Friday, February 24, 2017

Erik Paulsen: Wise or Chicken

MP Scenes from with or without 
ST Erik Skips Meeting
CNN TownHall Meetings

So one of our more Liberal church members setup a Townhall at our Church and asked Erik to attend. Given the number of cars and traffic that I endured dropping my daughter off at an unrelated church event, I think there were more than the reported 600 people there...

Well it turns out that Erik was a NO SHOW... However it seems the attendees still had a good time airing their thoughts, questions and/or concerns. So was Erik's avoidance of the mob wise or was he just being a big chicken who was hiding from his constituents? Rationale?

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

I thought it was great. I don't think it mattered it all that much that Paulsen didn't attend. Let's just say that he isn't the sort of guy who adds much to the discussion. And it's important to find a way to address the message to a larger audience than a lowly back bench Congressman.

--Hiram

Anonymous said...

Our Erik is the invisible man of Minnesota politics. In the movie version of his life, he could be played by Claude Rains.

--Hiram

John said...

Seems Erik took this to heart.

ST Sack Town Hall Comic

jerrye92002 said...

Question: Was Erik Paulsen actually invited to this event? Or was this just another of those FAKE NEWS town halls staged entirely by rent-a-mob leftists?

John said...

When did you become so irrationally negative regarding your fellow citizens?

I am sorry that Trump isn't as capable or smart as we wish he was, but that is no reason to attack everyone who is laughing at the emperor in his new clothing. Maybe the emperor will change outfits, but he seems slow to learn.

And yes Erik was invited... The simple reality is that about half of his constituents are unhappy with his falling in line with the Trump/ GOP establishment and he is scared to face them.

Maybe I should have have voted for Terri... At least she had the balls to vote against her party once in awhile.

jerrye92002 said...

Who set up this "town hall meeting"? Was it Rep. Paulsen, or some other group? Is it "constituents" who showed up at the meeting or were they all bused in, as happens in places all around the country? Is their purpose to ask questions and get answers, or simply to wave pre-printed signs and cause a scene? How many reporters were invited, and by whom? If they were my "fellow citizens" I would applaud their civic involvement. If they're a bunch of leftist wackos they don't deserve the term "citizen" in my book.

You want to debate issues? Have at it. Want to rant and rave about imaginary slights to your overstuffed ego? Take a hike.

John said...

Of course it was another group that set it up... The Congressmen are refusing to have meetings or haven't you heard. I am thinking 2018 is looking real bad for the GOP in Congress if the GOP Reps don't start making themselves available for the praise and the frustration.

I didn't see any buses, just a lot of concerned citizens and no Congressman...

jerrye92002 said...

When the leftists make it impossible to hold a civil town hall, they interfere with the rights of REAL "concerned citizens."

townhall

jerrye92002 said...

" 2018 is looking real bad for the GOP in Congress if..."
If these wacko leftists succeed in swaying public opinion with their vicious antics. The more likely effect will be a huge sympathy vote for those Republicans who simply do their jobs and ignore the nut jobs.

John said...

You can keep blaming Whacko Leftists... Unfortunately I know quite a few of these Leftists and they are not whacko... Just dedicated to different values than those on the Right.

Laurie said...

I went to an empty chair townhall today in CD2, there were maybe 200 people there. I didn't notice any buses or whackos.

jerrye92002 said...

Laurie, it still sounds like political theater 101.

John, these leftists you know... do they shout down, curse, threaten, bring pre-printed protest signs to a "town hall forum"? Those are the "values" I see on display, and if they are not wacko then you will need to offer a better word for this infantile and offensive behavior.

jerrye92002 said...

And a "town hall" without the representative is just a gaggle of folks. They can't be interested in what he has to say if they show up knowing he isn't there or, if he is, that they're going to chase him away. Besides, whatever happened to "write your Congressman"?

John said...

Sorry Jerry... The reps are avoiding their constituents... And you would come unglued if you had a Democratic rep that did the same and voted consistently along party lines...

Now if Conservatives demand to be listened to and speak up, are they whackos or concerned citizens?

John said...

And I wouldn't call it a gaggle... I would call it a rally...

And with no Congressman to address the concerns, I am thinking it is a pretty effective recruiting tool. Only 21 mths until the next election...

jerrye92002 said...

The reps are avoiding riots and loony-left freak shows, not "their constituents." Something any sane person would do. "Now if conservatives demand to be listened to..." they are at minimum holding unrealistic expectations. And if they are shouting and waving placards, is it more likely they will be "listened to," or less?

You are probably right, these FAKE NEWS town hall meetings are not for the purpose of expressing citizen concerns or gaining information from a Congressperson; they are an attempt to sustain the outrage industry.

John said...

I don't think maintaining outrage will be too hard if Trump continues to thrive on playing to his base and stoking the outrage, and few of the more moderate GOP leaders choose to stand up to him.

At least one of them is asking for a Special Prosecutor to resolve the Trump - Russia issues once and for all. It does seem that if Trump is as innocent as he says, he would be the first to support this.

jerrye92002 said...

I don't think the outrage can be maintained simply because it is so outrageous. Who is responsible for the outrage? Trump is doing what he said he would do, and doing things that make sense for the good of the country. If people choose to be outraged about that, it's on them, and those who want to see the good of the country advanced are rightly dismissive of them.

John said...

Now you do remember that over half of the voters disagreed with him... Right?

And that 50% still disapprove to 44% who approve. RCP Trump Approval Ratings

By the way they had some great jokes on the Oscars last night...

jerrye92002 said...

As I said, those who approve of him doing what is right for the country are entitled to dismiss those people behaving outrageously in opposition to that sensible course. If you (the rhetorical you) don't like being outraged, quit being outraged and try to find something to like, or at least something you can tolerate. You're all about tolerance, right?

John said...

If the GOP and Conservatives had done that during the last 8 years, maybe you would have a point.

Unfortunately they acted like a bunch of sore losers during Obama's time as President. And I assume the Democrats / Liberals will follow their example.

I mean you personally spent the full 8 years being outraged by Obama's "terrible Presidency". I think our rational Liberal friends have every right to do the same.

jerrye92002 said...

I would very much like to meet some of your "rational liberal friends." They seem to be quite rare "in the wild." And there are not many in zoos (like Congress), either.

John said...

It is funny... They seem to think that "rational conservatives" are rare also.

jerrye92002 said...

Simple test: Ask them for the specific reasoning that led them to their positions. If they actually can, disagree or propose an alternative reasoning. If they debate, they are rational. If they argue (most likely ad hominem), they're not.

John said...

Kind of how you are rational regarding man made climate change?

"I, Jerry know better than the experts, therefore it is a hoax."

Or one of dozens of topics we discuss regularly here.

It seems the farther Left and Right of center one is, it is really hard for them to see / sanction the validity of the other persons position. And therefore write them off as irrational. Probably because they are watching and interpreting the play from their very different seats.