Jim Hagedorn: one hateful congressional candidate
December 2nd, 2009 4:56 pm by DJ DIn the wake of both Allen Quist and Randy Demmer announcing their campaigns for Minnesota’s First Congressional District, another person has thrown his hat into the ring to face Tim Walz.
Jim Hagedorn announced today he is seeking the GOP nomination for congress. As noted at Bluestem Prairie and Minnesota Independent, he has scrubbed some entries from his blog entitled Mr. Conservative. Through these posts, Hagedorn shows his disdain for women, American Indians, and gays. While I can’t blame Hagedorn for scrubbing this content, one must ask how, by virtue of these writings, anyone can think he should be suitable for a lake advisory committee, let alone the United States Congress.
One post not displayed by Bluestem or MnIndy is so offensive it’s really difficult to read or write about, let alone comprehend how a person can be so full of hate toward another group of human beings. Something which would be more expected on a bigoted hategroup’s website, not the blog of a candidate for Congress.
It was titled “Tolerance v. Acceptance: America Files for Divorce” and written July 13, 2004 in the wake of Massachusetts’s acceptance of marriage equality. I don’t think I can do this any more justice with my own words (as I will likely become more ill the longer I think about how this clown is really running for congress) so below are some excerpts with screen shots. Google Cache here (for now):
And yes, they are EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE.
More so with each passing day, the June 28, 2003, Supreme Court decision in Lone Star Sodomites v. God and Country (Lawrence et al v. Texas) represents an abomination on par with the deviancy it attempted to condone.
Eighteen pages of spew, more resembling of encounter group notes than sound legal reasoning, injudiciously fisted two hundred and twenty-seven years of the Republic’s mores into the bowels of cultural debauchery.
Inexplicitly, Justices not named Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas felt compelled to nullify a dwindling number of rarely enforced morals laws by which States, in essence, prohibited two-way traffic in tunnels constructed by God and marked by nature as “exit only.”
The now invalidated Texas statute had been applied in the prosecution of John Geddes Lawrence and Tyron Garner, “Salt and Pepper” Texans whose squealing renditions of the shocking side of AC/DC disturbed more than the peace.
The whole of the story is that barnyard noises incited Houston’s version of Mrs. Kravitz to summon authorities, presumably, so her neighbors could be hosed down by something other than each other. Police dutifully responded to the dispatcher’s call of “code 69…in progress.” In the end, the human erector set were arrested after cops, copped the copping couple “copulating” – weapons withdrawn, in hand, thankfully still loaded, regrettably cocked and primed to shoot.
Shortly after conviction, the assailants challenged the ruling, as well as the validity of laws that discouraged acts most suitably performed at a Ringling Brothers sexual version of the greatest show on earth.
[…]
Never was it imagined the nation’s highest judicial body would entertain such an open-n-shut case and then have the cheek to permit the guilty to come from behind and pull one out of their rears, to use a sports metaphor. Even though the defendant’s line-of-reasoning gave new meaning to the term “oral argument,” the ins-and-outs of the judicial process were exposed as penetratingly confounding. The case confirmed to experts and laymen alike that the “Law Is A Ass,” or as the legal letches of MANBLA now whisper to fresh meat: ass IS the law.
Butt (sic) never have winners lost so dearly. The Court’s voyage into uncharted, untreated cultural bathhouse waters was designed to offer a gentle push from behind…to generate a small skip forward for the pink triangle class…to throw them a bone, so to speak.
[…]
Yet, the sodomy upshot and subsequent Massachusetts ruling proclaiming the right of literally every Tom, Dick and Harry to marry has severely accelerated the battle of culmination that must be waged and won before homosexuals can achieve normalcy in our civilized society. A fight they will surely now lose, as the issue transitions from sexual adventures to the sacrament of marriage; and the field of battle shifts from the chambers of unelected judges appointed by the likes of Michael Dukakis to the halls of the United States Congress and State legislatures.
So, Mr. Hagedorn, First District GOP delegates have to decide now which is more offensive: the fact that you think this way about people, or that you think you should be able to run for the United States Congress thinking this way. I don’t envy them.
[SHORT UPDATE] As Sally Jo just pointed out:
In an interview with MPR, Hagedorn cited his sense of humor as one of his assets in the campaign. Really?
And earth to Gregg Peppin: Really? This guy? Really???
[End Update]
December 2nd, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Nice digging. It’s amazing who comes out of the woodwork and considers themselves to be viable candidates. I hope Walz faces an opponent that’s competent enough to warrant some serious debates.
December 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Jim Hagedorn seems MANIACALLY obsessed with gay sex. So much so, in fact, that it is not even possible that this man is a heterosexual just by how much he thinks and writes about gay men. I wonder why he never mentions gay women? I guess that’s OK because the girl-on-girl action is what gets most hetero men off anyway. So, as long as heterosexual men are getting their rocks off on something, all is OK with God. How wonderful!
One wonders if this ‘man’ is even a human being.
I guess we will have to find out once he is, inevitably, elected and worshipped in this ‘great’ nation.
Jeez. These days, I have NEVER been happier to be a gay American.
Look around at the hetero-alternatives. You guys are the best-of-the-best humanity has to offer, huh? Really???????
No thanks.
December 4th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Good post.
During his press conference at the Truman Café, Mr. Hagedorn said he was running because “our way of life is worth saving” … I guess the key word is “our” … I presume that means a man and a woman … marriage vows notwithstanding … remember Mr. Hagedorn served as legislative assistant to former Congressman Arlan Stangland during the time that Stangland made several hundred long-distance telephone calls using his House credit card to the residence of a female lobbyist (which he claimed were not romantic in nature) but that turned into the refrain “He likes families so much that he wants to have two of them.” And as the MNIndependent story cited Mr. Hagedorn’s own father was accused by Paula Parkinson of having sexual relations. The Department of Justice eventually did investigate whether any members of the House had traded votes for sex but no one was indicted since it could not be proven that her lobbying involvement impacted how Congressman Hagedorn voted … she lobbied against the passage of a crop insurance bill and he voted against it but I am sure that there were many other reasons why a No vote would be warranted. The bill passed 235- to 150. A DOJ source said ”She gave us some salacious accounts of purported activities with congressmen, but there was no evidence of Federal violations.”
Based on these role models, it must be asked how Mr. Hagedorn defines “our way of life”.
All that aside, there are many questions about Mr. Hagedorn. Is it correct that Mr. Hagedorn has not lived in Minnesota since he was a teenager …. Did he even graduate from a Minnesota high school or one in Virginia ? Did he have any military service ? Does he have a wife and family ? How often has he returned to Minnesota ? Has he campaigned for any Minnesota politicians ? Has he given any money to Minnesota campaigns ?
How can he be “one of us” when he seems to have forgotten about us.