Al Franken declared winner in Minnesota.....FINALLY

Minn. rules for Franken in Senate fight


By BRIAN BAKST
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 2:25 PM



ST. PAUL, Minn. -- The Minnesota Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered that Democrat Al Franken be certified as the winner of the state's long-running Senate race.

The high court rejected a legal challenge from Republican Norm Coleman, whose options for regaining the Senate seat are dwindling.

Justices said Franken is entitled to the election certificate he needs to assume office. With Franken and the usual backing of two independents, Democrats will have a big enough majority to overcome Republican filibusters.

Coleman hasn't ruled out seeking federal court intervention.

link

I wonder if Coleman is going to keep on wasting tax payers money to fight something he lost months ago.?

I don't know about you, but the thought of Al Franken being a member of Senate isn't comforting at all. He's a bitter lunatic in my book, a real loose cannon.

As to the filibuster, that's as long as Kennedy and Byrd can physically make it to the Senate to cast their vote.

I couldn't stand Franken even before he got into politics, too radical (hard to believe a Hollywood fixture is radical I know). Then again, Minnesota elected Ventura correct? I guess electing nuts is the norm for them. I am only so-so on Coleman but if I had to take my pick, I would take the lesser of two extremes.

I love Al. Calling him a nut is rather harsh. Apparently many people liked him or he wouldn't be a senator now. YAYYYYYY!

gringaloca wrote:

I love Al. Calling him a nut is rather harsh. Apparently many people liked him or he wouldn't be a senator now. YAYYYYYY!

It is Minnesota...

I love Al!!!!!! Norm Coleman always reminded me of a scary cartoon figure with Osmond teeth

Kgirl wrote:

I love Al!!!!!! Norm Coleman always reminded me of a scary cartoon figure with Osmond teeth

He's another one of those plastic looking people. Odd. Minnesota is a nice state. I went up there to Mayo Clinic and got world class service. Not everybody is crazy there but there sure are some fruitcakes...Michele Bachmann for example. EEEKK! I'm glad Al won. He's funny and intelligent. I can't wait to see what all he has to say.

Hal Frankin ......... GREAT QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE JOB ! Yea Right. Sadly enough though, what is happening in Washington is the disassembling of the American way of life, and to send a nasty sharp tonged PUBLICITY SEEKING comedian to make important decisions really is a joke! Point in fact many Americans can't stand the fellow, and a controversial smart ass, who charms himself with his own rhetoric will surely only add to the "heat in the kitchen" and compound the difficulty of uniting a " hurting " country ....... Hal with a hurting carrier, got the publicity and job he wanted .... we need better representation than from a guy who flopped because he just wasn't funny, and who "RAN" for no doubt, self serving reasons . HIS SUPPORTERS, LIKE SO MANY LIVING IN AMERICA, THINK OUR PRESENT DAY SITUATION IS A JOKE.... so why not put an ailing "comedian" in Congress ? PERSONALLY, I think ALL of our self oriented TRAITOR representatives should be put on trial ......... so I guess Hal, even though a total jerk, could be "no worse " than any of them.....JUST LOOK at the people we have representing us....Democrat and Republican ..... A SELL OUT IS HAPPENING BEFORE OUR VERY EYES..... France had two successful revolutions, maybe it's time for the populace to consider that... ( AND WHILE CONSIDERING ,play the sound track/ cd from LA MIS )

Everyone make sure to take a look at the "sticky" posted at the top of the political forum. Thanks.

Other than being a washed up celebrity that the left seem to love.. Exactly what are his qualifications in the political arena??? I mean even Obama was a "community organizer".

Lucas McCain wrote:

Other than being a washed up celebrity that the left seem to love.. Exactly what are his qualifications in the political arena??? I mean even Obama was a "community organizer".

The only qualifications that he needs is...I have always liked him and for me...that's quite enough....but then I've always liked you also

^ Weird, I know.. But that means you'll vote for me...

He'll be as successful a Senator as he was a talk show host on Air America. When he talks, nobody will be listening.

Roy Rogers wrote:

He'll be as successful a Senator as he was a talk show host on Air America. When he talks, nobody will be listening.

Air America didn't have the big corporate funding like Rush and the others do. It's hard to get that kind of money unless you are in their back pocket. I listened to him on Air America when I had it. So saying that nobody listened to his show...well, that's simply not true.

I won't automatically dismiss Franken, but I'll give him no longer length of string to prove himself than anyone else. He can't be as bad as that Michelle Bachman, can he?

Geronimo wrote:

I won't automatically dismiss Franken, but I'll give him no longer length of string to prove himself than anyone else. He can't be as bad as that Michelle Bachman, can he?

Amen!

gringaloca wrote:

Roy Rogers wrote:

He'll be as successful a Senator as he was a talk show host on Air America. When he talks, nobody will be listening.

Air America didn't have the big corporate funding like Rush and the others do. It's hard to get that kind of money unless you are in their back pocket. I listened to him on Air America when I had it. So saying that nobody listened to his show...well, that's simply not true.

National corporate ads may pay large part Rush's salary (just like they pay Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan), but local ad sales in each individual market is what keeps him on the air. Those sales are driven by Arbitron ratings, which are driven by listener ship. Rush stays on because his ratings stay high. When people quit listening to him, he'll go the way of local sports talk in Cincinnati.

All you have to do is go to the Arbitron site and compare the ratings of talk stations affiliated with Air America with talk stations not affiliated with AA, especially those that carry Rush. You'll find that, in most markets, the difference in favor of non-AA stations is more than a 500 to 1 market share. (non-AA talk stations have a 5 share AA stations have a 0.01 share.) You call it what you want. From where I sit, nobody's listening.

Roy Rogers wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Roy Rogers wrote:

He'll be as successful a Senator as he was a talk show host on Air America. When he talks, nobody will be listening.

Air America didn't have the big corporate funding like Rush and the others do. It's hard to get that kind of money unless you are in their back pocket. I listened to him on Air America when I had it. So saying that nobody listened to his show...well, that's simply not true.

National corporate ads may pay large part Rush's salary (just like they pay Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan), but local ad sales in each individual market is what keeps him on the air. Those sales are driven by Arbitron ratings, which are driven by listener ship. Rush stays on because his ratings stay high. When people quit listening to him, he'll go the way of local sports talk in Cincinnati.

All you have to do is go to the Arbitron site and compare the ratings of talk stations affiliated with Air America with talk stations not affiliated with AA, especially those that carry Rush. You'll find that, in most markets, the difference in favor of non-AA stations is more than a 500 to 1 market share. (non-AA talk stations have a 5 share AA stations have a 0.01 share.) You call it what you want. From where I sit, nobody's listening.

Then I guess that myself and others I know who listen are "nobodies".

gringaloca wrote:

Then I guess that myself and others I know who listen are "nobodies".

No, he's just saying there's not enough of you and he's right. Liberals, for whatever reason, just don't support radio talk shows.

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Then I guess that myself and others I know who listen are "nobodies".

No, he's just saying there's not enough of you and he's right. Liberals, for whatever reason, just don't support radio talk shows.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the stigma that comes along with talk radio? When you have people like Rush babbling on....maybe liberals just don't want to partake in the constant negativity. That's one of the reasons I don't listen to Air America anymore. It can be quite depressing. If I listened to Rush every day, I'd probably kill myself.

gringaloca wrote:

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Then I guess that myself and others I know who listen are "nobodies".

No, he's just saying there's not enough of you and he's right. Liberals, for whatever reason, just don't support radio talk shows.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the stigma that comes along with talk radio? When you have people like Rush babbling on....maybe liberals just don't want to partake in the constant negativity. That's one of the reasons I don't listen to Air America anymore. It can be quite depressing. If I listened to Rush every day, I'd probably kill myself.

Honestly, I don't think that conservatives are any more prone to negativity than liberals are. I just think that conservatives feel that they have the "righteous indignent" on their side and people like Rush milk it for all it's worth.

Annie Oakley wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Then I guess that myself and others I know who listen are "nobodies".

No, he's just saying there's not enough of you and he's right. Liberals, for whatever reason, just don't support radio talk shows.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the stigma that comes along with talk radio? When you have people like Rush babbling on....maybe liberals just don't want to partake in the constant negativity. That's one of the reasons I don't listen to Air America anymore. It can be quite depressing. If I listened to Rush every day, I'd probably kill myself.

Honestly, I don't think that conservatives are any more prone to negativity than liberals are. I just think that conservatives feel that they have the "righteous indignent" on their side and people like Rush milk it for all it's worth.

I totally agree. Believe me, I know libs can be negative. BIG TIME. Like I said, I couldn't handle air America thing because I found myself angry and upset all the time. It's just not healthy for either side.

gringaloca wrote:

I totally agree. Believe me, I know libs can be negative. BIG TIME. Like I said, I couldn't handle air America thing because I found myself angry and upset all the time. It's just not healthy for either side.

Which is exactly why I avoid Rush, Hannity, Levine, Savage, AA, and all those spewing criticism with no meaningful solutions.