“It’s democracy in action,” Pawlenty told listeners to his weekly WCCO-AM radio show. Those are the same words Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue used to describe the town hall-ering during an RGA-sponsored telephone press conference today.

Perdue was joined by Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle and RGA Chairman Haley Barbour, governor of Mississippi, who said, “People do not understand why it is being crammed down their throat without getting their questions answered.” Perdue termed “ludicrous” this statement by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer: “Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.”

Pawlenty wasn’t on the call with the press, but his comments anticipated the RGA line on tactics at Congressional town hall meetings that have in some cases descended into chaos:

The thing that I don’t understand about that, Brian [McClung, Pawlenty's spokesman and radio co-host], regardless of right or left, Republican or Democrat or neither or some — what’s wrong with any group sending out an email saying, ‘Hey, Brian McClung, your representative is going to be at, you know, Eagan City Hall and since you’re a member of, say, a senior citizens organization, go tell ‘em what you think about this health care thing. And by the way, here’s five reasons we don’t like it.’

I think that’s not only appropriate and legal — it’s advocacy. It’s democracy in action. So even if some group is saying, ‘Here’s some information, go tell fill-in-the-blank-congressman or -congresswoman what you think,’ that seems perfectly fine to me. …

Both sides do it. But who cares? I mean, so what? Let’s say it is organized. It’s all organized. Any time you have a town hall meeting, I can tell you there are some folks who naturally show up, but it’s always representatives of the nursing home industry, the local school district, the county, you know, everybody’s who’s getting a government program or got a lobbying organization.

Most of the emails or many of the emails we get at our office are because some lobbying organization sends out a blast email and says, ‘Call the governor’s office and tell them this or that on a bill.’ You know, we know that. We know it’s mostly generated by some group, but so what? What’s wrong with that?

It was nice of the governor to generalize about what most or many of the emails he receives say, because when the Minnesota Independent asked to review his emails under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, his office would release only about one-seventh of them.

Pawlenty introduced a question about what the United States should do about Iran with his view that “it’s inevitable that that situation is going to come to a head.” Powell said recent political turmoil has revealed “fissures,” as people press their desire for “liberalized government.”

Regarding Iran’s nuclear program, Powell said the United States had two choices: Take out nukes militarily, or warn them, Cold War style, that any nuclear aggression on their part would bring greater retribution against them.

One area of shared interest wasn’t touched on in Pawlenty’s talk with Powell: the future of the Republican Party.

Also left unmentioned: Powell’s views on the recent arrest of Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates, and President Obama’s nationally-televised response in which he referenced racial profiling.

Only last week, the NAACP centenary brought Powell together with Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, whose “nation of cowards” speech in February marked the Administration’s other rhetorical milestone on race.

(Idle question: Would Minnesota DFL Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller have broached that timely issue of race with Powell, given the equal time from WCCO that he has asked for?)

Here’s the video of Pawlenty on Fox on Thursday, responding to Obama on health care:

[Via Political Animal]

A pair of headlines Thursday morning at the WCCO website made for a stark contrast in the television station’s treatment of LGBT-related stories. On one side, “Twin Cities to Celebrate 37th Gay Pride Fest” and on the other, “Undercover Cops Crack Down on Gay Cruising.”

“Gay cruising” is often a phenomena among men who are closeted and not likely to identify as gay — and not likely to attend this weekend’s Pride activities. In fact, except for the title, the cruising story never mentions the word “gay.” WCCO’s juxtaposition creates an inaccurate impression.

Image: Minnesota Independent

Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s recently announced plans to axe state refunds for political contributions of $50 or less has set off an email stampede, as candidates urge donors to give before the program dies July 1.

In the $2.7 billion of unallotments he unveiled on Tuesday, Pawlenty included a complete cutoff of $10 million in state funding for the cash-back campaign donation program. The program has no official name in state law, but the state Department of Revenue calls it the Political Contribution Refund Program.

Republicans get more money through the program than their rivals, but Pawlenty still dissed it as welfare for politicians. On his WCCO-AM radio program this morning Pawlenty allowed, “It’s a nice program,” but he said it was a lower priority than schools and health care.

A growing number of candidates and both other major parties have jumped on the short-notice deadline to make pitches via the Internet for refundable donations. (UPDATE: Republicans, remarkably, have joined them.)

In a Web solicitation, Independence Party Chair Jack Uldrich characterized the cut as hacking off the IP’s arm.

Democrats have used less vivid imagery but are communicating urgency all the same, with email subject lines like “Time is running out,” “Just 14 days to  get your refund” and “Campaign Alert!”

In particular, those aiming to replace Pawlenty made sure to whack him as they made their appeals for fast cash. Here’s former State Sen. Steve Kelley:

By cutting off the Political Contribution Refund Program, Tim Pawlenty is impacting your voice in the governor’s race.  Over 90,000 Minnesotans use the PCR program annually to make a refundable contribution to the candidate of their choice. … Before the program expires, make a refundable $50 contribution (or $100 for couples) to a Governor who will put education first!

Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner was even more pointed in her email plea:

In addition to making cuts that will disproportionately affect the poor, children and the elderly, the Governor also proposed eliminating a program that helps ordinary Minnesotans participate financially in the campaigns of their choice. … While Tim Pawlenty and other Republicans can afford to run their campaigns with large donations from PACs and wealthy individuals, we would prefer to run ours with money donated from all levels of givers.

Gaertner had a ready metaphor for donors unfamiliar with the soon-to-be-eliminated program:  ”Think of your contribution as a temporary loan to the campaign.”

State Auditor Rebecca Otto, also a DFLer, curiously made a pitch for donations of as little as $5 rather than the maximum refundable amount of $50: “Can you afford to support my work with a monthly donation of $5, $10 or $15?” her email asked.

Gary Goldsmith, executive director of the state Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, told the Minnesota Independent that his department doesn’t recognize pledges or plans as “contributions” under the refund program. He said donors or candidates with questions about the program’s phase-out should consult online memos from the campaign-finance board (pdf) and the Department of Revenue (pdf).

Pawlenty told his radio audience today that he’s heard more guff from legislators on the donation-refund program than any other unallotment item. Maybe that’s because it’s the one they can still do something about.

Here are some samples of appeals from candidates and parties, including those mentioned above plus state Rep. Paul Thissen and state Sen. John Marty (both gubernatorial candidates), and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. Click on an image to enlarge. If you have seen or received other similar communications from candidates, please forward them to MnIndy.

Susan Gaertner

Steve Kelley

John Marty

Rebecca Otto

Mark Ritchie

Paul Thissen

Independence Party

DFL Party

It was only two weeks ago that Obama reached out to Pawlenty in a weekly address that focused on the flooding along the Minnesota-North Dakota border.

Here’s the video of Pawlenty delivering the Republican response to Obama’s weekly address:

Here’s are two short audio clips of the Pawlentys on WCCO-AM radio. The second clip includes their guest, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. (Reports suggest the governor didn’t show as much interest in war crimes and other allegations against Kissinger as he did in former U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman’s legal options on Wednesday’s “The Rachel Maddow Show.”)

If Minnesota’s First Lady sounds particularly aghast at the violation of protocol a presidential bow would represent, it may be due to extenuating circumstances. “Governors’ spouses are the closest thing to royalty in state government,” said a Dec. 4, 2002 Stateline.org report that took note that then-First Lady-elect Mary Pawlenty was about to join the ranks of two other governors’ wives who also wore judges’ robes. During her 13 years on the bench, the First Lady presumably grew accustomed to all in her presence rising whenever she entered a courtroom.

She may abhor bows by heads-of-state, but Mary Pawlenty does allow herself a little bow now and then, such as the one she gave the governor as she said “I adore you” in front of the gathered luminaries at his 2007 inaugural ball. (See this TPT video clip.)

• WCCO’s Pat Kessler raised the “who’s a journalist question” Monday night, noting that the access battle is a bipartisan issue. He interviews The UpTake’s Jason Barnett and Minnesota Democrats Exposed’s Michael Brodkorb about their disappointment that the DFL majority seems opposed to “more transparency, more bloggers in, more access to the process,” as Brodkorb put it.

• WCCO’s Esme Murphy strikes the same chord, then posts the Society of Professional Journalists’ statement on yesterday’s proceedings:

“It’s our understanding the first three of the proposed rules are already tossed out, which is a good thing since they triggered the strongest response. However, SPJ is concerned about the rules that continue to try to narrow the definition of what a journalist is and who should be allowed to document the workings of state government.

The Minnesota Legislature does the people’s work during committee meetings and formal House and Senate floor sessions. Minnesota SPJ understands the difficulty in maintaining decorum and a productive environment in such open, public forums. However, this is precisely the job legislators were elected to do. Public scrutiny comes with the office. SPJ takes the position that transparency is the only way elected representatives can maintain credibility with their constituents. As such, the best approach is one that adheres to the most noble aspects of the First Amendment that recognizes the need for openness and accountability from government.

It’s difficult to understand why the proposed rules place conditions on what should be a simple process of access. SPJ prefers to define ‘journalist’ in the broadest of terms and we believe it’s time for the legislature to do the same. The public loses whenever elected officials choose to exclude people who wish to document what happens in a public meeting, working on public policy in a public space. If there is an issue of decorum, safety or logistical space, elected leaders have appropriate methods in place. Rather than create additional rules that imply a person’s credentials will be issued based on where a person works or how long a person will be reporting at the Capitol, SPJ would encourage legislative leaders to lessen the rules to allow more people to report in new and innovative ways to reach more of the public. The Legislature should establish equitable rules for all media, with no bias awarded anyone based on medium, method or viewpoint. If this proposal reflects the Legislature’s attempt to do that, they have missed the mark.”

• TPT’s Mary Lahammer expresssed “great outrage” over the House rules that limit “where, when and what [the media] could record in a public building involving publically elected people.” She writes, “True the media landscape is changing and that makes a lot of us fearful too, but fear never leads to good decision making.”

• MPR’s Bob Collins writes of the “big chill at the Capitol,” noting that there’s “virtually no reasonable case to be made that inviting a few bloggers in to inspect the workings of elected officials would cause an undue burden on the lawmakers who, for the record, asked for the job.”

CityPages.com image courtesy of Ed Kohler

City Pages, courtesy and copyright: After looking at how City Pages and its parent, Village Voice Media, apparently “game” social-bookmarking sites like Digg, The Deets’ Ed Kohler is again gunning for the Minneapolis altweekly – this time over the paper’s rather rampant disregard for image copyright.

“Photography kleptomaniacs,” including editor Kevin Hoffman, use images without permission, sometimes even slapping “Courtesy of” credits for publications, without ever linking to — or, one would guess, contacting — the source. (Several MnIndy photographs have ended up on City Pages site, including photos we purchased through WDCpix.com which, therefore, we wouldn’t be within our legal rights to “courteous”-ly offer up to anyone else. Another time my photograph, shot in former MnIndy editor Steve Perry’s house, ended up illustrating their story about how Perry left our fair site for MinnPost. When I asked Hoffman about lifting it, his response was to say he found it on Google Images and then to add a linkless credit. Curiously, that picture is no longer attached to the story, but it was — as recently as this Feb. 6 Google cache of the page [screengrab]. According to a Deets commenter, most of the images Kohler lists have also been removed from CityPages.com)

Brautweets get results: After David Brauer ribbed the Strib via Twitter about its long-neglected online newsroom directory, the page today is now not functioning. Hopefully, it’s evidence that it’s offline so Star Tribune staff can cull departed employees, rather than an indication they’re throwing in the towel on a treadmill-like job of erasing reporters and editors after a seemingly unending cycle of layoffs and buyouts. Or maybe it’s the new directory of the newsroom of the future?

Collardgate, ahem, blossoms: Brauer also reports that “Collardgate” — the story about Rainbow Foods’ move to promote collard greens during Black History Month — has gone national, with pickups by Gawker and (by way of WCCO’s Jason DeRusha), BrandFreak, BrandWeek’s blog.

Attention reporters, here’s how NOT to use Twitter.

No, he's not making a shadow-bird: Coleman shows how ballots could get counted twice.

Norm Coleman suggested in a TV interview Sunday that reporters’ asking about charges of illegally funneled money cost him the Nov. 4 Senate election. “That could have been a quiet story,” Coleman said. “It could have been a story that came out the day after the election.”

The live interview on WCCO-TV’s “Sunday Morning” news program contained other intriguing Coleman quotes. About the Senate election: “It will end soon.” About the idea of taking his fight to federal court: “If somehow there’s a violation of equal protection, you think about that.” About a run for governor in 2010 if he loses and Gov. Tim Pawlenty doesn’t seek re-election: “I’m not looking to the next election.” 

But the most interesting part was a 100-second exchange about charges that a campaign supporter funneled unreported funds to the former Republican senator. The exchange begins at the 5:30 mark in the seven-minute interview (video link). Anchor Esme Murphy’ asks about allegations in a pair of civil suits that Coleman benefactor Nasser Kazeminy directed $75,000 from a Texas business he controls to Coleman’s wife’s firm.

NORM COLEMAN: No money was ever funneled to my family. My wife has a job. She does a job. And there’s nothing that was illegally funneled to her. But you had two Star Tribune reporters appearing in a DFL ad on a story that came out four days –

WCCO-TV NEWS ANCHOR ESME MURPHY: But not of their own volition!

COLEMAN: Not of their own volition but they –

MURPHY: Because I was there, I mean when that was taped –

COLEMAN: But they put themselves in that ad. They put themselves. And so four days –

MURPHY: No, they didn’t.

COLEMAN: Esme, the cameras were there. They could have asked those questions quietly. They could have had a different conversation.

MURPHY: But they had no control over the cameras.

COLEMAN: But they knew the cameras were there. They could have gone back and had a quiet conversation if that was the purpose. My point being they appeared in a Democratic Party ad four days before an election on something that never happened.

And so in the end, I welcome — let’s take a full look at this. But, I can’t, you can’t recreate that. You can’t take that back. And so in the end it’s the nature of this business.

But no — you know, my wife never got any money that she didn’t earn. There was no money funneled to her. You had two guys involved in a lawsuit. And perhaps using that relationship, my relationship with that person to maybe squeeze more money out of him.

But that could have been a quiet story. It could have been a story that came out the day after the election. Instead you had two reporters in front of cameras confront a candidate on something they could have had a quiet conversation about if that was the purpose.

So, be that as it may. No question: Nothing ever happened there. And it’s unfortunate that those last-minute, eleventh-hour charges can have an impact on the race. I’m not lamenting anything. … 

Those other issues will be dealt with. But emphatically, there’s nothing to that. And it’s a shame that those kind of charges can be thrown out. No one – There’s not a single allegation that my wife or I actually received any money. Not one. Not one. And no facts to back that up.

UPDATE: The Star Tribune reporters responded to Coleman’s charges at Braublog. 

RELATED:

Video: Coleman ad calls Texas lawsuit “11th-hour attack” by Franken
Video: Franken responds to Coleman’s ad blaming him for Texas lawsuit
Video: Star Tribune squeamish over reporters asking Coleman about lawsuit in Dem ad
More DonorGate ads by Coleman, Franken
Coleman/Kazeminy: Norm told us this was coming almost a month ago

Gov. Tim Pawlenty continues to relish his own weekly hourlong “Good Morning, Minnesota” radio show every Friday on WCCO-AM, a carryover from Gov. Jesse Ventura, and presumably will continue his radio reign under new WCCO boss Mick Anselmo.

Today I tuned in to WCCO to hear if T-Paw would take back the slams on Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and the integrity of the state’s election canvassing process that he aided and abetted during a Sean Hannity interview. (Repeating the phony car-ballot legend was enough to make Pawlenty one of Keith Olbermann’s “worst persons” on MSNBC last night.)

But Pawlenty’s communications honcho and radio sidekick Brian McClung said the boss was en route from the Republican governors conference and would miss the show today. Pawlenty’s stand-in, WCCO’s Jeanette Trompeter, proposed a ”Be Nice to Someone You Really Don’t Want to be Nice to Today” — which would have made the perfect segue to a gubernatorial mea culpa.

Pawlenty also missed an opportunity to salvage Minnesota’s reputation as a clean-election state during a nearly 10-minute interview with Chris Matthews on MSNBC’s “Hardball” last night. Instead the segment focused on Pawlenty’s take on the Republican Party’s future, and particularly Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s place in it. Sample exchange:

MATTHEWS (exasperated): Was [Palin] a drag on the ticket or not?

PAWLENTY (dodging): You look at politics like postmodern art.

Here’s the video:

Pat Kessler, WCCO’s political reporter, says he’s been approached countless times by the Franken crew over the months of the campaign with hot angles regarding some supposedly untoward Coleman activity or another, (that’s SOP, of course), but got nothing from Team Franken on this one. “Not a thing. I think they were surprised by it,” says Kessler.

And given the general clumsiness of the Franken campaign to date does Kessler think they are capable of playing something with this kind of Ted Stevens-style payola with a championship poker face? “Uh, no, I don’t.”

He emphasizes that any bombshell that drops in the final days of a campaign has [to] be viewed “with extreme skepticism”, which is not at all the same thing as dismissing it. If not a byzantine move by the DNC, someone, for example, could be using the glare and pressure of the final hours of the campaign to squeeze Coleman’s pals for a quick settlement on a wholly bogus claim.