Star Tribune's Nick Coleman: Limitless Logical Lunacy

Today, the Star Tribune’s ever-present liberal voice lambasted Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, claiming the Governor does not spend enough time at the capital.

“If the state of Minnesota were "Titanic," this would be the part in the movie where some of the rich passengers put dresses on and try to sneak into the lifeboats,” Coleman writes.

Here’s my point-for-point destruction of Coleman’s argument. He blames conservatives for the economic failure, saying that our “hands off” approach to the economy is to blame. He apparently does not think Barney Frank and his liberal allies have much blame. The same Barney Frank who said in 2003 regarding proposed increases in Fannie May oversight: "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

Coleman says, “Nice guys got us into it by not reining in greed and not funding government responsibly.”

He makes no mention of irresponsible spending, only a lack of funding (see: not raising taxes on the rich). Maybe he should blame a state legislature more concerned with a bill mandating private businesses open up their bathrooms to people with Irritable Bowl Syndrome than cutting spending.

Another point: If you’ll go back in time with me a few short weeks, you’ll remember liberals everywhere criticizing Sarah Palin for her lack of worldly knowledge, only having applied for a passport a few years before her Vice-Presidential bid. But in his column today, Coleman writes that Pawlenty, “On an endless circuit of talk shows and national appearances aimed at puffing his profile for 2012, Gov. Tim Pawlenty leaves Thursday on a trip to Israel that will come in handy during foreign policy debates ("I've visited our friends in Israel") but may not do much for Minnesota's pork producers.”

So, on the one hand, to liberals, Sarah Palin is a typical Red state simpleton “American Idiot” for never having traveled the world, but Tim Pawlenty traveling to Israel somehow is a bystander as the state of Minnesota “sinks.” Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Coleman also says that Minnesota “needs federal money, and deserves it,” because we send $40 billion in taxes to the federal government and only receive $31 billion back. If Coleman believes we should receive more than our $40 billion back, where does he think it comes from? A magical money tree? No! It comes from other states! So, apparently it’s OK if Minnesota takes money from other states, but not if other states take it from Minnesota. His conclusion (Minnesota shouldn’t give more money to the federal government than it receives) is correct, but his reasoning is seriously misguided. While I agree that Minnesota-and any other state- shouldn’t give more than it receives, we disagree on the reasonings- mine being rooted in a proper understanding of federalism and the Constitution, his being based on some false understanding of fairness. After all, if it’s private citizens, Coleman thinks the rich should pay more than the poor. But when it comes to states, the better off states have no responsibility to poorer states with more serious problems.


And finally, Coleman makes the assumption that an active governor (and therefore an active government) would be a good thing in this economic downturn- I refuse to label market corrections as a “crisis.” Simply put, he’s wrong.

Plainly put, it seems futile to argue against Coleman. No one actually puts stock in his opinion. But, often his opinions are indicative of overall liberal sentiments, so their destruction is important.

While I find it hard to defend Pawlenty on economics, it’s easy to show the errors in Nick Coleman’s logic.