MinnPost asks the best question ever: Franken’s jokes, Coleman’s digs: Do voters really care?

These are old themes: Franken’s not qualified to be a senator because of tasteless humor in the past. Coleman’s not qualified because of relationships – financial and apartment leases – from powerful groups or, in this case, a tainted senator who is tied to powerful groups.

Two questions: Are either of these SERIOUS ethical issues? Do voters care?

I have, in this blog, called Norm Coleman a “spineless, self-serving shell of a human being with no redeeming qualities and, to be fair, no offensive qualities” and I called Al Franken “a capable comedian. And that’s about it.”

Let’s be clear: Al Franken isn’t unqualified to be a senator because of the jokes he told. He’s unqualified because his ego dwarfs Paul Bunyan: he’s running for a top political post because he’s famous (i.e. because he can). Come on! Even Jesse was a suburban mayor before he was governor. Franken should take a note from a man with an ego that rivals his own. Simply having opinions does not make you US Senate material.

As for Coleman, I don’t think any pseudo-scandal about shady business dealings matters. At all. So what? He’s rich; of course he had a shady business dealing. I wonder how many shady business dealings Franken has had. Instead, let’s look at his complicity with Bush Administration policies and his lack of creativity or vociferousness on the really important issues. He’s in there already, so let’s judge him on what and how he’s actually done (or not done) as a senator… seems to me there’s enough fodder for Franken right there.