Jordan wrote:
>Stenglein's explanation for his 1992 donation to Gingrich actually
>undermines any justification for his 1996 donation to FreedomPAC.
Stenglein
>claims that he made his donation to Gingrich while he was into drinking and
>not at all involved with politics. Basically, Stenglein seems to be
>renouncing his 1992 donation on the grounds that he did not know or care
>about what he was doing. It sounds like the classic adolescent excuse for
>inappropriate behavior - "I was too drunk to know what I was doing".
>Meanwhile, Stenglein's substantially larger 1996 contribution was the same
>year that he actually ran for his current elected office, and presumably
>after alcohol ceased to affect his life and impair his judgment. So what
is
>his explanation?
I received a different explanation when Mark & I talked briefly at
Art-A-Whirl. Mark told me that his brother was especially gung-ho about
Gingrich in '92, and that Mark and four brothers and sisters agreed to chip
in $50 each - Mark wrote the $250 check. Sounds coordinated enough not to be
done in a drunken stupor. Now, I'm troubled by the two versions that seem to
be floating around.
While the Gingrich contribution is a litmus test for me, I think Stenglein
owes it to the rest of the voters to stop playing the affable ex-drunk and
speak directly to a larger issue: does he regret giving Gingrich money? That
would give voters a clue to his current thinking.
>David Brauer disclosed Stenglein's 1996 contribution to Freedom Pac 6 days
>ago, and we have yet to receive any forthcoming response. Stenglein's only
>attempt to address the issue of his donation is conveniently incomplete and
>misleading.
I wish Grow had asked about that...this was an uncharacteristically fluffy
effort from Doug, though you don't always want to have the long knives out
and there's still time to add to the record. Although Gingrich gets the
headlines (yes, I exploited the name, too), the Freedom Club guys are
directly involved in Minnesota politics, in ways that affect Minneapolis
negatively. Stenglein's contribution was bigger ($750), and more recent. Are
these still his political pals?
Steve Minn and Constance Sheppard have both made pleas not to judge
Stenglein solely on two federal contributions. That's a very fair point. I
don't want to preclude a substantive discussion of Stenglein's record (still
enigmatic to most of us). Connie was nice enough to point to Stenglein's
official Hennepin County link at http://www.co.hennepin.mn.us/wdist2.html
Looking through the site leaves me with some open questions for supporters
and critics:
The closest thing to a political statement on the site reads: "Commissioner
Stenglein believes the size of government can be reduced through controlled
spending and implementing business concepts, which will make government more
efficient and less dependent on raising taxes. Commissioner Stenglein
understands the value that business brings to a community and how business
development can increase and enhance the standard of living."
Question: what business concepts has Commissioner Stenglein instituted that
have made government more efficient? How exactly has he controlled spending
and what were the trade-offs?
Also, the site notes he is CHAIR of the NRP Policy Board - that's a pretty
big deal in the Minneapolis context. So, for those who know, what has he
done/advocated as the NRP chair? That should tell us a lot about what kind
of mayor he would be.
List members who missed City Pages' story on Stenglein may be more
interested in it now:
http://www.citypages.com/databank/22/1060/article9452.asp
David Brauer
King Field - Ward 10
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
