It's not plagiarism; it's satire.
I love it when the far out tools of the crony-capitalist right pooh-pooh the solid blogging I bring to you, oh faithful readers.
That’s coming from unnamed SD Democrats. Not me. And I’ll continue to point out the reality that Weiland is a shill. An overcoat draped over an empty seat.
A placeholder in the same tradition that Democrats fill many other races in South Dakota politics. And that’s coming from the other team [Pat Powers, "Democrats admitting that Weiland is potentially a mere placeholder for Brendan Johnson," Dakota War College, 2013.05.18].
Because there’s nothing more fun than parsing the evasive phoneyness of his words. One. At. A. Time:
To further flog his latest propaganda obsession, pooh-poohing Rick Weiland's candidacy as a fake, Powers points to page 2 of an AP article by Bill Barrow and Thomas Beaumont that discusses Democratic Party divisions in South Dakota and Georgia. Powers picks the closing of the article as the big news, since it reinforces his preferred narrative:
Weiland, meanwhile, quickly entered the race, in part to keep Herseth-Sandlin out, a sign of tension between the moderate and liberal wings. Weiland, who lost to Herseth-Sandlin in the 2004 House primary, is a close Daschle ally.
Brendan Johnson, also a Daschle ally, would not challenge Weiland, especially in a state where successful Democrats are rare and clubby. However, Weiland, while a seasoned party operative, would likely bow out, should the younger Johnson assess the race over the summer and decide to enter in the fall.
That scenario becomes more probable should the race for the Republican nomination become contested, South Dakota Democrats said [Bill Barrow and Thomas Beaumont, "Dems Senate Campaigns Marked by Internal Battles," AP, 2013.05.18].
From that one passage, Powers concludes that Democrats are admitting that the rumor he is selling is true.
Oh, wait, read that headline: not true-true. Just potentially true.
A bit too eager to find accompaniment to his own shower-singing, Powers links to the end of the article, hoping you won't read the beginning of the article:
In the contest for retiring Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson's South Dakota seat, Democrats' preferred candidate now appears to be Rick Weiland, once a top aide to former Sen. Tom Daschle and twice an unsuccessful candidate for Congress. Weiland launched his bid, with Daschle's backing, amid clamoring about Herseth-Sandlin and Johnson's son, Brendan, a U.S. attorney. State Democrats now say the younger Johnson likely won't run [Barrow and Beaumont, 2013.05.18].
A reminder to Powers, who makes clear with every rumor and press release he posts that he does not understand the rules of quality journalism: in normal journalism, the items placed first in the article are more important than the items placed at the end. The "South Dakota Democrats" whom Barrow and Beaumont get to speculate on hypotheticals at the end of their article say up front that the likely scenario is the exact opposite of what Powers is trying to make you believe: Weiland is the preferred candidate, and Johnson is not running. That's exactly what Rick Weiland has said. That's exactly what I say. That's exactly what logic and evidence say: throwing Rick Weiland in as a placeholder for Brendan Johnson at this point does not put any Democrat in a stronger position to run against Rounds, Noem, or Nelson for Senate in 2014.
And that's exactly the logic and evidence to which Pat Powers desperately avoids offering a response.
Speaking of putting the important information in a story first, this latest Dakota War College effort to manufacture a story and attack any Democrat who steps forward to run for office bears out the thesis that South Dakota Republicans hold about Dakota War College. (I've heard South Dakota Republicans say the following, so I get to cite them as a source and thump my chest as being right about my preferred narrative, right?) Pat Powers is not an authentic blogger. He is a paid shill for the leaders of Republican Party. Look at his list of sponsors: Dennis Daugaard, John Thune, the South Dakota Republican Party, and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Click Rain Elect, the only private company sponsoring DWC, works for and is run by Republicans.
That’s coming from unnamed SD Republicans. Not me. And I’ll continue to point out the reality that Powers is a shill. An overcoat draped over an empty head.
A placeholder in the same tradition that Republicans have filled other spaces in the South Dakota blogosphere with paid propaganda quietly coordinated by Republican candidates. And that’s coming from the other team.
Update 10:49 MDT: The DC press and Pat want you to believe that unnamed South Dakota Democrats see Weiland as a placeholder whose entry into the race drove Stephanie Herseth Sandlin out. The DC press and Pat clearly aren't talking to named South Dakota Dems who are tight with both Weiland and SHS:
People on both sides of the Democratic divide were doubtful.
“Rick was in the race. Was that a consideration in some way? Maybe it was,” said Ryan Casey, a leader in the “Draft Brendan” movement. “I think the biggest things were exactly what she said in making her announcement, that she wants to spend time with her family.”
Judy Duhamel, a former chairwoman of the South Dakota Democratic Party and a close Herseth Sandlin ally, also downplayed Weiland’s role.
“If she felt the right thing to do was to run, she would have been 100 percent in there,” Duhamel said. “I don’t think any candidate in a primary would have been threatening to her” [David Montgomery, "Dearth of Star Power Hinders S.D. Democrats," that Sioux Falls paper, 2013.05.19].
You have apparently done the metrics and surmised that the click ratios make it worthwhile to have each others products in your sidebars. Is that a fair appraisal, Cory?
[editor's response: Yes, Larry, but not when the makers of those products keep changing the publish dates of earlier articles to push those articles to the top of the RSS list every couple of hours above newer content from other producers. Not cool.]
Excellent analysis, ripping him apart. Piece. By. Piece. Love it! I'm likely not the only one who has long suspected he's a paid peon of the SDGOP because he posts nothing that is original. Except his spin and 'shout outs'.
In a sentence that could have been written by PP: Cut and paste "research" is a strength of the right, which is to say it is their prime weakness.
I thought the cherry-picking was rather funny myself.
More on semantic infiltration:
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/18/how_right_wingers_use_semantic_tricks_to_kill_government/
Move back to South Dakota, Mr. kurtz, so you can run for the legislatures!
I can buy the argument that Brendan Johnson is still considering getting into the seat, I agree that he wants to wait it out and see if Rounds gets a tough primary. And until the period to enter the race is concluded, that speculation will occur.
But I don't get the Weiland as a place holder argument at all. Weiland is a marginal candidate at best, if SHS wanted to run, Weiland wasn't going to stop her or anyone from running.
gawd.
Exactly, Joe. That's exactly what Judy Duhamel (quoted above in my update) says. That's exactly why I can't buy the placeholder rumor. SHS wouldn't have fallen for it. Weiland entering as a placeholder adds no value to any Democrat's position.
Indeed. Mr. Weiland is as good as you got.
I don't think they're paying him enough to run that website. Links in the sidebar to other blogs create a moronic pop-up window without address bar.
At least the 90's are in style now.
The Weiland candidacy offers the Democrats in South Dakota two potential options. Either it's merely a "placeholder" candidacy for Brendan Johnson or merely an attempt to place a weaker Democratic Senate candidate out front, in order, to encourage Noem to run for the Senate, thus opening a House seat for Brendan Johnson.
As far as "I can't buy the placeholder rumor. SHS wouldn't have fallen for it.", then that means Sandlin feared Brendan Johnson's potential candidacy, which I do not believe she actually did, what she feared was a divisive primary (and I think B Johnson did too and that is why he used Weiland by having Weiland throw his hat in the ring), but as long as B Johnson withheld his announcement then the ball was in Sandlin's court, however, with Weiland entering the fray then a primary was inevitable and Sandlin's candidacy was seriously challenged as far in being able to maintain long term Party unity, especially after a primary fight. In fact, it could be argued also that Weiland was a greater threat to Sandlin in a Democratic primary fight than B Johnson because he is a more authentic and established Liberal than B Johnson, thus further causing Sandlin to sit-out 2014.
In actuality, Sandling called the Weiland/Johnson Forces on their bluff. Now the Democratic Establishment (absent the Sandlin wing of the Party) are placed in a position to run one of the weaker Democrats (Weiland or B Johnson) relative to Sandlin for the Senate, without having defeated or weakened Sandlin as neither Weiland or Johnson can beat Rounds in my opinion. Thus, leaving Sandlin for another day with the "Liberals" potentially left behind in the dust and with Sandlin's phoenix persona rising some day once again with a "I told you so" theme and attitude.
The question we must be asking ourselves as South Dakota Democrats is what is more important? Brendan Johnson's political future or holding a Senate seat for South Dakota Democrats beyond 2014? Because that is what is at stake here.
Another question that we must ask ourselves is whether the DSCC is a "happy camper" right now relative to the moves currently going on in the SD Senate race?... And whether, the relations between the DSCC and the Daschle/Johnson Forces are strained?
Let us not forget that the same intelligent and creative Democrats who gave us the recent nuclear exchange between the Sandlin and Johnson Forces are the same Democrats who gave us the Machiavellian moves in 2010 which consisted of no Democratic Senate candidate, a former Republican for Governor, and the potential Weiland challenge to Sandlin in a 2010 Democratic Congressional primary.... as a fellow SD Democrat I am not impressed.
Do not get me wrong, I am not a Sandlin apologist. There are many things about her past voting record that are repugnant, but there are also many things about Daschle and Johnsons' voting records which are repugnant too. Do not forget Kemp-Roth, Balanced Budget Amendments, Flag burning Amendments, Bush Tax cuts, Bush Wars, Bankruptcy Reform, Opposition to Credit Card Reform, they are all repugant moves to a Liberal which have Daschle and Johnsons' names on it. Sandlin, frankly, is just Tom or Tim in a skirt.
If some of these so-called "Liberals" within the Democratic Party were really concerned about Sandlin back in 2010, then, why were they not concern about the lack of a candidate against Thune that year, in order, to fly the liberal flag and its concerns, and why were they willing to run a former Republican for Governor, who never missed a "First Monday" on KELO television to defend the Republican (Trent Lott) position on major issues confronting the country during the 1990s?
The totality of all of these facts and questions leads me to believe that Weiland might be a "placeholder." It also leads me to believe that the established Liberal concerns about Sandlin are not genuine, because they hold Sandlin to a higher standard than others. I believe the genesis behind this hypocracy is two fold. One, it stems from a resentment within the Daschle Forces that Daschle would have won in 2004 had Sandlin lost to Diedrich in the special Congressional election that year; and two, it stems from the mere political presence of Sandlin and how her political ambitions were, and obviously now, in the way of the political continuance of the Johnson staff and family in the US Senate.
As South Dakota Democrats, we have to understand that more meets the eyes on this Senate race than appears too. This struggle between Sandlin and Johnson is not ideological. Ideology merely masks the real struggle between two political forces - a struggle, which places the greater inevitability of victory (Sandlin over Rounds) at stake do to the wishes of one sides greater concern for their viability and continuance, and as a South Dakota Democrat this concerns me greatly, especially after witnessing the strategic debacle and ideology heresy of 2010.
Let me conclude with one further argument. For the first time I must side with the DWC, I believe the Weiland candidacy may merely be a "placeholder" position. And nothing tells me this more than the fact that Ryan Casey led the Draft Brendan Johnson movement and now his mother is the treasurer for Weiland's campaign. What do they say?... "Follow the money...?"... no pun intended. How is this relevant? It shows a orchestrated effort by a common few and a potential cooperation which could leave to any eventual out come.... including a "placeholder" strategy.
The dots still don't connect. How does a "nuclear exchange" result in neither candidate running? How does a bitter power struggle play out in such foolish, obviously ineffective strategems? How does the placeholder strategy give Johnson any advantage?
PP is so lacking in original analysis that he had to steal Winston's poorly thought out comment above as the centerpiece of one of DWC's latest posts.
I love how Pat Powers moderates people who express a conservative viewpoint civilly and logically with factual evidence, and yet allows Rounds' goons to run rampant over his blog, attacking conservatives (and liberals) anonymously with childish, hateful, unintelligent remarks.
"How does a 'nuclear exchange' result in neither candidate running?"
I think they call it "Nuclear Winter," but any way, there is still plenty of time for one of them to re-enter and if you accept the "placeholder" strategy then one of them is still running.
"How does a bitter power struggle play out in such foolish, obviously ineffective strategems?"
Potentially not well, but when it's about protecting your own political presences over ideology, then any thing is possible.
"How does the placeholder strategy give Johnson any advantage?"
Sandlin is most likely out of the way, and they think they can beat Rounds.
As far as Dave's comment, I hope Dave is right and I am wrong. I say this as a good and respectful Democrat. I do not have a problem with Brendan, Stephanie or Rick as my next Senator, but this struggle is not about ideology, it is merely about political turf, and I am afraid this internal Demomcrat struggle is going to leave the SD Democrats with little to work with after 2014. If I am wrong, then we will all be better off for it as Democrats.
Winston, the placeholder strategy still doesn't make sense. How does saying that Brendan is out, then declaring Rick is in, drive SHS out of the race any better than simply having Brendan declare his candidacy now?
Bree, welcome to our world. Did he nuke one of your comments?
It appears that he has the word "socialist" on auto-nuke. Which is plain silly. That would be like you moderating the word "capitalist" on here because people started calling each other "capitalist pigs."
File under ad nauseam...Pat Powers tries to slime Angie Buhl for ...you know doing something. Like standing up for and comforting the afflicted, rather than making excuses for the crony comfortables. Actually, Pat was trying to infer that Angie was...you know...teh gay. Unfortunately for Pat, Angie is a recent addition to taking full advantage of the only right of marriage that is legal in SD.
Of course PP is a tool...we knew that. So why do I still throw up a little in my mouth when he resorts to politics that appeals to mouth breathers?
Oh...never mind...I answered my own question.
There's a reason why MTimes is ahead and why DWC is yesterday's virtual bird cage liner. It's clear Pat's clawing hard to work his way back after his fall from grace as a politically appointed government paycheck collector who abused his privileges. My only advice is there is no percentage in giving DWC and its author any more attention than he's struggling to generate for himself. The key to understanding the modern Republican network is it is no longer a political party. It is a noise machine at every level. It has totally marginalized itself, and Obama's recent polling result proves how incompetent and impotent these knuckleheads have become. There is no reason to reward this pitifal collection of hacks by giving them any kind of lip service. Ignore them and keep looking up. I think we're reaching a turning point.
Your spin is egregious.
Bree, I'd rather enjoy hearing more people shouting "capitalist pigs!" ;-)
I will see if I can work it into my arguments in the future. lol.
Pat has beaten Madville and the Democratic Party is finished in South Dakota. I am done here.
Without you Mr. kurtz they may thrive.
Gee whiz, did somebody say something wrong?
Rick, on this issue in particular, fighting Pat feels like fighting Sibby, or maybe the Westboro Baptist Church. He keeps repeating the same lie, constantly couched in weasel words like "potentially" or "possibilities". The lie gets some extra life from our attention. But we need to put at least one firm refutation on the record, don't we?
Cory, in answer to your question.... because Brendan probably feared a primary with Sandlin, and Sandlin just feared a primary over ideology.
But regardless, I think the following article speaks volumes to my concerns:
http://politicalsmokeout.tumblr.com/post/50989505347/politico-weiland-pick-spurs-daschle-reid-feud
If I were Weiland, I would blast email, post on Facebook and send direct mail that he's not Harry Reid's stooge in the Senate. Reid's unpopular in South Dakota with Democrats and Republicans for different reasons. Republicans dislike him because he's the slack-jawed puppet of the Obama administration. Democrats dislike him because he waffles on big corporate interests and is gun shy on too many key issues.
If I was Weiland, I would do the same. But that does not mean that Reid is wrong about the 2014 South Dakota Senate Race.... if you want to win.
Respectfully, I disagree. Weiland is very capable. He has developed an impressive list of experience and qualifications in business, government and community development. He's bright, genuine, friendly, talented and a natural leader. Only a lunatic would believe he'd jump into a U.S. Senate race as a placeholder for somebody else, which is one fat whopper being shopped around on a certain blog. Makes as much sense as Mike Rounds willing to be the placeholder for Kristi Noem.
And if Harry Reid wants another waffler in the Democratic caucus who won't stand up on principle or won't take the fight to the obstructionists holding up progress in Congress, too bad. Maybe he can find a reincarnated Max Baucus in a different state.
For Republican operatives, marginalizing Weiland before their own party jumps into a bitter primary between Rounds and Noem is the name of the game. I get it. Might as well try to win it before the general election starts. They'll need some excuse to explain why South Dakota should send three obstructionists to fight the President and prevent anything from getting done for the next three or more years.
I wish you Democrats would strengthen your party by supporting some Blue Dogs. Not because I'm conservative - but because it hurts the citizens of this state by subjecting them to one party rule and the inevitable corruption. The path you are on is extremely shortsighted.
Totally off topic, again, but why is Larry so pissed at Cory?
Bree - The Blue Dogs was a cheap gimmick, and I feel confident from the destruction of the Blue Dog clic in 2010 that the concept of giving voters a choice of a phony Republican would fail pathetically, just as Harry S Truman warned. I don't believe in radicalizing the elected officials as a tool to radicalize a base of voters, because that is short sighted and phony. But where do the Eisenhower/Janklow Republicans have to go? How much longer can they be confronted at Lincoln Day dinners as RINOs?
Larry is right about his party. You guys have completely lost it.
Rick, is there any chance Reid could be playing along with exactly that game and trying to give Weiland some independent daylight?
Bree, I've got to roll with Rick. SHS was a Blue Dog, and she lost to Noem. Heidepriem acted like a Blue Dog, and he lost to Daugaard. The SD Dems who won in 1932 acted like Blue Dogs, and they lost to the GOP in 1934 while Dems everywhere else in the Country rode FDR's New Deal to a generation of dominance. SD Dems need to differentiate themselves from the Republicans. We then also need to bust our chops making the case to people that we are different not because we are über-liberal, but because we better represent the fiscal and moral principles of South Dakotans.