State senator from Hutchinson won't m...

State senator from Hutchinson won't meet with opponent's backers

There are 61 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jan 25, 2011, titled State senator from Hutchinson won't meet with opponent's backers. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

A state senator from Hutchinson is refusing to meet with representatives from groups that supported his opponent in the last election.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: Sep 08

Saint Paul, MN

#2 Jan 25, 2011
so he only represents his own special interest groups?
HUH

Minneapolis, MN

#3 Jan 25, 2011
That's just wrong. When you are elected, you are elected to represent EVERYBODY.
Walter

Minneapolis, MN

#4 Jan 25, 2011
Charles Manson wrote:
It looks like he doesn't represent everyone in his district. His is being a P r i c k
He has no obligation to meet with anyone who is not comporting themselves in good faith or intent.
Evlded

Minneapolis, MN

#5 Jan 25, 2011
What a pathetic state our elected government is in.

These people are egomaniacs, and most of them are pathetic excuses for human being to boot.

Grow up, Scotty. You're not royalty.

Since: Dec 09

Minneapolis, MN

#6 Jan 25, 2011
"He has no obligation to meet with anyone who is not comporting themselves in good faith or intent. " Please explain how supporting someone closer to your beliefs in a given election is "comporting themselves in bad faith?" Last I checked you can vote for and back anyone you want in an election. He doesn't have the luxury of picking and choosing who he represents as long as they are acting lawfully. He's a baby and just another elected bully.
LeDumbo

Saint Paul, MN

#7 Jan 25, 2011
oxboro wrote:
so he only represents his own special interest groups?
Not much point in meeting with them, if its just to listen to a point of view he disagrees with. That's the problem with union groups, if the candidate they push their membership to vote for doesn't get elected, they still try to get special access.

Since: Apr 09

Twin Cities

#8 Jan 25, 2011
Once you are elected, you represent ALL of the people in your constituency. ALL of them. Should Obama refuse to speak with anyone who did not vote for him? Should Governor Dayton refuse to listen to this legislater because Scotty the wimp did not vote for Dayton? Grow up repeesentative! You are setting a very bad president.
Fan of Common Sense

Minneapolis, MN

#9 Jan 25, 2011
Compare this with Governor Dayton, who gave his opponents the microphone when they came to protest. Classy.
Fan of Common Sense

Minneapolis, MN

#10 Jan 25, 2011
"Not much point in meeting with them, if its just to listen to a point of view he disagrees with. "

Perhaps they disagree less than either assumes. Hard to tell if he won't sit down with them.

“REUNITE GONDWANALAND!”

Since: Jun 08

Woodbury

#11 Jan 25, 2011
It seems the Senator does not truly believe in Democracy - only those who agree with him have the right to vote and to express an opinion.
LeDumbo

Saint Paul, MN

#12 Jan 25, 2011
orreljw wrote:
Once you are elected, you represent ALL of the people in your constituency. ALL of them. Should Obama refuse to speak with anyone who did not vote for him? Should Governor Dayton refuse to listen to this legislater because Scotty the wimp did not vote for Dayton? Grow up repeesentative! You are setting a very bad president.
That is exactly what Obama did when he and Nancy shut the Republicans out of the healthcare negotiations. What a short memory you have.
Peacemaker

Maple Grove, MN

#13 Jan 25, 2011
Since when is name calling, like Charles Manson's comment above, not abusive? I agree he should have met with the nurses.
LeDumbo

Saint Paul, MN

#14 Jan 25, 2011
Darwinian wrote:
It seems the Senator does not truly believe in Democracy - only those who agree with him have the right to vote and to express an opinion.
Says the nurse, angry the nurse's union got shut out.
Walt Kowalski

Saint Paul, MN

#15 Jan 25, 2011
I bet the senator would meet with anyone from his district, just not representatives of organizations that supported his opponent. If one of those nurses asked for a meeting I'm sure he would meet with them, but they did not ask him, they had their lobbying organization ask for a meeting.
OkieDokey

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Jan 25, 2011
LeDumbo wrote:
<quoted text>That is exactly what Obama did when he and Nancy shut the Republicans out of the healthcare negotiations. What a short memory you have.
Wow....what a short memory you have!

Do you not remember the 8-hr meeting - the "health care summit" - with all Dem and GOP leaders that was broadcast nationally?

Do you not remember the Dems - and Obama - pleading with the GOP that they would "consider any amendment proposed in good faith negotiations" and all the GOP would offer were outlandish amendments they knew would go against the whole idea of reform?
LeDumbo

Saint Paul, MN

#17 Jan 25, 2011
OkieDokey wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow....what a short memory you have!
Do you not remember the 8-hr meeting - the "health care summit" - with all Dem and GOP leaders that was broadcast nationally?
Do you not remember the Dems - and Obama - pleading with the GOP that they would "consider any amendment proposed in good faith negotiations" and all the GOP would offer were outlandish amendments they knew would go against the whole idea of reform?
I don't remember it that way at all. From my vantage, it was playing up the positives of the policy, while shutting out the negatives. The Doc Fix provision was passed after(reimbursment to doctors accepting medicare not cut by 23%) so it could stay under a trillion dollars for 10 years. Thing is, it doesn't really take effect until 2014, so its really more than $1 trillion over 6 years. Lets see how well Obama and Pelosi get borderline legislation through now.
Walter

Minneapolis, MN

#18 Jan 25, 2011
It's always amusing that liberals just don't understand when they lose the election. They still think they can just bully their demands through the process.

Silly little liberals.
OkieDokey

Minneapolis, MN

#19 Jan 25, 2011
LeDumbo wrote:
<quoted text>I don't remember it that way at all. From my vantage, it was playing up the positives of the policy, while shutting out the negatives. The Doc Fix provision was passed after(reimbursment to doctors accepting medicare not cut by 23%) so it could stay under a trillion dollars for 10 years. Thing is, it doesn't really take effect until 2014, so its really more than $1 trillion over 6 years. Lets see how well Obama and Pelosi get borderline legislation through now.
Really? You don't remember that summit on every news station the entire day? That is a fact that happened.

You don't remember the GOP waving papers at Obama during his SOTU address when he said tGOP amendments and ideas where welcome? That is a fact that happened.

Finally, rembmer, the GOP has the house, so bills sponsored by Pelosi only get heard/voted-on if the GOP allows it. And, of course, the President does not introduce or write legislation. He only signs (or vetoes) the bills that pass the House and Senate.

A political wonk, you ain't.....

“REUNITE GONDWANALAND!”

Since: Jun 08

Woodbury

#20 Jan 25, 2011
LeDumbo wrote:
<quoted text>That is exactly what Obama did when he and Nancy shut the Republicans out of the healthcare negotiations. What a short memory you have.
They did not "shut out" the Republicans - the ACA contains over 100 amendments introduced by Republicans.

“REUNITE GONDWANALAND!”

Since: Jun 08

Woodbury

#21 Jan 25, 2011
LeDumbo wrote:
<quoted text>I don't remember it that way at all. From my vantage, it was playing up the positives of the policy, while shutting out the negatives. The Doc Fix provision was passed after(reimbursment to doctors accepting medicare not cut by 23%) so it could stay under a trillion dollars for 10 years. Thing is, it doesn't really take effect until 2014, so its really more than $1 trillion over 6 years. Lets see how well Obama and Pelosi get borderline legislation through now.
The "Doc Fix" has nothing to do with the new health care law - it would have to be addressed with or without the Affordable Care Act, since it was caused by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hutchinson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Collapsed risers at Circus Juventas were overdu... (Aug '09) Aug 6 John shaey 22
legit pain P.I.L.L.S n m/ar.iju/an.a (Mar '15) Mar '15 hutchinson guy 1
News 2 dead in McLeod County after apparent murder-s... (Apr '08) Feb '15 Jenna czeck 89
A Dog Park In Hutchinson, is there enough inter... (May '08) Aug '14 BIG GUY 17
News Authorities ID body found in Renville County co... (Oct '11) Aug '14 sonny 4
News Dakota County police blotter (May '14) May '14 Sangelia 3
New McLeod County Arrests (Mar '14) Mar '14 Recently Busted 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hutchinson Mortgages