Posted: September 19, 2011 at 5:13 pm

Convention Notes

Dems rallied the faithful this weekend in Great Falls at the annual convention, with many speeches by the many state-wide candidates. Mostly, just a lot speechifying. The top ticket candidates did not disappoint. Tester and Bullock gave great speeches, whipping the crowd into a frenzy.

Nothing in the way of fireworks or controversy, unfortunately for bloggers, unless you count a few backhanded comments by a couple of speakers. Larry Jent, running for Governor, said he would pledge never to bring his dog to his office if he were the governor and that he’d “never disparage the legislature.” It was unclear whether Jent’s remarks were a slap at the Governor. Jent has a strange speaking style. But Schweitzer seemed to take his pound of flesh for these remarks, personally introducing Bullock to the podium with remarks that almost amounted to an endorsement.

Jon Sesso, house majority leader, said that dems need to do more than disparage the enemy, an apparent effort to tamp down the jovial anti-nut-case spirit that was reverberating through the convention.

Picking up on Sesso’s comment, sourpuss Lee Capitol beat writer Mike Dennison wrote an opinion piece on Sunday, wondering aloud whether Dems will do anything other than disparage the extreme elements of the GOP as the 2012 election season kicks in.

Dennison has a point. Democratic candidates must always, above all else, cite the work of Democrats in making Montana one of the best fiscally managed state in America, and for using the resulting funds to invest in education.

But I wonder if Dennison has listened, in the last ten years or so, to the rhetoric that emanates from the GOP? That party has reduced itself to four talking points: complaining about environmentalists, complaining about liberals, complaining about Democrats, and complaining about Obama.

41 comments

  1. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

    Larry Jent’s a dink. I’m thinkin’ that now that Bob Kelleher has died (a man I truly admired), Jent has taken up the mantle of the perpetual candidate and also ran! Now, maybe he’ll drink sumthin’ to turn himself blue! It might help! Ya never know! Then, he could claim to be the ONLY truly blue candidate! And he’s just as weird as the blue guy. (I forget his name. Oh well, doesn’t matter anyway. He’s only known as the blue guy.)

    But ferchrissakes, Jent! Schweitzer is LUVED because of his dog, Jag! What the hell’s WRONG with you?! You don’t like dogs or sumthin’?

    p.s. Jent is a Tennessee transplant or some such. NO real Montana would disparage a man for his dog!

  2. Publius II

    Some good news for the ‘High Line’ in Blaine and Hill Counties, Sen. Hutton, SD17, resigning and opportunity for SANITY to return, and there’s a strong Democratic contender I hear, and experienced. Dems DO need to highlight
    accomplishments, to not just solve problems, but SEIZE opportunities and the future!

  3. Havre Voter

    I attended the convention and made the following observations. Tester, Schweitzer, and Bullock were very impressive. Wilmer and Gillan were good, but will be better with time. The others were not memorable, at least not in a good way. I am worried about the state legislature most of all.

  4. Damion Stolz

    I hope we start seeing democrats talk about their fiscal responsibility soon. In this political climate especially. We must take back the legislature from the TEA party and I agree that democrats can win on this message.

  5. Butte Gal

    One thing that bothered me was the canned and planned greeting for Max Baucus at the convention as some kind of hero for health care reform. The crowd was told and expected to stand, but I definitely noticed a few askance looks. It was bad. The health care bill was nothing more than a give away to the insurance industry. If democrats don’t start talking about the jobs and fiscal responsibility they’ve created in the state instead of this garbage we deserve to lose.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

      Mini Barfus is stuck in his mid-twenties mode. He’s still trying to find himself. When he first decided to run for office, he didn’t know whether to run as a Dem or Pubbie, and he’s STILL workin’ on it! He’s the single worst thing to happen to the Dem party in Montana in a long time. He never matured as a Dem, and KeeRIST, what is he now, seventy? He should stick with runnin’ marathons, bonkin’ his head, and chasin’ tail until he finally grows up and grows a set. Until then, he still won’t put Dem on his signs. I say if the dumb bastard won’t claim me, I won’t claim him! And yes, for the record, I voted for Kelleher. Can you even IMAGINE?? HE WON’T EVEN CLAIM US DEMS! Think about it. Is THIS the guy we want representing us? Time for Mini to follow the old Corndog Buns lonesome trail. Time to put the old boy out to pasture. Maybe he can get a job as a sheepherder down there on the ranch!!

      • Butte Gal

        I didn’t vote for Baucus or Kelleher, I wrote in Donald Duck just because I couldn’t vote for either of them. I think the Dems should keep Baucus in the background this election cycle, as he seems to represent all that is wrong with Washington DC, and that isn’t going to help anyone get elected.

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

          Barfus has NEVER, repeat NEVER, taken even ONE principled stand on any issue. He’s a wimp, pure and simple. A senator incapable or unwilling of making the hard decisions based on what is right is simply a lousy politician. I mean, we would STILL be wallowing in the civil rights movement and Vietnam if it had not been for courageous politicos willing to take a stand. Let’s face it. Mini Barfus just ain’t UP to it. I mean, just take a gander at Mini’s take on the budget battle. Mini wants to hear from Montanans only. Can you even IMAGINE? Mini, one of only FIFTY senators, wants one million people in Montana to decide the economic fate of the OTHER three hundred million in the country. He’s a wimp who badly needs a gubmint job to survive. That’s all. Sad, so sad that our system is designed to do just that!

  6. Butte Gal

    I should add that it was encouraging to see such a strong labor presence at the event. That was one of the best things about this convention. Kudos to the demos for remembering who their friends are and for championing working people!!!

    • Turner

      I’m glad that there was a union presence at the convention. I wasn’t happy, though, with the KIND of union representation I encountered there.

      In a conversation with the executive secretary of the AFL-CIO, I was told that Montana’s unions are totally on board with eminent domain rights over private property for corporations. I was told that NorthWestern Energy and their predecessor Montana Power had already used eminent domain 33 times, that it was no big deal.

      This led to the corporations-create-jobs line. And the environmentalists kill jobs line.

      When our labor leaders spout corporate propaganda, especially when they buy in to and promote the “it’s either jobs or the environment” argument, there’s something very wrong.

      By the way, I saw almost no environmentalist representation at the convention. Is the Party abandoning the issue because Tea-Baggers don’t like it?

      • Lynn

        At the Union Picnic, over Labor Day, I was asked to sign a petion FOR the Keystone XL pipieline.

        The only way this can be safely done is if the Fines for a leak are so severe that the Companies involved do the maintainance. IE, if there is a leak, they LOSE their corporate charter, or Board memebers go to jail and forfeit all income from the company untill the leaks fixed and cleaned up and millions of dollars are paid etc.

        • Turner

          It sounds to me like the unions have joined the corporations in their war against the environment. Where does the Democratic Party stand on this?

          • Lynn

            This is off the Website

            Extractive Industries

            Extractive industries have historically been part of Montana’s economy, and we affirm the importance of environmentally responsible extraction of hard rock minerals, coal and coal bed methane, oil and gas. The state and federal government should maintain effective programs to reclaim the environmental impacts of resource extraction. Because of potential impacts to our state’s natural resources, we will advocate for policies that make sure all resource extraction is done responsibly with adequate environmental protections and that coal bed methane development does not damage Montana’s groundwater, rivers, streams and agricultural land. It is necessary to require sufficient bonding to both reclaim damages and to restore the environment. Extractive industries have a responsibility to protect the health of the environment and the safety of their workers.

            http://www.montanademocrats.org/platform

            I emailed Ted Dicks for more info

        • James Conner

          No surprise here. Unions exist to support jobs. Building a pipeline requires skilled workers — welders, pipefitters, heavy equipment operators. These jobs pay well. If properly designed, constructed, and maintained, the Keystone XL pipeline is consistent with the platform of the Democratic Party. The real issue is converting hydrocarbons in oil sands to a liquid that can be pumped through a pipeline.

          I’ll also go out on a limb a bit to say that developing the tar sands — responsibly, of course — is consistent with the platforms of both the Republican and Democratic parties because both use the same plank: more; more of everything; more, developed responsibly.

          I would not sign the petition, but I don’t blame the unions for circulating it.

          • Lynn

            As long as it’s done right….it should be ok. The issue will be making the Corporations put that over profit

          • Turner

            It sounds to me like there is no difference between the parties when it comes to exploitative industries. When a buzz-word like “responsibly” is used over and over, it’s meaningless. Or it’s a smoke-screen.

            If you’re an environmentalist, can you support either party? Or do you support the one that you hope will do less damage?

          • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

            Conner, I would go out on a limb here and say that if you think that the tar sands can be developed “responsibly”, you’re either nuts, incredibly stupid, or a paid industry spokesman! BTW, which is it?

            Now, I’m not saying that you’re any of the above, but ANY person with an IQ above a turnip understands that the tar sands is simply a gubmint subsidized Big Kockh enrichment program. BTW, you DO realize that people actually LIVE within that third of Alberta that will be turned into a toxic dead zone, and that the tar sands will irrevocably ALTER the world’s climate, oceans, and rivers in Canada? If you don’t, please don’t post about crap which you know nothing about.

            Bottom line. The tar sands is destruction on a MASSIVE scale the world has never seen before. And sorry, it ain’t worth even ONE union job. And for the record, been Union my whole life.

            • James Conner

              I don’t think the tar sands can be developed without causing enormous environmental damage. Nor did I say so. But I do think the concept of responsible development of oil sands consistent with the energy platforms of both parties.

              Sorry you didn’t read the ironic and tongue-in-cheek sections of my post closely enough.

              • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers

                OK. I’ll look harder for the irony. But I think that most people do NOT understand the dimensions of this horrific project. Alberta is a large province, and I’m not kidding when I say that the tar sands will destroy approx. a THIRD of it. This is a crime against humanity. It must be stopped. With the tar sands, we have moved into a new level of environmental crime heretofore unseen. It will either mark the absolute beginning of the end of humanity on the planet, or the day that the people rose up and put a stop to the earth raping nazis. Which I dunno.

                • Ilikewoods

                  State of Michigan did a study already over 20 years old that said the lower 48 of the Union would run out of Oil by 2020, that only 9 and a half years away! Instead of pushing for new ways of making energy the Oil Companies are pushing the lie that Oil lies everywhere! We have been Hoodwinked by old Money for too long folks, if we want something for our grand children we will have to stand together to get it done!

                  This is why the oil company is going after tarsands, to make their grip in the world last as long as possible. they don’t care about the environment, or people just their profits. Tarsand oil is extremely corrosive! they were pushing it through pipes like the one across the yellowstone and it burst. and you think it wont happen elsewhere… no matter how good a union pipefitter’s are you cant beat acids destruction for long! and you wont be able to protect or water and air against the product even with the technology today!

  7. Jamie

    I think Monica Lindeen would make a good Governor. I realize that she isn’t running, and that we need her as State Auditor, but she is a smart woman who is very likeable and popular with unions. She also voted pro-schools on Otter Creek, which is going to work against Bullock. I don’t know how he is with the union crowd, but I know Lindeen is popular.

  8. helenan

    Hey cowpie-you conveniently left out BS’s lewd slap about Rick Hil “starting his career at a nearby bar”, and also his comment that he offered Bob Brown a job (what he neglected to say is that Brown told him to shove it up his butt.)

  9. Monco

    Schweitzer does hate Hill. Hill took a shot at Schweitzer in the press a while back, so I’m not surprised the barbs have been returned. Hill is probably the GOP’s best candidate overall. But if Hill is the nominee, it will definitely bring Schweitzer into the race, perhaps with a sizeable warchest to help Bullock. Look at what Schweitzer did to Roy Brown. Supposedly raised a fortune for Kendall Van Dyk’s race to help him unseat Brown, all because Brown ran nasty ads against Schweitzer. as payback to old Roy.

  10. Bob

    @helenan–I heard the Governor was a little bit more specific on Hill. That he launched his political career at the Great Falls bar, the Sip and Dip. Now THAT’S funny.

  11. Bob

    Anyone who says there is no difference between reponsible development and rape and pullage is straight smoking crack. And anyone using metal electronics to post that all mining is wrong no matter how responsibly developed needs to stop and think….

    • rleeh

      mining in mt has a bad record…
      little shy of the “responsibility”…
      long on rape and pillage…
      and when the damage is done…
      bankruptcy shucks responsibility.
      you know, butte, zortman, columbia falls etc etc.

  12. Farmboy

    I have a few thoughts about the convention and the primary process in general. From my understanding Steve Bullock is pretty much going to be the Democratic candidate for Governor, and Im not saying anything bad about Steve Bullock, but here is my problem, it sounds like the other interested candidates are not being heard out, if we are not atleast going to hear them out then why even bother with a primary? Also wouldn’t Steve be an even better candidate if he had some competition in the primary? Another thought Eastern Montana only had maybe one or two people at the convention, why does it seem that the party has pretty much given up everything between Billings and the North Dakota line?

    • Jennifer Davies

      Farmboy raises a really good point. It seems we have a lack of Democratic candidates from eastern montana right now. Farmboy I’d like to see someone like you run for office. I also hope Bullock will take the opportunity to represent eastern Montana when he picks a running mate.

  13. Farmboy

    Jennifer I cant thank you enough, I have ran for the legislature in the past from Eastern Montana, I lost but I may do it again someday just not in 2012. Right now part of the problem is that with the re districting that was done back in 2002 after the 2000 census its such a gherry mandered mess out here that a Democrat has a hard time winning. And with Republicans now being in charge of the re districting commission after the 2010 census we are going to have an even bigger mess. All Im trying to say is this dont count out Eastern Montana, there are more Democrats over here then one would think. My other point is or was why is Bullock just the nominee? Im not saying anything bad about the guy in fact he has done a good job as attorney general, but what Im saying is if he is just going to be the nominee just because then why bother with a primary, heck lets just let the executive board of the party pick the candidates, and save time. Now I get respecting incumbants if they are doing good jobs, but just letting somebody have an open seat, just because is ridiculus in my opinion.