had it, I'd help two or three families get adequate health insurance for a year and be photographed with them. These kind of photo ops abound, and I'm imagining a world where we as a culture seek them out.
(Star Tribune, LARRY JOHNSON, GOLDEN VALLEY)

---

The Minneapolis Star Tribune printed a letter from Tom Steward, Communications Director for Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN), defending Norm's flip flop on filibustering. Norm has received significant criticism for voting against timetables for getting the troops out of Iraq and to a lesser extent changing his principled stance against filibusters. Steward's response to the criticism is full of lies and misinformation.

COLEMAN'S CLOTURE VOTE

It has a solid context

A July 25 letter that criticized Sen. Norm Coleman for voting against cloture on a recent amendment to the Senate's defense bill failed to mention some key facts.

It is true that Sen. Coleman does not favor the filibuster as a routine practice. He first stated his opposition to the filibuster when Democrats used it regularly to block votes on numerous judicial nominations in 2003. Coleman also has generally supported cloture votes when used to bring up a measure for debate and improvement on the Senate floor.

Unfortunately, since Sen. Harry Reid took over as majority leader in January, he has exploited this little-understood Senate procedure, invoking cloture more than any other Senate leader in history. Reid has now filed cloture 46 times in the first seven months of this session of Congress, compared with just 16 at the same point in 2005 or 11 at the same point in 2003 when Republicans were in control of the Senate.

Most important, Reid's use of cloture votes for the most part has not been to end filibusters but to avoid a full debate by taking away the rights of the Republican minority to offer amendments -- the exact opposite of what this tool was designed for. In fact, Reid is using it so often that a cloture vote is often the only opportunity for senators to express their view on any given topic, as was the case with the recent amendment to immediately begin withdrawing our troops from Iraq, which Coleman opposed.

Sen. Coleman will continue to support cloture whenever he can, but he will not be afraid to stand up to Senate leaders when they are suppressing debate on the major issues facing our country.

TOM STEWARD, WASHINGTON;
COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR,
OFFICE OF SEN. NORM COLEMAN
(Star Tribune)

Read the analysis of the lies and misinformation here.

---

Will Coleman admit he's wrong?

7/20/2007

I write to express my deep disappointment and confusion regarding Sen. Norm Coleman's vote against invoking cloture on the filibuster of the Levin Amendment concerning troop redeployment in Iraq.

I say this not because of the substance of the amendment. Rather, I say it because of the supposed principle on which Sen. Coleman relied in the past during the Democratic filibuster of the president's judicial nominees, among others, stating he believes the Senate is obligated to allow an up-or-down majority vote on any given proposal. His vote flies in the face of that principle. Frankly, it is hypocritical.

While I personally may or may not be happy with the outcome of any particular vote, I firmly believe the Senate filibuster is a useful tool of checks and balances -- a legitimate legislative tactic to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. Thus, on the procedural merits I do not question the propriety of the Senate Republicans resorting to use of this tactic. However, it is patently inconsistent to say you are in favor of up or down votes when you are in the majority, but then be against up or down votes when you are in the minority.

The only principled thing Coleman can do now is either admit he was wrong today or that he was wrong in the past. Which is it?
(Rochester Post Bulletin, Bruce R. Larson, Rochester)

---

COLEMAN AND GALLOWAY

Partial vindication

Sen. Norm Coleman was apparently vindicated about British MP George Galloway's financial stake in the oil-for-food program, but not about the God-forsaken Iraq war ("Coleman claims vindication in spat with British MP," July 18).

Parliament rightly suspended Galloway from the House of Commons for 18 working days and required him to apologize for his conduct. Galloway, however, was spot on about a much bigger score: that the run-up to the war was based on a "pack of lies."

How shall we hold Coleman responsible for this war and its colossal loss of life?

(Minneapolis Star Tribuen, Todd Seabury-Kolod, St. Paul)

---

Letter: For sake of small farms, Coleman should sign on

Sen. Norm Coleman's recent public insistence that no money be taken from commodity programs in the farm bill to support rural economic development overlooks a common-sense solution — closing the loopholes in farm program payment limits would make farm programs work better to strengthen family farms and save money to invest in the future of rural America.

Budgets are tight, but that simply means tough decisions have to be made regarding the best places to invest taxpayer dollars. There is one place to find real dollars — close the loopholes in farm program payment limitations and put the savings into rural economic development programs.

Coleman is correct in saying that farm programs are important, but I certainly hope he doesn't think that sending million dollar checks to mega-farms is a better use of our tax dollars than investing in rural small business creation.

Making the paper limits real in farm programs is a bipartisan, common-sense reform supported by rural citizens and true family farmers throughout Minnesota. Legislation has been introduced to do just that, and limit farm program payments to $250,000 — a first step to revitalizing farming and rural communities.

We hope Coleman will support this common-sense legislation. Rural development programs in the farm bill are crucial to the future of rural Minnesota and rural America.

Congress needs to match its stated commitment to such programs with real funds. Putting real dollars behind the rural development title of the 2007 farm bill would demonstrate a true commitment to our rural communities.
(St. Cloud Times, By Dan Owens, Center for Rural Affairs, Lyons, Neb., 7/17/07)

---

Javier Morillo-Alicea: A situation that won't do; a Congress that won't act

Norm Coleman is among the senators in thrall to the wrong voices on immigration.

Published: July 09, 2007

Minnesotans recently heard the story of Sara Muñoz. Sara was deported even though her husband and young children live here in Minnesota as U.S. citizens. Her family was torn apart because of our broken immigration system. We had a chance to change that fact last month, when the U.S. Senate took up comprehensive immigration reform.
But Sen. Norm Coleman voted to keep this broken immigration system broken.

There is one thing we can all agree on when it comes to immigration: We have to do something soon. The political echo chamber around this issue is deafening, but the fact remains that 12 million people are living in the shadows of our neighborhoods, our communities, our state and our nation, and any excuse for not addressing this issue is shameful.

In many respects, this particular bill was flawed. But the defeat of the immigration bill means one thing for sure: For the next few years (everyone acknowledges this political hot potato will not be touched in an election year), our borders will be no more secure; 12 million hard-working, tax-paying families will remain vulnerable, and this very complex issue will continue to be dominated by hatemongers and talk-radio extremists.

Immigrant advocates had high hopes that Coleman might vote to change our system. The senator is an original cosponsor of the Dream Act, a bill that would make it easier for those who are children of undocumented immigrants and who do well in U.S. high schools to go on to college. Last year, he voted for the Hagel-Martinez comprehensive immigration reform bill, which in many respects was much more liberal than this year's compromise legislation. And he has previously described filibusters as something "to be ashamed of."

What changed?

After the first cloture vote failed, Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott said, "Talk radio is running America." The right wing fired up its engines, and the Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys and Lou Dobbses of the world stirred up massive amounts of phone calls, faxes and e-mails into Washington offices. If you speak to staffers at some of those offices, as I have, you might be surprised at the vicious hatred that is being expressed in many of these communications. George W. Bush, whose election was supposed to signal a different, more welcoming party for Latinos and immigrants, has instead presided over the transformation of the Party of Lincoln to the Party of Ann Coulter.

It was to those extreme forces of the right that Coleman caved when he changed his position and voted to kill all hope for comprehensive reform. Talk radio ran the country, and Coleman listened.

And while he voted to maintain the broken system, immigrants continue to live and work in the shadows because our economy demands it. Entire industries will continue to rely on undocumented labor and hope that the next raid does not signal their downfall. Human beings will continue to die in the desert because our economic system requires their labor, but our broken immigration system does not allow them to migrate and offer it legally. Families like that of Sara Muñoz will continue to be torn apart.

Last month, the Senate had the opportunity to move forward with immigration reform. We could have continued the dialogue and maybe, just maybe, we might have seen the enactment of a law that would begin to end the madness that has ensnared people like Sara Muñoz. Maybe we could have begun to achieve secure borders and a sane immigration system. Maybe we could have had a law that was tough, but was also practical and fair.

But Coleman voted no.

Javier Morillo-Alicea is an immigration-reform advocate. He is also president of SEIU Local 26, a union that unites more than 5,000 predominantly Latino and East African janitors in the Twin Cities.
Minneapolis Star Tribune, 7/9/07

---

Don’t compliment bamboozlers

The Winona Daily News recently published an editorial position supporting Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota on the Gonzales issue. The editorial was titled “Go, Norm, go,” by Darrell Ehrlick.

Ehrlick decried Bush’s lying crony and condemned conservative criminal politicization of the judicial branch of government. He gave Coleman an “attaboy” for his (tardy) anti-Gonzales statement. Fine!

But Ehrlick fell victim to the same bamboozling spin conservatives aim toward narrow-minded single-issue voters, and/or he is courting local conservative readers. Frankly, Coleman’s deceptive and damaging spin-games are strikingly similar to that of charlatans like Pat Robertson and just as obvious.

Behind all the political machinations is the fact that Gonzales’ dismissal/resignation would be doubly problematic for the administration. The White House cannot afford to be embroiled in lengthy Judicial Committee hearings. They also fear a new attorney general might be forced into a criminal perjury investigation. Coleman howls because nothing will happen.

Coleman’s well-oiled deceit mirrors the Bush administration’s absolute disregard for truth and dependence on spin. Instead of going along, if Coleman had any integrity, he would have balked when he learned of White House plans to suppress liberal Minnesota voter’s rights and condemned them by name for violating their oath of office and the Constitution.

How does Coleman explain his utter lack of integrity? The same way Coleman and conservative family values/right-to-lifers explain rationalizing as Christian and just, torture, perjury, undermining America’s defense capability, unprecedented debt and outright corruption. Spin!

Good governance must be more than one bill, a single issue or pork barrel bribery. At crunch time, Coleman marches the conservative cadence because his interest is himself, period.

Coleman rode Bush’s coattails (carpetbagged) on the war, among other issues, when it helped, and he flopped when the war — and Bush’s leadership — went south. Spin, like his party, is Coleman’s only substance.

Again, one seemingly bipartisan act does not change this political sow’s ear into a silk purse, even with remarkable liberal stupidity thrown in. Yet, this slick huckster’s games seem to have bamboozled a skittish Daily News editor, but not astute Minnesota voters.

All bamboozlers should be exposed, not saluted.

Robert Hively-Johnson, Winona
(Winona Daily News, 6/7/07)

---

Report card on Coleman

Whether Norm Coleman's voting record in the U.S. Senate is "moderate" or "conservative" is really beside the point. If Republicans regain control of the Senate, they will set the agenda. They will control what bills are considered. They will decide what hearings are held, what investigations are conducted.

The Bush administration has produced the most corrupt and incompetent government in over a century. The Republican-controlled Senate stood by and did nothing. We cannot risk another four years of Republican-led government while the party is still in the grip of "loyal Bushies."

Remember: Dick Cheney hand-picked Norm Coleman to run for the Senate in 2002, forcing Tim Pawlenty to run for governor. Coleman may be allowed to vote against the party on some occasions, but we all know who's really calling the shots.

BRUCE KVAM, MINNETONKA
(Minneapolis Star Tribune, 5/25/07)