Patty Wetterling's Deal for Dollars?
Patty Wetterling was expected to be unopposed in Minnesota's 6th Congressional District Democratic primary. So why did she recently announce that she was forming an exploratory committee to determine whether to run for Mark Dayton's Senate seat in '06?
It seems to me that a columnist who claims concerned with finding out the truth about who's funding political speech in Minnesota would ask Patty a few poignant questions. In the surprising event that he won't, I will: Patty, have you made a covert deal with DFL higher ups to fake a run for the Senate so you can go statewide and even national with your fundraising? Have you agreed to rake in as much money as possible from donors outside the 6th district under the ruse of a Senatorial bid? Have you agreed to exit the Senate race in time to announce for the 6th Congressional seat with a huge funding advantage over your Republican rival?
We all know that Senatorial races attract far more money than House races. First of all, they have eight times the constituency in Minnesota. Secondly, national money from special interests flows much more easily to Senatorial candidates, as they make a larger individual impact than their House counterparts.
I for one am frankly sick of the lack of skepticism and kid glove treatment that Patty Wetterling gets. Won't someone in the mainstream media ask her some tough questions?
It seems to me that a columnist who claims concerned with finding out the truth about who's funding political speech in Minnesota would ask Patty a few poignant questions. In the surprising event that he won't, I will: Patty, have you made a covert deal with DFL higher ups to fake a run for the Senate so you can go statewide and even national with your fundraising? Have you agreed to rake in as much money as possible from donors outside the 6th district under the ruse of a Senatorial bid? Have you agreed to exit the Senate race in time to announce for the 6th Congressional seat with a huge funding advantage over your Republican rival?
We all know that Senatorial races attract far more money than House races. First of all, they have eight times the constituency in Minnesota. Secondly, national money from special interests flows much more easily to Senatorial candidates, as they make a larger individual impact than their House counterparts.
I for one am frankly sick of the lack of skepticism and kid glove treatment that Patty Wetterling gets. Won't someone in the mainstream media ask her some tough questions?
posted by Nihilist in Golf Pants at 2/28/2005 12:00:00 AM
7 Comments:
Don't you mean pointed questions? Not poignant questions. Unless you think her feelings would be hurt if someone asked.
I actually used that word on purpose. One of its definitions is "designed to make an impression," and I'd assume an emotional one. If you read the City Pages interview with her, she got all offended when the interviewer asked her personal questions. She got really huffy and acted like it was brutally out of bounds for anyone to question her motives. The funny part was she did this over a puff piece!
That's quite an unacceptable position for someone campainging for national office to take. If she doesn't want to answer personal questions, she can remain a private citizen.
Of course, I'm not an English major, but I think poignant works. I'd certainly ask her pointed questions too.
I guess poignancy is in the eye of the beholder. Is the question emotional or the reaction? Both in this case. Either way, I guess, it works.
I assume you mean this piece? The question is at the end. I don't know: It's a pretty poor question, unsurprising given the interviewer.
Thanks, King.
That's the piece. I agree that the question was dumb. A far more appropriate line of questioning would have been, "You have made a career out of advocating on behalf of missing and exploited children and their families. What motivates your run for congress? Since congresspeople can only spend a small percentage of time on any such subject, how would you deal with the constraints? Are you willing to spend less time on your key subject or would you ignore or downplay other important issues like defense and economic issues to pursue your interest?
I get the point of the question and think it was a good question to raise, but the original wording of the question was terrible.
The bottom line is that Pathetic Patty is going to use the grave of her child (again) to gain public office. She can't clearly discuss a single issue, which makes her PERFECT for the Democrats. And anyone who thinks the DFL hacks (see: Klobachar/Ciresi/Hatch) are gonna just roll over and let her take the seat, they are SADLY mistaken. If Pathetic Patty wants to duke-it-out with those sharks, she'll be even too damaged to run in the 6th.
Post a Comment
<< Home