-102

The Whitewashing and Greenwashing of Gov. Tim Walz (www.counterpunch.org)

submitted 2 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

41 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For those of us who have had a front row seat to some of Walz’s machinations and political decision-making in Minnesota for the past several years, reconciling the current media narrative around Walz with what we’ve seen with our own eyes has been disorienting.

Tim Walz originally decided to run for office as a Democrat after being denied entry to a George W. Bush rally in 2004. He flipped a longtime red Congressional District in 2006, and then proceeded to be one of the most conservative Democrats in the U.S. Congress, ironically aligning himself with many of the Bush Administration policies. He had an ‘A’ rating from the NRA, voted for the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline, supported the big agriculture industry, and was obviously pro-military after serving in the Minnesota National Guard for 24 years.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

Probably UBI or my belief that anything over several million dollars in income should be taxed at or near 100%

this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2024

-102 points (11.9% liked)

politics

19107 readers

3253 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News