Controversial preacher Bradlee Dean says that House Speaker Kurt Zellers asked to appear on Dean’s radio show, the Sons of Liberty, the week before Dean gave a controversial prayer before the Minnesota House. Dean’s claim stands in stark contrast to Zeller’s words condemning Dean, as well as House leadership’s insistence that they weren’t familiar with Dean. Dean made his statement as part of a media blitz of more than two dozen radio stations where he defended his prayer and blamed “homosexual activists” for the controversy which continues to simmer. Zellers says Dean’s claim is not true.

On the Global Freedom Report last week, Dean was flummoxed about why Zellers condemned his prayer. Zellers told members of the House that he “denounced” Dean and that allowing him to pray was a mistake.

“I was actually denounced by Kurt Zellers, the Speaker of the House, and why he denounced me nobody knows. I have no idea,” Dean said. “What I do know, he doesn’t know me, and the week prior to that he was asking to be on our radio show here in Minneapolis.”

He added, “So we are all kind of taken back. As a matter of fact we have done 21 interviews from coast to coast and every show host has asked me the question, ‘What was the problem?’ And we are still asking the same question.”

Radio host Brent Johnson added, “Go ahead and invite him, after the fact, invite him on your show. Maybe he’ll answer.”

A spokesperson for Zellers’ office says Zellers never attempted to go on Dean’s show. Update: “Speaker Zellers did not ask to be on Bradlee Dean’s radio show,” Jodi Boyne, director of public affairs for the Minnesota House Republican Caucus, told the Minnesota Independent.

Dean has appeared on a two dozen conservative radio stations to defend himself, the prayer and especially Dean’s remarks about gays and lesbians in the last few weeks.

On HOPE FM 95.9, a Christian station in Forest Lake, Dean said he wasn’t targeting Obama when he said, “It’s not about the Baptists and it’s not about the Catholics alone or the Lutherans or the Wesleyans. Or the Presbyterians, the Evangelicals, or any other denomination, the head of the denomination and His name is Jesus, as every president up until 2008 has acknowledged, and we pray it in Jesus’ name.”

“I never meant to take a shot at Obama,” he said. “I’m not going to play your little political games. If you look at my prayer, in no sense of the word can you derive disrespect anywhere.”

He added, “If you want to split hairs, strain at the gnat and swallow the camel.”

He said it was Obama who said the United States was not a Christian nation.

On the overtly Christian nature of his prayer, Dean said, “We are not a Muslim nation. We are not a Buddhist nation. We are a Christian nation. We have to understand it’s not all of the religions of the world, that this is everybody’s country? No. When you go to Washington, D.C., Moses and the Ten Commandments are everywhere.”

Here’s part one of the interview:

And part two:

On the Joe Pags Show out of Houston, Tex., Dean said he never suggested that Obama wasn’t a Christian. “There was no implication on my part. I wasn’t taking a shot at Obama,” said Dean. “If you listen to the entirety of my prayer, I was unifying.”

He then said that American soldiers did not die for Americans who were not Christians.

“What did our military boys and girls die for? Did they die for other religions? Or did they die to uphold for the Constitution, so help me God? If we have foreign gods come in here, then what’s going to happen is everyone is going to want to implement their law. For example, the Muslims want to implement Shari [sic] law. Why? Because they think they have a right to do it. No, they don’t. Foreign people can come here and they are afforded asylum, but we serve the lord of lords, king of kings. They cannot continuously bring in their gods into our country and expect us to remain who we are as a people. We have to stand. We have to protect who we are as a people.”

Here’s part one of the interview:

Here’s the second half of the interview:

On the Shilling Show in Virginia, Dean told host Rob Schilling that “homosexual communities” were out to get him.

“How did we go from what I said in the prayer to ‘big bad Brad the anti-gay hate-monger,’ as they like to say. It’s not anti-gay. It’s anti-crime and pro-family. And it’s not bigotry, it’s decency,” he said. “My perspective is it’s character assassination by the homosexual communities, no ifs, ands or buts about it.”

He added, “We are turning into hell in this country.”

Here’s the interview:

WCCO’s Chad Hartman was the only interviewer to challenge Dean’s statements about gays and lesbian. He asked about one of Dean’s more incendiary quotes:

“Muslims are calling for the executions of homosexuals in America. This just shows you they themselves are upholding the laws that are even in the Bible of the Judeo-Christian God, but they seem to be more moral than even the American Christians do, because these people are livid about enforcing their laws. They know homosexuality is an abomination.”

Dean said he was simply warning LGBT people about Muslims.

“I’m warning the homosexual communities that the Muslims are calling for your execution,” he said. “They took what I said and they turned it up on its head, and they’ve been on attack ever since. I’ve debunked it, I’ve debunked it, and I’ve debunked it.”

Hartman then asked, “Did you also say that ‘gays will molest 117 people before they are found out?‘”

Dean said, “I was referring to pedophiles.”

“It was very clear you were talking about gays,” Hartman shot back. “Did you say that inaccurately? Should you have said pedophiles?”

Dean responded, “What I am saying is what I just told you, and I am referring from Dr. Paul Cameron’s quotes, his statistics.”

He added, “Why is the homosexual communities defensive about it unless it does concern pedophiles?”

Here’s the interview:

Part 2:

Rep. Michele Bachmann sat down with WCCO’s Esme Murphy on Sunday following a Face the Nation appearance in which she proclaimed that she lives “in the real world.” Asked where she would trim the federal budget, Bachmann said she wants to cut federal employees, stop stimulus spending and freeze unnamed federal accounts which have $20 billion.

Pressed by CNN’s Anderson Cooper in November about her plans for cutting the budget, Bachmann could offer no specifics, instead erroneously claiming that President Obama’s trip to India, which she said represented “over-the-top spending,” cost $200 million per day. On WCCO, she had more concrete, although still vague, plans.

Murphy asked, “Where would you slash? I mean if you could just go one two three what would be your top priorities?”

“I think mistakes were made in passing the stimulus in the first place and also in the TARP bailout” — which was signed into law by George W. Bush in 2008 — “so we do have quite a bit of money still left unspent stimulus funds. We shouldn’t spend that,” Bachmann said. “We have other accounts that have $20 billion in them that we haven’t spent we shouldn’t spend that. We need to take the federal employees that were added, an additional 10 percent, and we need to cut back on there as well.”

She added, “I don’t like the idea of just across the board cuts because some budgets might need to be increased.”

WCCO’s Pat Kessler said, “Bachmann’s ad starts with a kettle corn kernel of truth, but like a carnival mirror at the fair, it stretches and distorts what’s really true.”

The ad accuses Clark of voting for tax increases on fair staples like corndogs, beer and deep-fried bacon. Kessler says Clark did vote for a tax on beer, but did not vote for a tax on corn dogs and bacon.

“Bachmann says correctly that Clark voted in favor of putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot to raise the sales tax for arts and the environment. Minnesotans approved it,” said Kessler. “But voting to put it on the ballot isn’t the same as voting for a sales tax hike, so that’s not accurate.”

Screenshot of a Fox 9 segment on the ad buy

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — aka the Mormon church — is running a mega ad campaign in nine mid-sized and mostly non-coastal American cities, including Minneapolis  to tell us… they’re normal people!

The ads are airing in Baton Rouge, Colorado Springs, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, Rochester, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, Tucson and Minneapolis, WCCO reports.

So what’s the deal? The Mormon church denies any political agenda, but Fox News thinks it might at least partially be a ploy to make 2012 presidential hopeful (and Mormon) Mitt Romney more electable among Republican primary voters. Alex Pareene at Salon points out that the ads are running in four or five potential swing states, but he concludes:

There is a history of Americans persecuting Mormons, and they’re a bit touchy about getting run out of everywhere they were until they ended up settling beside a giant dead salt lake, so working on their brand is understandable. But (in addition to incredibly expensive mission work) this could also be damage control for the messy press they got for bankrolling the anti-gay marriage campaign in [California].

Salon has the ads. Here’s Fox 9′s take on the videos:

“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.”