I Don’t Hate America!

After viewing Bluestem Prairie’s coverage of Allen Quist’s announcement that he will be the GOP candidate for Congress against Tim Walz, I have one thing to say:

Sally Jo, you should know that Quist prefers “fisherman” to “angler.”

From a February 8, 1986 story in the Star Tribune about a bill on the horizon to modify state statues to be gender neutral:

Some critics are frowning because the changes occasionally twist normal usage. “My objection is that apparently the changes have not been based on usage,” said Rep. Allen Quist , IR-St. Peter. “You cannot change the language by authoritative decree.”

One that particularly irks Quist is “fisherman.” Said Quist : “I said, `Look, I’m an avid fisherman. I go to fishing clinics … and I’ve never in my whole life seen or heard the word `fisher.”‘ He said his office dictionary defines “fisher” as “an animal (with) four legs and a tail” that is related to the weasel and is found in North America.

“Angler” might be a good compromise if it weren’t for the fact that it means one who fishes with a hook - thereby not addressing those who fish with nets.

When the bill came to the floor just over two weeks later, instead of accepting that the times were-a-changin’, Quist took the logical route of being a pain in the ass by introducing countless tedious floor amendments. From the February 25, 1986 Strib:

For close to three hours Monday, the Minnesota House pondered whether “airman” should be “aviation worker.” It debated whether “repairman” should be “repairer.” It questioned whether “sportsman’s license” should be “sporting license.”

In the end, after wading through at least 20 proposed amendments, the House passed a bill that would eliminate sexual bias from the laws of Minnesota. The vote was 102 to 19.

“I didn’t expect anything near this,” said Rep. David Bishop, IR-Rochester, the author of the changes. “Nobody expected this to be boiled down to a floor fight with 20 amendments.”

[…]

Many of the amendments were offered by Rep. Allen Quist  , IR-St. Peter, who complained that the bill sacrificed normal word usage in order to make the changes. “The bill hits the common folk usage of language  right in the teeth,” he said.

The changes even brought in the profamily lobby. Quist , who said profamily supporters backed him on the issue, said the changes removed the words “father” and “mother” from the laws along with the words “husband” and “wife.”

Bishop said he knew of no instance where the words “father” and “mother” were changed and only two instances where “husband” and “wife” were changed. “This is not a profamily issue,” said Bishop. “This is not intended to be ideology changes.”

Quist said he found the words “husband” and “wife” deleted on one page alone. “What’s wrong with the word `husband’? What’s wrong with the word `wife’?” he asked.

As the House members favoring the amendment that restored “husband” and “wife” were asked to stand, Rep. K.J. McDonald, IR-Watertown, stood and turned to his colleagues and said: “Come on, you male chauvinists, get up.”

Added Rep. Ralph Kiffmeyer, IR-Big Lake: “These words are real crucial to the foundation of our society.” The House voted to restore “father” and “mother” to the statutes - although whether they were ever taken out remained unclear - and voted to replace “husband” and “wife” in the two instances.

Just another instance of why Allen Quist would be one stinky fish for the First District.

This entry was posted on Friday, November 20th, 2009 at 12:47 am and is filed under Allen Quist, Tim Walz. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.