If you ever decide that nothing in politics and government makes sense anymore, you should take a few minutes to read an article entitled "Two Santa Clauses or How The Republican Party Has Conned America for Thirty Years," an article written by Thom Hartmann at CommonDreams.org.  The article is a couple years old, but it reads like it was written this morning or next week.  Whether you are a Democrat or Republicon or Independent or completely apolitical,  I believe it is worthy of your time.  If I didn't think so, I wouldn't post it here.  Please read it.  Here are the first few paragraphs:

This weekend, House Republican leader John Boehner played out the role of Jude Wanniski on NBC's "Meet The Press."

Odds are you've never heard of Jude, but without him Reagan never would have become a "successful" president, Republicans never would have taken control of the House or Senate, Bill Clinton never would have been impeached, and neither George Bush would have been president.

When Barry Goldwater went down to ignominious defeat in 1964, most Republicans felt doomed (among them the then-28-year-old Wanniski). Goldwater himself, although uncomfortable with the rising religious right within his own party and the calls for more intrusion in people's bedrooms, was a diehard fan of Herbert Hoover's economic worldview.

In Hoover's world (and virtually all the Republicans since reconstruction with the exception of Teddy Roosevelt), market fundamentalism was a virtual religion. Economists from Ludwig von Mises to Friedrich Hayek to Milton Friedman had preached that government could only make a mess of things economic, and the world of finance should be left to the Big Boys – the Masters of the Universe, as they sometimes called themselves – who ruled Wall Street and international finance.

Hoover enthusiastically followed the advice of his Treasury Secretary, multimillionaire Andrew Mellon, who said in 1931: "Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate. Purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down... enterprising people will pick up the wrecks from less competent people."

Thus, the Republican mantra was: "Lower taxes, reduce the size of government, and balance the budget."

The only problem with this ideology from the Hooverite perspective was that the Democrats always seemed like the bestowers of gifts, while the Republicans were seen by the American people as the stingy Scrooges, bent on making the lives of working people harder all the while making richer the very richest. This, Republican strategists since 1930 knew, was no way to win elections.

CommonDreams.org ( <---- click this link to read the rest of it, please.)

So... what's a Scrooge to do?  

The answer -- and Hartmann sets it out much better than I -- is that they essentially drive the economy into the ground by running up the debt and bestowing massive tax breaks for the wealthy until our government is virtually destroyed.  At that point -- the two Santas theory goes -- Democrats will have no choice but to agree to chip away at successful programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  Then, the only grown-ups in the room -- i.e. the Democrats -- will be the ones who have to fix the problem created by these destructive Republican policies.  Democrats will be forced to look not only look like Scrooges for cutting away at successful programs, but they will also be forced to ask for -- gasp!!! -- elimination of the huge tax loopholes for big corporations and Paris Hilton.  When Democrats do this, they will lose their base, they will lose every election and they will be relegated to the kids' table at Thanksgiving.

If you have ever read the Bismarck Teabune or your local newspaper's reprinting of a press release from North Dakota Congressman Rick Berg's office and wondered to yourself, "How can this character show up at a bunch of Tea Party rallies in North Dakota AND gloat about bringing [even though he didn't] millions of dollars of federal money to North Dakota to be spent on airports or bus terminals or hospitals?" this article is for you.  If you read and understand the whole article, you'll start to understand exactly what's going on.

Frankly, this is one of the reasons I'm disappointed with Democrats in Washington right now.  Some of them seem to have taken the Republicans' bait.  I occasionally hear some of them talking about things like eliminating "corporate jet tax loopholes" as "tax increases."  Those folks are lost causes when it comes to messaging.  Luckily, a few get it.  

With the recent release of the "Gang of Six" plan and President Obama's preliminary support, it's hard to say whether President Obama and our own Senator Kent Conrad have taken the Republicans' "two santas" bait, but it looks like maybe they have.  I feel for those guys, to some extent, because the framework that's been dumped on them is one where we really do need to take a look at how much damage Republican "two Santas" policies have done, and need to figure out how best to repair that damage.  

But it is no solution to any problem -- real or imagined -- to start down the path of destroying safety-net programs like Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.  

Anyway... if you want to understand everything that's happened between Reagan's "Tinkle Down Economics" and Rick Berg's favored "Cut, Slash and Pillage" bill, go read Hartmann's piece at CommonDreams.org.  It'll give you a new level of understanding of everything you see in government, politics and the media.

State Senate Majority Leader Bob Stenehjem (R-Bismarck) died in a car accident in Alaska today.

Stenehjem, 59, had been on a halibut fishing vacation near the Alaska community of Homer on the state's south coast. He had been visiting his older brother, John, and his son, Rob, both of whom live in Alaska, said Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, who is Bob Stenehjem's brother.

Forgo Forum

Our thoughts and prayers go out to Senator Stenehjem's family and friends. 

May he rest in peace.

In an excessively-hyped criminal case ignored by NorthDecoder.com, a woman from Florida was recently acquitted of killing her own daughter, but found guilty of four counts of lying to the police.  In North Dakota, people lie to the police all the time, but most people aren't charged with providing false info to law enforcement unless the cop and/or prosecutor have some kind of political agenda they feel they need to pursue.  For the purposes of this discussion, we'll focus on the recent arrest and conviction of State Representative Dwight Wrangham, a Republican from Bismarck. 

In Florida, lying to the police is a "first degree misdemeanor" which is roughly equivelant to a North Dakota Class A misdemeanor.  The maximum sentence allowed for a first degree misdemeanor in Florida is one year in jail and a thousand dollar fine, or both.  The max in North Dakota is the same amount of jail time, but double the fine.  

Here's the North Dakota "lying to police" law:

12.1-11-03. False information or report to law enforcement officers or securityofficials. 

A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if that person:

1. Gives false information or a false report to a law enforcement officer which that personknows to be false, and the information or report may interfere with an investigation ormay materially mislead a law enforcement officer; or

2. Falsely reports to a law enforcement officer or other security official the occurrence ofa crime of violence or other incident calling for an emergency response when thatperson knows that the incident did not occur. "Security official" means a public servantresponsible for averting or dealing with emergencies involving public safety.

NDCC § 12.1-11-03

Let's talk about Rep. Dwight Wrangham (R) and his recent conviction for driving while under the influence. Here is my summary of the facts as reported in the police report.

On June 27, 2011, at about 9:30 p.m., Bismarck Police officers were dispatched to the scene of an automobile accident at the 5200 block of East Main Street, not far from the Burleigh County rural fire department building a mile or two east of town.  Officer Chad Fetzer arrived on the scene to find that a red Chrysler Lebaron had run into the back end of a pickup hauling a trailer with two older model vehicles on it.  There were two people standing by the pick-up and trailer.  They told Fetzer they were not injured. The man standing next to the Lebaron reported he was also uninjured. 

A witness -- Rep. Keith Kempenich (R-Bowman) -- was following Wrangham, likely trying to make sure his drunk buddy got home alright, and witnessed the whole thing. Kempenich explained to Fetzer that Wrangham wasn't going too fast, but he ran into the rear end of the trailer because he "just could not stop in time."

Fetzer next interviewed the driver of the pick-up hauling the trailer.  The first words out of that guy's mouth were: "You need to do a breathalyzer on the driver of the Lebaron.  He's drunker than a skunk."

Fetzer then walked over to Rep. Wrangham (R) -- the driver of the Lebaron -- and asked if he had been drinking.  Rep. Wrangham's (R) response was "I had about two or three beers" at a Republican Party fundraiser at the Country Club. Fetzer's police report indicates Wrangham had bloodshot eyes, slow/slurred speech "and a very strong odor of alcohol." Asked when he had his last drink, Wrangham responded, "About five minutes ago."

The collision happened just a few blocks from Wrangham's home.

Fetzer then asked if Wrangham would submit to a couple field sobriety tests, and Wrangham agreed to try.  He failed the "HGN test" with flying colors.  ("HGN" stands for "Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus," and it's a complete b.s. test involving the officer having the driver follow the officer's finger, or a pen, to see if the driver's eyes "twitch.")  Wrangham failed all parts of that test.  Regarding Wrangham's balance, Fetzer wrote this in his report:  "Dwight appeared to have very poor balance at this time and it was obvious he would not be able to complete the walk & turn or one legged stand tests."  

Wrangham then agreed to submit to the field blood-alcohol breath screening test (the SD-5).  The SD-5 showed Wrangham's Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) was .203.  (The SD-5 is a completely unreliable test, with a very high margin of error.  SD-5 results are generally inadmissable in court because they're so unreliable. Despite that, cops use it as a screening device.) Fetzer felt Wrangham had failed the tests, was pretty clearly intoxicated and so he arrested him for drunk driving, handcuffed him and put him in the back of a patrol car to be transported to the Law Enforcement Center.  There, Wrangham submitted to testing with the Intoxilyzer 8000 machine. There, Wrangham's reported blood alcohol content was .179.  

Wrangham was cited with Driving Under the Influence and for "care required."  He was released to the custody of his wife, Linda, about a half hour later.

Police Report

According to news reports, Wrangham entered a guilty plea to DUI in City Court last week.

I'd draw your attention to the four bolded items in my report summary: (1) Wrangham was described as being "drunker than a skunk, (2) Wrangham claimed he had only had "two or three beers," (3) his field breath test showed his BAC at .203, and (4) the Intoxylizer showed his breath at .179.

There are some other truths that should be thrown into the mix here, too.

This was a fairly typical N.D. House Republican fundraising golf tournament at Apple Creek Country Club. It had started in the early afternoon. My sources tell me Wrangham had been drinking while golfing much of the afternoon, and that he finished golfing around 4pm or 5pm.  He then stuck around and drank more from then until 9:00 p.m., roughly.  Wrangham's statement that he had only had "two or three beers" is a demonstrably false statement. It seems impossible that he became "drunker than a skunk" after only having two or three beers.

Wrangham lied to officer Fetzer.  I think that's pretty clear.

So, what is the difference between the woman in Florida who lied to police, and the Republican state legislator in North Dakota who lied to police? The woman in Florida was found "not guilty" of killing her daughter. The judge in Florida seemed to think it was significant that law enforcement had to expend resources because of her lie. Law enforcement in Bismarck had to expend resources because of Wrangham's lie, too. If Wrangham had said, "I've been drinking since 1:00 p.m., and am drunker than a skunk," the police officer's time could have been saved.

We also know there was "an estimated $2,500 worth of damage" to Wrangham's car. That's not a small amount of damage when you're talking about a 1995 Chrysler Lebaron (Book is under $2,000, FYI). Wrangham is lucky nobody was hurt or killed when he rammed into the trailer.

Interestingly, when the North Dakota legislature decided to reduce the maximum blood alcohol level for driving from .10 BAC to .08 BAC, both Wrangham and Kempenich voted against the reduction. (See HB 1161, 2003) The change obviously wouldn't have made a difference for Wrangham.

Wrangham also voted against mandatory BAC testing for persons involved in motor vehicle accidents in 2007 (SB 2165) and in 2009 (HB 1219 and again). Interestingly, Wrangham voted in support of enhanced punishments for people with high blood alcohol levels. (HB 1439, 2003) He did, however, vote for enhanced punishments (i.e. longer driver's license suspensions) only for people whose BAC is above .18 (HB 1439, 2003) and his was only .179. If that's not a "skin of the teeth" vote, nothing is.

Anyway... my main point here is that I don't think lying to the police should be a crime. If a legislator can do it, and the wife of a legislator can do it, and all kinds of folks at Workforce Safety and Insurance can do it, and none of them are charged or convicted, then I don't think any of the rest of us should be held accountable for doing it.

For what it's worth, it's my humble opinion that the woman in Florida should not have been charged with or convicted of the first-degree misdemeanor of lying to the police either. When it comes to laws that are selectively enforced in a way that is completely contrary to the concepts of "fairness" and/or "justice," this type of law ranks right up there as being one of the worst. If the law is going to be selectively enforced -- i.e. if it's only going to be enforced as a "fall-back charge" because there isn't enough evidence to get a conviction for anything else, or to make a political point -- I do, however, think it would be perfectly okay to have the charge be a non-criminal "infraction." People shouldn't be looking at a year in jail for doing something when legislative big-shots and governor's office staffers get away with doing it all the time.

Rep. Dwight Wrangham (R-Bismarck) lies to the police ("I only had two or three beers.") and he'll probably get a legislative committee vice-chairmanship like his fellow convict, wife beater Rep. Dave Weiler (R-Bismarck). The lady in Florida gets four consecutive one year sentences, even though a jury determined there wasn't enough evidence to convict her of any of the more serious charges she was facing.

Nothing for Wrangham for lying to police vs. four years in jail and a criminal record for the rest of her life for that woman in Florida for lying to police.

There just doesn't seem to be a lot of justice in that.

Bismarck Police Sgt. Steve Kenner was fatally wounded while on duty Friday night, while responding to a report of a domestic disturbance in the area of a trailer park in East-Central Bismarck.  I don't know a lot about the facts of what happened, other than what's been reported in the news and a few other morsels. If you want to know what happened, you can go read the news stories. I want to take a few moments to tell you what I knew about Sgt. Kenner.

I met Steve Kenner when I was 14 years old. That's when I took my behind-the-wheel driving test. I don't even know if city cops still administer those tests, but they did back in the dark ages when I took the test. I have several vivid memories of that interaction. For example, I remember Officer Kenner made me parallel park. I could show you where he had me do that to this day, though a lot of time has passed since I took the test. I also remember the results of that behind-the-wheel test. I got "one wrong." The one mistake I made during the test was that I failed to use my blinker to pull into my parking spot in the Bismarck Law Enforcement Center parking lot at the end of the test. He docked me for that, but I still passed. I could also show you the parking space I pulled into without using my blinker. He was tough, but fair when I was 14. 

To this day I always use my blinker when pulling into a parking spot.

My next interaction with Kenner happened a few years later. The file is sealed and I still profess my innocence. The young BSC criminal justice student gal riding along with Kenner -- and who I ended up dating a couple years later -- was mad at Kenner because she felt I wasn't treated fairly. She gave him a piece of her mind. It really didn't matter, much. Let's just say I was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

A friend posted a note on Facebook about how Kenner always seemed to be the arresting officer in Minor in Possession cases here in Bismarck. Teen-agers, back then, would talk about how they had "gotten busted for minor" over the weekend, and others would undoubtedly ask, "Was it Kenner?"  Yeah, it usually was.  I don't know why. Good police work, I suppose.

I didn't interact with Kenner again until after I graduated from law school and was practicing law. I've had a few different cases where Kenner was the investigating officer.  Some were criminal cases.  Some were divorce cases.  I also dealt with Kenner on some car accident-type cases, too, where my office hired Kenner as an accident reconstructionist.  He did a decent, thorough job with that, too. In dealing with Kenner as a lawyer, my experience was that Kenner was always thorough, honest and fair. Always. Criminal defense lawyers deal with all kinds of cops. Good cops, bad cops, honest cops, dishonest cops, fair cops, unfair cops, etc., etc., etc... From all my interactions with Kenner, I can tell you Steve Kenner was a good cop, an honest cop, a good man, a hard worker and a nice person. 

Then I ran into Kenner a little over a month ago. I hadn't run into Kenner for a couple years.  He was working the barricades on River Road in Bismarck, near the north end of Sertoma Park. I was trying to get to the condos just north of the park to help some folks prepare for the anticipated flooding. Kenner -- in uniform -- walked up to my truck and said, "Do you live in here?" I said, "No, but I'm going to help some friends get their stuff moved."  He said, "Where do they live?" I told him.  He said, "Okay. Be careful; if you see any big trucks coming through, get out of their way. They're hauling dirt in for the levee."  I stuck my hand out to shake his and (re-)introduced myself, not sure that he recognized me. We shook hands. He said, "No, I recognize you, Chad; I just didn't think you lived down here." We visited a little bit. 

He shook my hand with a firm grip.

It's a horrible tragedy when something like this happens. Cops have to put up with the risk that they'll have to deal with an event like this, and they deal with it every day. That can't be easy.

I don't know Steve's wife or kids but they are in my thoughts and prayers. Steve was a good man and a good cop. He was what a public servant should be. The Bismarck Police Department would do well to find more men like him to serve on the force.

Godspeed, Sgt. Kenner.

I'm not a big baseball fan, but I know a grand-slam home-run (for the win) when I see one.  

Here's Travis Hafner -- who was born in Jamestown, ND, and raised in Sykeston, SD -- last night...

Attaboy, Travis.