Based on this St. Cloud Times editorial, written by James Mogen, pro-growth capitalism is now part of the far right. Here's how Mr. Mogen arrives at that conclusion:
Continuing to use her office for campaign activities, Rep. Michele Bachmann recently touted her support from the right-wing radical organization Club for Growth on her congressional Web site. The club is a far right-wing group made up of Wall Street financiers. You may be familiar with the group for its negative ads in 2004.CFG is a "right-wing radical organization"? Based on what criteria? Mr. Mogen doesn't give us the criteria by which he arrived at that conclusion. Instead, this is typical of his 'logic':Instead of denouncing extreme groups like them, Bachmann is proud of its support and is now taking direction from the club. After the club demanded that representatives submit to their “key votes,” Bachmann opposed the recently passed farm bill, which promises to bring major support for area farmers, environmental initiatives and hungry children and families.
This group, like Bachmann, is far more conservative than the Minnesotans she is supposed to represent.Saying that Rep. Bachmann is "far more conservative than the district" she's supposed to represent doesn't make sense. If this were true, how did she get elected? Mr. Mogen certainly can't honestly say that Rep. Bachmann ran as a squishy moderate, either. Anytime I hear someone speaking with this type of certitude, I worry because there isn't room for differing perspectives.In fact, the club has been known to go after moderates who vote their district. The club’s support for Bachmann illustrates her own far-right positions are out of line with those of the 6th District.
But I digress.
Let's find out what CFG is interested in. Here's what their About Us page says:
Club for Growth is a national network of thousands of Americans, from all walks of life, who believe that prosperity and opportunity come through economic freedom. We work to promote public policies that promote economic growth primarily through legislative involvement, issue advocacy, research, training and educational activity.What we can deduce from Mr. Mogen's editorial is that he thinks that keeping taxes low and spending under control is something only far right radicals believe in.The primary tactic of the separate Club for Growth PAC is to provide financial support from Club members to viable pro-growth candidates to Congress, particularly in Republican primaries.
Club for Growth Policy Goals:
- Making the Bush tax cuts permanent
- Death tax repeal
- Cutting and limiting government spending
- Social Security reform with personal retirement accounts
- Expanding free trade
- Legal reform to end abusive lawsuits
- Replacing the current tax code
- School choice
- Regulatory reform and deregulation
I wonder how many independents think that that's an extremist's agenda. I wonder if independents think that replacing the current tax code is a good idea or part of an extremist's agenda. I wonder how if independents would characterize school choice as an extremist and unwelcome approach to education. Somehow I don't think many people would think of any of thoes things as part of an extremist agenda.
Here's how Mr. Mogen finishes his anti-Michele diatribe:
The 6th District is made up of independent-minded voters looking for a moderate to carry their views. El Tinklenberg is that moderate. A former minister, mayor and state transportation commissioner under Gov. Jesse Ventura, Tinklenberg is committed to challenging the Washington status quo, and will not be controlled by the big money forces of the Club for Growth. I encourage you to support El Tinklenberg in November.this editorial started with the absurd and finishes with the laughable. Saying that El Tinklenberg won't "be controlled by the big money forces of the Club for Growth" is probably true. What isn't true, though, is thinking that he wouldn't "be controlled by the big money forces" of K Street. I'd bet the ranch that it's impossible for a former lobbyist like Tinklenberg to not be swayed by K Street's influences. I'm confident that K Street's priorities won't often match the Sixth District's priorities, either.
I'd bet that the Sixth District isn't "looking for a moderate to carry their views." I'd rather bet that this is just Mogen's wish, not statistical fact. In 2006, the Sixth District was often described as "Minnesota's Bible Belt."
Finally, I'll repeat what I said here: that El Tinklenberg isn't a moderate. Here's what he said in May, 2006:
“I [Elwyn Tinklenberg] would support a resolution for impeachment if it was brought to me. I would not introduce one. I think there are so many issues that have been waiting for resolution. So many issues that have to be addressed from the war to the economy to health care that we need to move on and move on aggressively.” Source: Star Tribune, May 10, 2006What did President Bush do that rises to the level of impeachment? Did he cause a constitutional crisis? If President Bush didn’t cause a constitutional crisis, then why would Mr. Tinklenberg say that he’d vote for impeachment?
Announcing that you'd support impeaching a president (a) before you're elected, (b) before articles of impeachment were even debated in the House Judiciary Committee and (c) before your political party had control of the House of Representatives isn't the mark of a moderate, independent-thinking individual.
Rather, it sounds like a man pandering to the MoveOn.org, DailyKos, Huffington Post wing of the Democratic Party. Those aren't the voices of moderation.
