In The Lady Logcician’s post , she accurately points out that you and I aren’t spending enough to help R.T. Rybak out of his problem in Murderapolis. Well, at least according to Mayor Rybak we aren’t. Therefore, if you follow the looney left lack of logic, we are responsible for the death of Mr. Reitter. Time after time, when lefties don’t get their way with more of your money, they always cut essential services and then plead it’s because you or I are greedy in that we need to provide for our families first. R.T. decided to cut police, but not community development. Firemen laid off, but keep the Neighborhood Revitalization Project (which the Murderapolis whiners say is aimed at reducing crime.[insert uproarious laughing here]). DFL Rep. Ellison says “We need a partner in public safety, not a finger-pointer,” and the apparent irony this statement of his and his fellow lefties are pointing fingers is lost on him. And this statement would seem to imply “We’re idiots and can’t even provide the basics of government to our citizens. HELP!!!!!”
This style of government also happens when the locals turn down a school bond issue. The very first thing that gets cut: buses. Put the parents in a bind immediately. Then cut after school activities at the same time so little Taylor and Nathan are in need of being picked up at 3:00 p.m.

Be a man R.T. Whining is usually a prime indicator of testosterone deficit disorder.

Governor Pawlenty announced yesterday that he was getting “involved” in trying to resolve the growing crime issue in Minneapolis.

Mayor Ryback (in televised comments) said that the “most responsible” thing that the Governor could do was to restore the Local Government Aid money that was cut by the state in the last budget. Then, he said, we can hire more cops. This from the man who two weeks ago (after the senseless murder of Michael Zebuhr) said that more cops on the street was not the solution – but more on that later. I would like to know WHY the City of Minneapolis is not funding essential solutions (like police) in it’s regular budget! With a $1.24 billion budget, why aren’t there more cops on the street? Why are things like Neighborhood Revitalization Programs funded out of the General Budget instead of police protection? Why is Community Planning getting twice as many budget dollars as the police department? Community Planning and NRP should be what is funded out of the LGA dollars, not the police department!

The Star Tribune opines today that the problem is that people don’t feel safe downtown. Here is a tip for the denizens of the Ivory Tower on Portland Avenue….people don’t feel safe downtown because they AREN’T safe downtown! Yes getting rid of the “fear and intimidation” subculture that roams the streets of Minneapolis at night will make things safer in the area, but what is going to take care of that is MORE COPS ON THE STREET! If the cops are around, these kids are not going to be as quick to start fights with their rival gangs!

UPDATE AND BUMP: MDE points out to us that while crying poor, the City of Minneapolis managed to find $1.7 million for a “green” garden on the roof of City Hall! Now it may be (as some claim) that the roof would need to be repaired anyway, but it seems to me that roof repair would be a much better use of LGA funds – as opposed to paying police officers salaries. But that’s just me.

Nick Coleman is every MOB bloggers favorite media whipping boy – and with good reason. While he can write a very moving story, his stories tend to lack a certain factual basis. Not so this story on the murder of Alan Reitter outside of Block E (the entertainment heart of the city) in Downtown Minneapolis (H/T Anti-Strib and Rambix). Nick eloquently pens the reactions of almost all Twin Cities residents to this heinous act of violence. I say almost all because Mayor Nero Ryback is still fiddling while his city burns. The Mayor’s reaction to this was to say that this was not due to a lack of cops on the street, but to an overabundance of GUNS! I like this particular paragraph from the article:

“So we are told: Friday’s shooting was “an aberration.” (Would it be OK if it were routine?) That it was random. (Would we feel better if the killer had shot the guy he was trying to kill, instead of a bystander?) That the killer was “a deeply troubled person.” (Mayor R.T. Rybak said that.)

Well, Your Honor: Duh.”

Nick almost gets it. He calls for more cops….and less guns. Like I said, he ALMOST gets it. Maybe a few more legal permit holders carrying would make these thugs think twice before firing shots into a crowd of people!

Meanwhile the management of Block E has started playing opera music in an effort to chase away loiterers and panhandlers!

On the other side of the river, St Paul Pioneer Press columnist Joe Soucheray had this to say about the crime wave in Minneapolis:

“Don’t worry, Alan, they are on it, flipping open their cell phones to discuss new camera locations, more cops and great new programs of deterrence, like, well, opera music.
Believe me, they want this solved. They want this terrible problem to go away. They would much sooner concentrate on the important things, like bike paths.”

And while Nero fiddles and dreams of bike paths and diversity, the citizens are looking for leadership:

“It no longer is a problem for just the city; it’s a problem for anyone visiting the city. “Read one letter to the Star Tribune.

“I have a solution to help curb the crime in Minneapolis’ Uptown and downtown neighborhoods. It’s called the “draft.” Read another.

“Time to regain control -The latest tragedies are part of a crime epidemic that has gripped our city for well over a year, yet the most action we’ve seen from the mayor is to caution us against leading “high-risk lifestyles.” The Uptown murder happened just blocks south of my home on Girard Avenue to a person doing what I do nearly every day, walking with friends. The Block E murder was just steps from where I board the bus each morning. Are these two things now considered “high risk?” Read a third.

“So Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak says that, so long as there are too many guns on the street, hiring 1,000 more police officers is not going to make any difference in combatting crime.
Here is how Minneapolis can solve the gun violence:
• Hire at least 500 more police officers.
• Establish a zero-tolerance policy on crime.
• Persuade more law-abiding citizens to obtain handgun carry permits.
• Enforce existing gun laws as written.
• Persuade the court system to aggressively prosecute criminals.
Then, and only then, will you see the crime rate drop dramatically in Minneapolis. ” Read this one from one of our fine service men in Iraq!

Speaking of prosecuting criminals…the shooter had been through the system before. Big surprise there. It is only NOW that the Hennepin County Prosecutor’s office (Amy Klobuchar candidate for US Senate) has decided to do something about it and actually charge him with a crime! What took you so long Ms. Klobuchar?????

Lastly, this bit of irony….

“The April 4 Star Tribune headline should have read “Block E is safe, at least from secondhand smoke.” That would have been more accurate.”

Yes – Nero would have you believe that a burning Rome is safe, but only if your concern is second hand smoke. However, if you are concerned about mugging, murder and mayhem then you are best to stay out of Murderapolis!

I’ll leave the last word to Nick, who comes up with a surprisingly Republican comment:

Solving murders is good. Preventing them is better.

In a political process precisely reminiscent of the fight over the Minnesota Personal Protection Act, the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee rejected the Same Sex Marriage Amendment. This is EXACTLY the same procedure whereby the Senate denied the Senate at large to vote on the Personal Protection Act. For years. Because the Metrocrats (see below) knew it would pass if it ever hit the Senate floor for an up or down vote.
Now, there are differences. If I have to go to the government and ask for permission to protect myself and have to be granted that permission, I don’t have a right. I have a government granted privilege.
But, again, this is an example of the Metrocrats (the long in the tooth Minneapolis/St.Paul Senators) who ALWAYS get elected by the radicals in the inner city and therefore chair the committees and block legislation again and again.
Proving once again, you are not to be trusted. That’s why we have the Metrocrats and lefties.

From Prairie Pravda (article )

Block E is safe, City Hall leaders insist

OK. And I’ll believe it when R.T. Rybak, Mayor, walks the streets of Block E without any of his police escorts, bodyguards, radio,cell phone or a firearm.Be a citizen R.T.
Lead from the front Mr. Mayor.

Our good buddy, Sen. Neville Chamberlain Specter (R-PA) is building consensus. His quote on looking for a compromise on the immigration issue” ‘What we’re looking for is a middle ground, something that will appeal to a broader base” in the Republican Party“ perhaps needs some translation: “Screw you conservatives, screw principles,screw security, screw integrity, as I ever had any, screw what Americans think. I got re-elected. So, SCREW YOU!!!” I think might be a fairly accurate portrayl of what the august Senator from Pennsylvania is attempting to say to the American citizen (REAL American citizen BTW).
And we had an opportunity to get rid of this guy two years ago.Remember Rep. Pat Twoomey? The real Republican, the real conservative that challenged Specter. And that GWB supported Specter over Twoomey and actively campaigned for Specter?
Specter. If ever there was an appropriate name.
Lady Thatcher on consensus:“To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.” “I am not a consensus politician. I am a conviction politician.”
A great site for great quotes from Lady Thatcher.

Ya wanna know why we have traffic jams and don’t have adequate roads and freeways?
Check this out . $18,644 for RELOCATION fees from a small rented house? And Miss Davis says she wants to buy a house some day? Isn’t $18,000 a down payment someplace? Oh, and by the way, you and I are paying that $18,000. One renters relocation fees.
With $18,000 relocation fees no wonder there’s no money for roads.

I run the games for Sunday School where I go to church. The games are message specific to go with the Scripture message being taught. Well, today, the teachers for the 1st graders were gone, so we took a combined class into the Outreach project. And there was Kelly. Worn clothes, obviously a worker. I’d seen him a few times in church, but hadn’t met, nor did I know who he was. Today,though, I was going to meet him. And learn. Kelly runs a real outreach program. Not one of those some of the time “Golly, ain’t I a Christian and doing Jesus work ‘cuz I volunteered to serve mashed potatoes on Thanksgiving” types. But, in the streets, rain (like today) or shine, cold or hot, holiday or not. So, here were these really neat kids (kindergarten and 1st graders) listening to Kelly talk about the homeless, who and what they were, what they need. And the outreach project was to make sandwiches (whole wheat, turkey, and Swiss cheese). And then he explained that the children were also going to make small cards with a greeting on them that would be included with the sandwiches.
Kelly also had a print out from his website (the article “Dreaming of The World”). And I read the whole article. And the last three paragraphs really caught my attention. Here is a guy who is there. Right there. Right now as we speak. He’s out there doing real Christian work. Not that crap called “Social Justice” (which I interpret as “Socialism Injustice”). Not talking about raising taxes for another feel good program. Not dishing hash on a holiday.But a real live worker.
I told him I wholeheartedly agreed with him. He said “Jesus didn’t say have the government feed the homeless. He said YOU feed the hungry and homeless.” I said that when Jesus told Peter “Feed my sheep” He didn’t continue on to say “And to do that , go to the Sanhedrin to institute the “Feed My Sheep Program” and have the Romans raise taxes to pay for it.” And Kelly laughingly agreed.
Go read what a man who really works the Word has to say.

Eric Black of the Star Tribune did an amazing interview with all three candidates for US Senator a couple of weeks ago, with follow-up questions and answers this week. (Hat tip KvM) AAA focused on a couple of specific Iraq war related questions and on Mr. Black’s well conducted interview (he did not let an unanswered question go unchallenged) but I want to dig a little deeper into the exchange (emphasis added).

” Black: Okay. On your website, you say that we need a clear plan to bring our troops home safely. “We need to change course.” That 2006 should be the year that the Iraqi government decreases its dependency on the United States.
As far as I can tell, the administration agrees with that, and Rep. Kennedy agrees with that as a goal. But given the circumstances in Iraq, how do you ensure that the Iraqis decrease their dependency?
Klobuchar: There is a clear difference between me and Congressman Kennedy on this. He is saying stay the course. I am saying change the course.”

OK – I must interrupt here…..All 3 say that we need to bring a majority of our troops home, but Amy says that there is a “clear difference” between her and Congressman Kennedy?

“Klobuchar: I do believe that we should listen to the commanders on the ground. However a policy decision has to be made to start bringing home some of our troops, working with them, having them tell the Congress and tell the president what’s the most responsible way to do that. But the policy decision has to be made from above. And I believe it should be made to start bringing home a significant number of our troops.
Black: So, to clarify the differences between you and let’s say the Bush position, other than saying that you favor change and they favor staying the course. They say that they expect there to be withdrawals this year, they favor it. And that it should be based on the recommendations of the commanders in the field. Is there some portion of that that you disagree with?
Klobuchar: If you look at the president’s recommendations yesterday, [the reference is to Bush’s March 13 Iraq speech] he did not say that we would bring home a significant number of troops this year. So that is a clear difference. He did not say that. He said that he thought we should begin to do that. That we should listen to the troops. I’m saying that we must begin bringing home a significant number of troops. He talked about territory.
Black: Rep. Kennedy has said in one of his MPR interviews that his understanding from his last visit over there, from talking to the military leadership, is that there is a plan that will drawdown tens of thousands of troops this year, but that the enactment of that plan should depend on the continuing recommendations of the commanders in the field. Do you disagree with any of that.
Klobuchar: I believe that the president should set the course that we should bring home a significant number of troops this year. And ask the commanders on the ground for a plan to do that.
But the difference is that we must bring home a significant number of troops this year because I believe that that is the only way that we’re going to get the message to the rest of the world that we’re serious about this, we’re bringing our troops home, and that the government of Iraq must take responsibility for their own country.
Black: Any notion of what constitutes a significant number?
Klobuchar: We need that plan. What I’ve said is that if the president isn’t going to tell us that, then we need to call in the Joint Chiefs of Staff, obviously they can’t demand that they come up with a plan, but that they should ask them to present a plan of how we bring home a significant number of troops and what that is.
Black: So the difference I think I’m noticing is this. They’re saying we think the situation will improve that will enable us to bring home a significant number of troops and you’re saying we should announce that we’re bringing home a certain number of troops and we’ll do it whatever the situation is, but you believe that it will spur the situation to improve?”

B-I-N-G-O!!!!! Amy has no plan other than to say that we need a plan to announce that we have a plan to bring an unplanned number of troops home from Iraq by the end of the year, regardless of what the commanders in country say. I think that about sums it up. But the most telling thing (for me) were the sheer number of questions like this:

“Black:What can you tell us about the realistic time-frame and the specific milestones and benchmarks?
Klobuchar: Again, the president hasn’t given us those. I called for that since April, for the president to give us that clear plan. He hasn’t done it. At this point we need to start bringing our troops home. Obviously benchmarks would be their police being trained, their military being trained. We basically went in there and destroyed their army and destroyed their police force. Getting a better trained army would be a piece of it.
But again, I believe that we need to start bringing our troops home to encourage them to start doing that.”

Amy – let me translate for you hon. Mr. Black wants to know what YOU WOULD DO…how would you handle this if you could make all the decisions. Or as the guys at KvM ask “What Would Amy Do?” It is fine to say what the guy you are running against is doing wrong, but if you are going to say (ad nauseum) that there are big differences between you and your opponent, you had best have an answer when someone asks you “what would you do differently?” The voters (and Mr. Black’s readers) can see right through your no-answer answers! Contrast her answers with Ford Bell’s. When asked if we should set a “time-table” for withdrawal, Mr. Ford answered with an unequivical “YES”. No tap dancing, no side-stepping, no equivicating – just a straight up answer. He also (when asked) laid out

If you are a Minnesota voter or are interested in the Minnesota Senatorial race at all, you really should take the time to read all 3 candidates positions on the issues.

The conservative bloggers best friend spoke again. DNC Chairman Howard Dean spoke Friday in an Oakland (CA) union hall and accused President Bush of using Latinos as scapegoats in the immigration debate.

“This is a nonsensical proposal put out by far right-wingers in the Republican Party who have been endorsed for re-election by the president of the United States,” Dean said. “The president has a moral obligation to rein in the right-wing extremists in his party and stop this divisive rhetoric about immigrants.”

OK – did you get that? It is President Bush’s “moral obligation” to rein in the “right wing extremists” of the Republican Party. Well then, Chairman Dean, whose moral obligation is it to rein in the left wing extremists in the Democratic Party? Oh thats right – the left wing extremists ARE the Democratic Party. How silly of me to forget that.

What Chairman Dean refuses to admit is that he and President Bush are on the same side of the immigration debate. However, if Chairman Dean admits that, then he looses HIS scapegoat. For if Chairman Dean were to agree with President Bush on any issue, then he would have to admit that the President is not as big a “right wing extremist” as the Chairman and the DNC leadership in Washington have painted him to be, negating their entire campaign strategy!