Dismissing rural Minnesota or suburban Minnesota as a "Republican Norman Rockwell" fantasy has been the downfall of many Democrat candidates. Perception or reality - that was one of John Kerry's biggest obstacles in the south and in other rural areas. Al Franken actually comes across less likeable than Kerry if that is possible. If this wasn't a factor would Hillary have embraced beer drinking and hunting toward the end of the Primary campaign?
Also you insinuate that it has only been the Republicans who will pull Franken's unfunny satire out of the archive when it was high profile Democrat congress men and women who were the most vocal over the Playboy article.
Franken's campaign has been for the most part a revenge campaign against Norm Coleman. Trying to paint him as George Bush will not work - he did not vote for the 2002 resolution to go to war (Unlike Democrat heroes Hillary, Kerry, Edwards, Reid, Kerry), did not vote for the surge, and has voted on as many war funding bills as many of our Democrat "leaders".
I am suprised the DFL did not learn that name recognition (Patty Wetterling) does not mean victory.

LAMBERT: There may not be much difference, but I'm saying that Republicans love this "Norman Rockwell" fantasy of easily-outraged moralists shocked ... shocked ... at a bawdy humor, since of course culture war, lifestyle issues are really the only thing they've got in the aftermath of the Bush calamity. Norm didn't vote for the Iraq resolution because he wasn't in the Senate yet. But his "disputes" with Bush over Iraq policy incubated until 2006, as the election cycle began.

What's this? Lambert back on KTLK? Heard you yesterday (Saturday) and thought your commentary on Franken was pretty good.

Any insider info on if Ventura is going to throw is hat in the ring? It sure would make for a fun few months.

LAMBERT: It was a little odd being back in Knucklehead Country, doing Rosenbaum's Saturday show. My guy Quentin never fails ... . More than anything Ventura just wants to be asked -- constantly, and preferably in front of a camera -- if he'll "serve": in the U.S. Senate. His appeal is pretty well played out here in Minnesota.

Your article was 1200 words or so long, had a Flesch-Kincaid grade level of 12 and hardly mentioned Norm Coleman.

The worst thing that can happen to a challenger is that he or she becomes the main subject of discussion and dispute.

Apparently, this race will be decided by pundits like you focusing on Al Franken's real and imagined past actions and speech.

Senator Coleman will not be disappointed with this approach.

LAMBERT: I'll look up that Flesch-Kincaid shot when I finish my book work here, but really, Bleuler, am I -- or my type - the ones eager to hold his campaign to a discussion of personal pecadilloes? As i say, while risky -- in that it open doors to topics uncomfortable for Sen. Coleman -- I'm thinking the Republicans are the ones eager to confine this to personal trivia ... the issue "thing' ... Iraq, economy, health care ... that is NOT thick ice for the incumbent.

Ha! Hillary out and Franken in on the same day! I'm filled schadenfreude and glee. Did I mention that Hillary is out? Hillary Clinton, I mean. Yeah, well she's done. Finis. Over. Bye-bye Ms. but-I-won-the-popular-vote-and-survived-sniper-fire-and-contemplated-my-opponent's-possible-assassination-count-everybody-but-the-caucus-states-I-voted-for-the-war-just-to-prove-I-could-be-commander-in-chief-and-it's-really-too-bad-4,000-young-Americans-got-killed-as-a-result-and-hard-working-white-people-love-me Clinton. Don't let the door hit you in your big-ass pantsuit on the way out.

LAMBERT: That roaring sound I heard off on the eastern horizon was, I assume, your barrage of champagne corks. Did make any "big ass" references when Joe Biden left the race?

I realize I'm just a poor boy from the delta, but I think he's toast.

LAMBERT: You fry up some collards and chitlin and we'll call you when Norm goes down.

Looks like you're carrying some water of your own here, Bri.

Do I sense some backlash against your own Rockwell-like upbringing in bucolic Monticello?

(Off the topic, but I was shocke, SHOCKED to learn via "Withering Glance" yesterday that Rick of "Claude n'Rick" (tm) attended the same YMCA Camp as I - the hidebound traditional boys camp that was Camp Warren).

LAMBERT: Sometimes the long sought explanation just drops in your lap.

"It isn't like, you know, he is some high-profile politician hiding a reputation for chronic womanizing"

Am I the only one who continually wonders about this? Really what's worse? Writing about womanizing or doing it?

LAMBERT: I don't want to overplay my "coy hand" here, but at some point this tactic of throwing up old jokes at Franken opens a door to a public discussion of a lot of long-whispered about -- but never proven -- topics related to "other candidates" private lives. A classic example of "be careful what you ask for", I think.

Stephanie Hansen hosts her show 1-3 p.m. weekdays on FM107.

Knucklehead country? I didn't realize you were donig Air America this weekend.
Speaking of Air America and Ventura - I believe one Minnesotan columnist at the Star Tribune encouraged Ventua to run in a recent column.

LAMBERT: You're referring to my buddy Nick Coleman, and I'm pretty sure Nick was making a satiric point with that one ... without stooping to Porn-O-Rama, I'd like to point out.

Aren't you supposed to be a "media pundit"?

Is your publisher aware that you're actually a DFL mouthpiece?

LAMBERT: The DFL party apparatus, a.k.a. "The Nerds" referenced in this latest post, are the sort of friends that preclude the need for Al Franken to seek out any enemies.

I'm listening to Al on NPR with Gary Eichten as I write this. Before this show began, Kerri Miller interviewed Scott McClellan on Midmorning. A caller asked McClellan if he was going to say he was sorry for serving the cause that has led to torture, mass displacement, American decline, and of course, so much death. He talked at great length, but no sorry. Kerri Miller missed a great follow up: so you aren't sorry, then? Now Al is on during the next hour and caller number two wants to know if he is sorry his articles hurt people's feelings or is he sorry for what he wrote in the articles? He actually said the word sorry, again, and seemed to shake off the qualifiers pretty decently. He missed a nice oportunity to expand on the fact that he did not write jokes for the Lawrence Welk Show, thus triggering the conversation you have been advocating for, but he did I think begin talking about the subject in a way that will make it that much closer to becoming boring, which would seem to be a good goal. He also missed a chance to ask why our demand for apology is weighted more towards sketch comedy than mass-misdirection leading to death and mayhem.

LAMBERT: Damn straight. Obviously it's easier to apologize for a few lame comedy bits than complicity in breaking a proud, moral 230 year prohibition against preemptive war, running up over a trillion dollars in debt, depressing the value of the dollar so badly oil prices push the country into recession and get 4300 soldiers killed. We hope veteran journalists -- and their bean-counting editors -- keep this in mind as the campaign progresses.

Oh my. I spent seven summers at Camp Warren. I blush at the thought that Bertram and I may have been cabinmates and that he has seen me naked.

LAMBERT: If he did I'm guessing he still remembers it.

I was a "counselor".

We generally frowned on camper nudity except of course during the weekly mandatory soap baths in the lake.

BTW Bri, Franken-frauds's peculiar "humour" is out there for all the world to see. His "product", if you will, his contribution to the society.

Your lame and rather disengenuous whisper campaign against Sen. Coleman, who has certainly proven his leadership abilities in St. Paul and in Washington, is hardly comparable.

But do keep it up, it seems you've sparked the latex- enhancement gals over at the 107.

LAMBERT: Maybe if you cited a few of Sen. Coleman's "leadership" successes ....

"I Norm Coleman, Do solemnly swear...". When Al gets beat by 10 to 12 points this November, I hope you remember this, and my previous, posts. (Although I did accidently post my second comment under the wrong article. A thousand pardons for my previous gaffe, I am new to the blogging community and still get excited when I am putting thought to keyboard) What is ironic is that I am voting for Mr. Franken. Thus, the anguish I feel over this nomination. All Senator Coleman has to do is run out the clock, not say or do anything stupid, and Franken will not see poll numbers within five points of the Senator. I am stunned that somebody as bright and as well versed on local politics as you does not see this? It is clear that many of the party stalwarts such as Oberstar, McCollum, Walz, etc...see this scenario playing out as I predict. Franken is not getting any traction, and only a major, and I mean major, gaffe by Senator Coleman will shift the balance of this race. Having seen Senator Coleman over numerous campaigns, this ain't gonna happen. In summation, the DFL has the wrong horse in this race.

LAMBERT: I'm not disagreeing with the view that Franken has a serious problem. He is being defined by the opposition. But fundamentally, he is a smart guy. He knows the issues. He knows what Coleman is -- a careerist -- and where to attack him -- on issues that voters truly care about. He'll have some interesting opportunities on the debate circuit. If he can find the right proportion of wit and factual bite, he can turn public perception around. Held today, even with Obama's coattails, I'd give it to Coleman 53-47. But it is only still early June, and 80% of voters haven't paid attention past the headlines.

Balanced city budgets, the Xcel Energy Center, etc.

He was the MAYOR.

Of course, you are no doubt blissfully unaware of this, preferring instead the vague capabilities of Stuart Smalley, the porn chuckler.

Is it any wonder that folks think we're rather daft around these parts?

I mean, Klobuchar, McCollum, Ellison...et al.

LAMBERT: Thank God we've got Michele Bachmann to balance things out, huh?

Don't share this with Libfelder - it's too long for his attention span.

He gets rather vaporish when faced with so many accomplishments.

By all means, I'll await the Porn Chuckler's (tm) bona fides as comparison....

http://coleman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Bio.Accomplishments

There are days when it is tough trying to be a Republican (insert joke here).

I won't vote for Franken, not because he wrote dirty stories, but because I don't agree with his policies. Paul Scott is correct in his comments here, people are all wound up about Franken saying dirty words and they don't give a rip about the mess called Iraq.

Bertram, put the bottle down for a minute and try to describe something positive that Coleman has done. I supported him six years ago financially and will now admit that he is just another run of the mill politician protecting his own ass. Coleman, wakes up, puts his finger in the air, and follows the wind.

Our choices this time around are pretty lousy.

LAMBERT: I'll stand by Franken as long as he keeps making the case that Coleman's judgment vis a vis not just the war but Bush's ruinous economic policies are the issue and not his previous career as a comedian. This election -- with Obama v. McCain -- really is about making a dramatic change from almost 40 years of unreflective conservative policies, almost all of which required sacrifices on the part of the middle and lower classes. I still think Franken should loosen up and be himself, because gosh darn it he's good enough ad smart enough ... even if some peple don't find him particularly lovable.

I'm firmly interested in Coleman's short-comings. Is he a skirt chaser? Is he incompetent and in the pocket of special interests? When given the option, did he strike down legislation to reduce our carbon footprint? Perhaps he's a heartless, political turn-coat unwilling to support our troops when they come home and need our support the most? I believe the answer is yes to all questions posed above.

The only thing I have ever thanked him for was visiting the troops.

Did Al Franken receive over-whelming support from every-day, hard working folks from the Range to Albert Lea? YES! His middle class - living room chats were real. He thought of holding them, he asked the questions and spent hours meeting with people and listened.

Norm Coleman has never done this. His decisions help those in power. He serves the elite. Franken is an elite because he's talented. Coleman seems to benefit from faithfully supporting uninspired, unfair, unimaginable legislation that is the opposite of being a friend to Minnesotans.

Peace and collard greens, Bri!

LAMBERT: By the standards of the top echelon of Bush cronies -- Dick Cheney, Tom Delay, Jack Abramoff, Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, David Addington -- Norm Coleman is a sweetheart and a Boy Scout. The guy does retail politics well, and there is no question he knows how to play the election game. But he is eminently vulnerable to the charge of complicity. His back and forth on ANWR and late, timorous objection to elements of the Iraq "plan" are far, far too little to offset valid accusations of caddying for a rolling series of disasters. It all leaves him with an enormous red target on his chest.

Bertram, what is your problem with women? Geez, a woman has a radio show, and automatically you assume she is "enhanced". If I used the same lame criteria on you, then I would assume every conservative blogger is a hackjob sitting in his parent's basement. I happen to think Stephanie (and BL) are fantastic on 107. As for Brian's political slant, I mean really, what would you do all do if you didn't have things to complain about on his blog? I mean, god forbid, you actually go out and do something productive, rather then just comment about being productive.

LAMBERT: I'm thinking bertram's "problem with women" is a door you don't want to open.

My dear Nerd-girl:

I am willing to overlook your apparent "moodiness" which I am certain is due to "the pantsuit" going down in flames....

You missed my jab at the gals at 107 whose notoriety is based on the marketing of latex nipples, a rather oddly conflicted representation of their faux feminism, at best.

I was trying to be more tasteful.

LAMBERT: Just guessing here, but bertram's talk radio defined "feminism" probably looks more like the wives of the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints than any woman walking around town.

Part of the problem in American politics is a "I'm sorry" never is taken as sorry. It has no carry value. There is no thru-put with "I'm sorry" Even though Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld have committed unthinkable atrocities against humanity and their own citizens, do you think they'll ever say "I'm sorry?"

Yes I agree, we want to stay away from bertram's problems with women...

LAMBERT: By all means.

"unthinkable atrocities", eh?

Where's your examples / proof?

The military is foursquare behind the war on terror. We are winning in Iraq.

You, sir, are apparently just another mewling anti-American skinny white boy not picked for kickball....with daddy issues.

When will a reporter grow some balls and simply ask the question of both candidates straight up: Have you ever committed adultery? It's seems fair enough since we all have been told how offended Minnesotans seem to be at such talk. Let's get Norm on the record lying--because if his answer is anything but yes, he will be lying. Maybe that will finally flush out some of his conquests to tell all. Come on, reporters, it's not as if there isn't a whole pile of rumors that have been out there for years that true news reporting would dictate need to be confirmed or denied. How many other times have you asked a politician something that started with "We've heard" or "It's been reported" or "It's been rumored"? Why not this question? Or are there no true news reporters left out there anymore?

LAMBERT: I am looking forward to the Franken-Coleman debates. If the moderator(s) dare go for something a little more interesting than, "Does your pastor love America as much as you?" they might try your question on for size.

Hey Brian:

Why are you so interested in talking about a report that now tells lies (the Senate report on intelligence)

In 2002 a bunch of Democrats believed just like the administration that Iraq was a threat.

Jay Rockfeller (the Democrat head of the Intelligence committee), John Kerry (the 2004 nominee), Joe Libberman (the party's vice President nominee in 2000), Hillary Clinton who said she "Independently" verified it, etc. The point is was Saddam Hussein a threat if left alone:

* He kicked out the arms inspectors

* Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on his own people and on Iran

* Saddam Hussein was funding terrorists groups

* Lets not forget that Richard Clark a famous critic of the Bush Administration wrote in his book which was praised that in the process of the previous Bush adminstration checking on Iraq that they had plans to build an atomic bomb which they had to let Iraq keep. Thus is Iraq is showing interest in getting uranium that has to be taken as a serious sign that they might be building an atomic bomb. The left praises Joe Wilson as a hero, but by the liars own admission Iraq was looking even though Wilson claimed their was no serious deal effort by Iraq.

Thus an overwhelming case by the critics of the Bush Administration that Bush didn't lie about their being a threat.

When will you lefties quit trying to use that lie?

Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN

LAMBERT: I admire your courage in using your real name.

Walter's taking some time away from his work inveighing against the the heinous crimes of Sec. of State Mike Ritchie over at Democrats Exposed. So you can hardly expect him to get too worked up about something as piddling as Bush and his enablers lying the country into war with a phony and constantly shifting casus belli.

Yes, Walter, Saddam used poisonous gas against the Kurds (Trust me, Saddam never thought of the Kurds as "his own people") and Iran back when he was OUR ally, when we were assisting him with satellite reconnaisance that made Chemical Ali's job that much easier, when Rumsfeld was over there gripping and grinning for the cameras with Saddam, when a MILLION young Iranians died fending off his invasion and criminal martial techniques. Huh, wonder why Iranians would hate us, which most of them don't, or, didn't. They may well now be better disposed to their formerly despised leaders thanks to Bush et al's spittle-flecked saber rattling.

Yes, we invaded in time to liberate their mass graves as yet a fresh new rationale for war after the previous one was disproved, and so on and so..., not when they were actually being murdered.

Tell us, Walter, all about what we did to assist the Iraqis in the south when they rose up against Saddam after Desert Storm. What? What's that you say? We did nothing? They were left to turn slowly in the wind, to use a Watergate phrase, and summarily slaughtered by the Republican Guard? Ohhhhh, darn.

Saddam had no air force, no missiles, nothing more efficacious for delivering "weapons of mass destruction," even if he actually did have them, than a camel.

Everybody lied. This is really no longer any more up for discussion than is intelligent design, and yet...

LAMBERT: My finger reaches for the delete button as soon as one of these guys mentions how "Saddam kicked out the inspectors".

I understand that the report also has a date wrong, and that it misspelled Hadley's name as Hadly. This cements it for me -- the whole thing must be a pack of lies -- especially the part where it details no connection between Al Queda and Saddam.

No matter how the 1600 Penn apologists wish otherwise, somethings are "certain" and can't be explained away with "there's still a lot of controversy about it." The war's instigation and conduct is now becoming known (Feith didn't get the press of MacClellen, but said the same things) as the travesty of our lifetime. The drain on our Treasury, our lowered standing in the world, our inability to lead by example -- all aspects of how the war moves us from Great Power to second rung.

The only thing debatable is if Bush was in on the dupping, or was dupped himself.

Franken/Coleman content: Where was the Empty Man in the Empty Suit for all those Senate investigations in fraud and misconduct as he led the committee charged with it? Will someone ever ask him some hard questions about his complicity?

LAMBERT: I think Coleman's lack of initiative (interest in) any of a dozen outrageous frauds related to the war is ripe, red meat for Franken. The question may be whether the press corps and the blogosphere regards that as as titillating a commodity as another bad dirty joke.

He's right about the Democratic leadership, though. They rolled over for this administration.

LAMBERT: I'm amused at how often our right-wing friends note Congress' very low approval ratings, since according to every poll I've read the country disapproves most with how little Congress has done to counter the administration. On the war at least, that "soft on supporting the troops" shtick is still powerful.