Last updated on 2012.02.26
Back in September, some agitators bearing the faint scent of Birch published the "South Dakota Freedom Index," an attempt to score South Dakota's state legislators by their fidelity to "freedom" on ten key votes during the 2011 Legislative Session. That scorecard concluded that Republican stalwarts like Senators Larry Tidemann, Dan Lederman, and Al Novstrup don't defend freedom any better than Democrats like Senators Angie Buhl and Billie Sutton. On the House side, the Freedom Index scored Republican Rep. Roger Hunt the same as Democratic Rep. Frank Kloucek and gave GOP Rep. Charlie Hoffman only a 50%. (Come on: Rep. Hoffman reads blogs: he's got to be at least a 60%!)
Now another anonymous scoring of South Dakota's legislators hits the blogwaves. A new (registered last Wednesday) website, SDRepublican.org, e-mails me and who knows how many other media outlets seeking publicity for its new Republican Platform Voting Scorecard (sorted by district and by score). This scorecard rates each of South Dakota's 105 legislators based on their votes on 20 bills from the 2011 Session and the fidelity of those votes to the South Dakota GOP Platform.
The results? As was the case with September's Freedom Index, the Republican Platform Voting Scorecard gives the highest scores in the House to Reps. Betty Olson and Stace Nelson, who each cast just one wrong vote (both on corporate welfare). Rep. Kloucek is the highest-ranked House Democrat, voting the Republican party line on 60% of the sampled votes (Frank! We need to talk!). 22 of the House's 50 Republicans score below 50%. The least Republican Republican: Rep. Tad Perry from Ft. Pierre, who scores a meager 15%, tied with Democratic Reps. Larry Lucas and Sue Wismer for rock-bottom (way to go, Larry and Sue!).
Only five Senators manage to score higher than 50% fidelity with the GOP platform. Amazingly, the second-highest score, 57%, goes to Democrat leader Senator Jason Frerichs. 13 of the Senate's 30 Republicans score worse than all of the Senate Democrats in fiedlity to their own platform.
The two scorecards track pretty closely: dropping Rep. Elaine Elliott (who missed too many votes to get a Freedom Index score), the two scorecards get a 0.81 correlation, which means it's a safe bet that if a legislator scores high on one, he or she will score high on the other.
The folks behind the Republican scorecard apparently represent the far right wing of the Republican party. On their scorecard, they mention "Bills against ObamaCare, Illegal Immigration and Sharia Law" as key legislation that should have been given a floor vote. Picking those three issues makes these folks sound like Jason Bjorklund, auditioning for conservative talk radio rather than focusing on bread-and-butter state-level issues.
Speaking of Bjorklund, while steadfastly refusing to identify themselves, the SDRepublican.org agitators provide links to an assortment of 9/12 Projects, Tea Parties, and theocrats in South Dakota. These right-wing leanings certainly color the group's interpretation of the Republican Party platform.
But these folks claim the mantle of "Republican," so it's as much their platform as anyone else's. Let's see now if these scorecarders will step out from behind their curtain and send delegates to next summer's convention with their scorecards in hand to ride herd on the RINOs.
Update 18:33 MST: As I review my comments for the day, I find Steve Sibson citing Rep. Charlie Hoffman's 37% GOP Platform score four hours before I received the media release on SDRepublican.org. Coincidence?
I am a little shy about commenting on this; however, when the only person that even mentions the GOP Party Platform is a freshman legislator trying to talk others out of raising taxes on the House floor, maybe something is wrong in the state of Denmark...
Vote Republican: it's easier than thinking.
I think the lesson here is to not blame conservatives for what the leadership of the GOP votes for. Another lesson, the conservative base needs to understand that what their party says and what they do are not the same. Yes, they are Democrats who better at looking out for the little than the RINOs.
"The folks behind the Republican scorecard apparently represent the far right wing of the Republican party. On their scorecard, they mention â€œBills against ObamaCare, Illegal Immigration and Sharia Lawâ€ as key legislation that should have been given a floor vote. "
So you have to be in the "far right wing of the Republican party" in order to defend the Law of the Land?
No, Steve, you have to be a far-right-winger to spend time in the South Dakota Legislature obsessing over fundamentally federal issues that the Legislature can't do much about or, in the case of Sharia Law, boogeymen that aren't a practical threat to South Dakota.
Stace: don't be shy! Fortune favors the bold!
So Cory, you refuse to defend the Tenth Amendment?
No, Steve, I refuse to defend wasting the Legislature's time with fringe issues that don't directly affect our daily quality of life or the effective, practical operations of state government.
So "No, Steve" means you do not defend the Constitution's Tenth Amendment? That that freedom isn't worth your time? The analysis shows that you are in line the the SDGOP leadership, and you are at odds with the populists (you know, the ones that watch out for the little guy) within the Democrat Party.
Pew: "The American public is sharply divided in its judgments about the sweeping changes in the structure of the American family that have unfolded over the past half century. About a third generally accepts the changes; a third is tolerant but skeptical; and a third considers them bad for society."
Read: red state failure.
At the risk of going down another Sibby rabbit hole (I am NOT going to, Cory) the 10th Amendment was considered superfluous from the git-go. Its inclusion in the bill of rights has always done more harm to our nation than good, and was essentially rendered moot by the Civil War.
The Constitution says what it says and the 10th Amendment doesn't change, add, or alter any of the meaning of it.
But that won't ever stop secessionists like Sib from trying to assert that it does.
Didn't then, didn't now.
But let's be clear.
By over-asserting the rights affirmed in the 10th Amendment, you are essentially arguing against the very reason the Constitution was written in the first place.
Joe Scarborough is angry at the simple minded that run around screaming RINO. He starts his Politico column this way:
"The insult du jour for Republican candidates this election cycle is being labeled a RINO, a Republican in Name Only. Unfortunately, the insult has been so overused lately itâ€™s been rendered meaningless."
You can read it here and even take the quiz if you want.
Bill, in other words, the Founders just created another European tyranny.
Jana, and RINOs are simply doing what the Hamiltonians wanted to do...create another European tyranny.
We did not create a Christian Nation and we did not create a secular nation...the Founders created a Masonic Nation, with the French Templars providing the blueprint...Liberty, Fraternity, Equality, or in other words a "New Age Theocracy" for the New World.
Sibby, so you also disagree with the Tea Party and the radical right's strong belief that this is a Christian nation? That's going to make Gordie Howie's group really angry...
Jana, I think Sibby might be happier if he moved to Israel. So might Howie. Armageddon is just right down the road over there.
Let me pick an issue that would get me on the bad list (HB1198-provide for the state and local enforcement of certain federal immigration laws, to criminalize the knowing transportation, concealment, or solicitation of illegal aliens, and to provide penalties therefor) which had the following clauses:
1) Would require every law enforcement officer to enforce federal immigration laws to the full extent permitted by federal law, without regard to other laws. For instance, it would be impossible for a detective to say to a witness of a rape "I'm not interested in your legal status and won't determine it if you testify." In other words, federal immigration laws become the preeminent law for local law enforcement over rape, murder, and child molestation.
2) Any citizen can an action in circuit court to challenge any law enforcement officer who doesn't make federal immigration pre-eminent law enforcement objective. If they find out they cut a deal for cooperation on a rape, the local sheriff or police department could be fined up to five thousand dollars for each day that the policy has remained in effect after the filing of an action pursuant to this section. I thought this type of matter was why we elect sheriff's and mayors (to hold accountable on how they are enforcing the law).
3) Any person who gives transportation (even to a hospital) if the person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that the alien has come to, has entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law. Any violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor. In other words, if one works or volunteers at a soup kitchen (for me following my Christian obligation to feed the hungry without condition (they are hungry, period), suspect they might be illegal but don't ask them any question, they have a heart attack and I take them to the hospital, I will be committing a misdemeanor and they local authorities will have no choice but to prosecute me (see #1) unless they want their office pursued under #2.
4) Any person who volunteers at a shelter for abused women and knows or suspects the person might be an illegal alien is guilty of a a Class 1 misdemeanor.
The people who put this together justified their position relying on the following platform planks.
5.13 The South Dakota Republican Party believes the free flow of information empowers and energizes a republic and serves to keep the process of government honest and robust. (This only listed because Stace Nelson believes that the smoke-out rule needs to be changed and the matter officially died when a smoke-out failed)
6.1 The South Dakota Republican Party supports the fair and equal administration of justice to protect the general public and their property, to assist the victims of crime, punish as well as rehabilitate offenders and assist in the transition of offenders into society. (If one believes a federal law is not the pre-eminent priority of law enforcement, to support this bill would be in violation of Plank 6.1. I guess from this group, they believe they get to determine what is the best way to "protect the general public" and the biggest law enforcement problem isn't drugs, rape, or theft but illegal immigration. Furthermore, I didn't know victims of crime were more concerned about immigration status than those who actually commit crimes AGAINST people like theft or rape or molestation.)
6.6 The South Dakota Republican Party supports a strong and reasonable approach to homeland security while protecting our borders; and maintaining a secure state and nation. (I find it interesting these people assert that transporting, feeding, and "harboring" abused women is of such critical threat to our nation they can criminalize people who desire to follow their religious obligation to feed the hungry and shelter the homeless as described in Plank 7.2 or are trying to honor Plank 7.1 which considers the family the "central core of society and the foundation of our state and nation."
First of all, any scorecard that has over half the party opposing the platform tells you one of two things:
1) About 80% of our GOP legislature are not very Republican including our Governor.
2) The selection of issues is selective (my view) because only 25 of 71 planks are referenced and here are what this group thinks is important in each section.
Section 1: Agriculture and Natural Resources and Energy. The only important plank issues for this group regarding our biggest industry is with regard to hunting and access of law enforcement to land. Ag economy, markets, environment, renewable energy, forest management, river management--- NOTHING.
Section 2: Economic Development and Jobs. They only endorse "fair competition" with regard to very large capital projects, Ellsworth, and the National Guard tuition incentive. Expanding business, job creation, tourism, fair labor laws, secret ballot on union organizing, expanded telecommunication, science lab, railroads and transportation, energy independence--NOTHING
Section 3: Health and Human Services: Here the issue is Obamacare (and anything that looks like it) and related to midwives. All other matters of health and protection of those who can't take care of themselves-- NOTHING. (by the way, might HB1198's prohibition on sheltering illegal abused women/children or transporting illegals to the hospital run against this section? LOL)
Section 4: Education and Cultural Affairs. Here the defining issues are excusing kids from school, history requirements and the Regents Performance fund. Broader quality of education, access, reading, safe environment, technology, art and culture--NOTHING
Section 5: Government Affairs. While they mention a couple of select tax/fee or non cuts to taxes, they don't talk about the broader reality they dealt with the revenue problem by cutting spending and not increasing the sales tax.
Section 6: Public Safety and Security. I wonder why this is the most referenced section (despite being the section with next fewest planks)? LOL Based on the bills they selected that reference this section, the preeminent safety issues are drug testing welfare recipients, illegal aliens and gun permits for legal aliens (I guess this explains why they want federal immigration laws to be the highest priority of our police and sheriff departments). All other crimes or safety issues-- NOTHING
Section 7: Family and Community Values. Here the only two matters are grandparents rights and the waiting period for an abortion. Freedom of Religion (except to criminalize following basic Christian precepts to care for those who are poor) and probably a hundred other bills that addressed these matters-- NOTHING.
Sidenote: Without regard to which house voted on it, based on what I know, I would have voted 50% with this group placing me barely with the majority. On most I would have voted with this group, I'd have been wholly consistent with my understanding of GOP principles (not that those who voted the other way are necessarily bad Republicans. On those I voted against this group, in most cases I think my position is the more Republican based on broader principles. Think about it. The sections that affected business were actually more regulation and obligation.
But more important, look at all the Republican issues (broad taxation, spending cuts, regulation, jobs, etc.) this group ignored.
Bottom line: This group has a very narrow and select view of what it means to be a Republican.
Jana, I now understand that the Religious Right's Dominion Theology is basically the same as the Left's Social Gospel. Both use the Postmillennial eschatology that is not compatible with Fleming's "Armageddon" which is based on premillenial eschatology. So his false accusation is way off base.
Now politically, both the Democratic leadership and the GOP leadersip want the same thing...a bigger ever more controlling central government, whether that be national or international. The GOP Platform Scorecard helps bear that truth out. Both parties are being directed by wealthy international interests that some call the New World Order.
The Religous Right better wake and understand their Kingdom now theology fits perfectly into the one-world religion the NWO needs to finish their agenda. Then Bill, you can look for the Second Advent. I think we are still not there yet. But logic tells us we are getting closer every day.
Troy, then show us your all in scorecard. Or are you arguing that the GOP Platform in not consistent in principle?
"But logic tells us we are getting closer every day."
No, it doesn't, Sibby. There is nothing "logical" about any of it (except perhaps for some form of conceptual internal consistency akin to how many angels can dance on the head of a pin).
i.e. It's merely a difference in the interpretation of an irrational mystical, supernatural, dogmatic belief system. If you want empirical, evidence-based "logical", you'll have to go with Cory's "scientific determinism." (At least I think that's how one would describe his worldview, right, Cory?)
I will show you how I think I would have voted (without benefit of deep study or testimony of consequences not evident on the surface) so it is generally qualified in that regard. This said, I am not convinced these are "critical" matters for which to judge people with regard to following the platform and in some cases, the sample is too small, and in some cases, I don't think they have captured the broader GOP platform for which I think GOP "fidelity" should be measured. Additionally, in a few cases, my rationale for my votes with them is different than their rationale as I think there are better solutions.
The following are the matters I'd have voted as this group thinks I should as a Republican.
HB1061, 1133, 1149, 1178, 1206, 1217
SB22, 38, 43, 55, 188
The following are matters I'd have NOT voted as this group thinks I should as a Republican
HB1198, 1230,1235, 1248
The following are one's I am uncertain as the matter requires more study for me to know either way.
HB1120, 1153, 1192, 1255
"The following are oneâ€™s I am uncertain as the matter requires more study for me to know either way."
Troy, I hope that means you understand the about of time, effort, and thought that went into the analysis. Once one is presented that is better, then we should give this work serious consideration.
Bill, I thought you were against pushing your beliefs onto others? Or does that only apply to those who are in your fraternity?
Well Troy, I guess that proves it. You, the Governor and the vast majority of Republicans elected by a vote of the people of South Dakota, get failing grades.
Guessing the SDRepublican.org people are warming up their candidates to primary everyone with a failing grade.
Of course when you look at the big 3 of ObamaCare, Illegal Immigration and Sharia Law, the following Republican icons and current candidates for President would fail, including Reagan, Bushes I and II, Gingrich, Perry, Romney, Janklow, etc. etc.
I think what might be tripping you guys up is intellect over blind allegiance to Glen Beck and not having your knowledge limited to positions that will fit on a bumper sticker. That'll teach you for thinking!
So I'm wondering if the people behind SDRepublicans.org will come out in force (and in person) at the next GOP convention. Any chance it could be televised?
"Of course when you look at the big 3 of ObamaCare, Illegal Immigration and Sharia Law, the following Republican icons and current candidates for President would fail, including Reagan, Bushes I and II, Gingrich, Perry, Romney, Janklow, etc. etc."
So Reagan was in favor of Sharia Law and breaking immigration laws?
And if Jana is right and the Democratic presidents are also in favor of Sharia Law, breaking immigration laws, and forcing citizens to buy products they don't want...then it only proves by point that both presidential candidates are determined by the Council on Foreign Relations, the British arm for the New World Order.
I am also amazed when far-left political activists like Cory Heidelberger and Bill Fleming defend these RINOs.
Miss one and you fail...
"Miss one and you fail"
So you believe in being god-like and thereby perfect?
Bill how does that fit your monistic unity theology?
I told you Sibby, no rabbit hole for me today, brother. You're on your own down there, Alice.
Sibby, I like listening to your commentary and find it interesting but you lose me when you start talking about the illuminatti or free masons.
Mike, thanks for the compliment. I have found that historical analysis is incomplete without including the impact of secret societies. I know it is difficult because of the secrecy.
Secret societies include the LDS 'church,' right, Steve? Socialism incarnate. Joseph Smith was blasted on white lightning when he received the Holy Spirit...charismatic, yet mellow, er Moroni.
St. Paul was blasted on opium, Jesus of Nazareth was blasted on opium. Temporal Lobe Epilepsy: Holy Spirit or mental illness?
What rabbit hole?
Take your pick, IP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_hole
Again we see the attempts to destract from this RINO issue coming from the far-left.
destruck, detract or distract: which is it, Sibby?
I fully understand why these folks posted this without laying any claims personally to it. I disagree with some of the bills they have on the list; however, I fully support them, or any other concerned citizens, to compile a list of bills that concerned them and to attempt to educate the public.
Their killer statement that if a bill is viewed as flawed, as alleged above, every legislator has the ability to offer corrections at every stage of the process.
These folks had a right to throw something together and put it out. From what I have seen, the votes are what they are. I know that this has caused a stink from one end of the state to the other.
Lastly, these folks crammed a ton of information on two pages. The reality is they can only get so much in one spot before they lose people or defeat their resources. It was their project, they had a right to put out the issues that stuck in their craw. Good on em. I don't see any claims that this was a scientific endeavor. I do see where they included tons of links for people to explore the bills and legislators.
I think this one is fairer than the freedom index; however, I think the results on the Senate side are overly heavy simply due to the bills highlighted.
Been a rotten day, good night.
larry, thanks for the constructive response...it is "distract" so that the truth can remain hidden. Sounds like something a secret society would do (grin). Is it a rabbit hole or a coyote hole?
Stace, I will grant that the platform scorecard is fairer than the Freedom Index in that it covers more bills. A scorecard covering more bills and more of the platform would be even better. Yes, time and resources are limited, and the scorecard creators made choices to shorten their work. But those choices reveal clear biases and color the results.
Troy, thank you for your in-depth analysis. The radical agitator in me wants the anons behind SDRepublican.org to come out and make life hard for the GOP in the primary. The regular guy in me sees that mainstream Republicans like you (I hope that's not an insult, Troy) are more than ready to beat these right-wingers back with some common sense.
As Troy notes, the scorecard authors chose fringe issues, little niggling hobbyhorses and talking points, and ignored numerous core issues... very much like Sibby harping on the Tenth Amendment and Masons while the rest of us try to craft practical policy. Perhaps the scorecard authors can press some useful conversations with mainstream Republicans, but they're going to need to discuss a broader range of issues to get the attention of more than three guys at Pizza Ranch shooting the bull about gold and silver.
Cory, you are a true friend of the RINOs who use Big Government to fund their Big Business. Thought you were against HB1230, or is it you want the money to go to education so that Big Business can continue to receive free job training, while their future employees go into debt paying the ever escalating tuitions.
Steve, I am against HB 1230. I would love to hear from South Dakota Republicans as to how many consider me their "true friend". (Actually, I'd like to think we South Dakotans could all be friends even as we conduct our vigorous policy debates... but I don't think that's the kind of friendship Sibby is talking about.)
I have a few questions/comments on your statements. Any explanation or clarification would be appreciated and no intent to attack you.
"I fully understand why these folks posted this without laying any claims personally to it."
Stace, these people have selected issues dear to them but ignored other matters also covered in the platform. I think in the interest of transparency, we should know who thinks these are matters of such importance to claim they are "remiss in representing Republican principles and values."
"I fully support them, or any other concerned citizens, to compile a list of bills that concerned them and to attempt to educate the public."
I agree with you with regard to the right for any concerned citizen group to devise a scorecard. However, I don't think it appropriate for any group to claim they get to define what are core Republican principles or interpret the platform. Maybe the party but not a anonymous group claiming to be omniscient with regard to what is a good Republican.
"Their killer statement that if a bill is viewed as flawed, as alleged above, every legislator has the ability to offer corrections at every stage of the process."
Yes, they have the ability but they also have the choice to discern the bill might be inherently flawed (ala my view on HB1198) or this is not of such vital priority to be the fight they want to make that particular day.
"I do see where they included tons of links for people to explore the bills and legislators."
This is the best thing about this. It allowed me (and anyone else even slightly interested) in exploring both the bills they selected and their rationale for why they think their view was consistent with the platform. In its simplicity, it is quite good. I wish they had the same attitude with regard to disclosing who they are though.
"Stace, these people have selected issues dear to them but ignored other matters also covered in the platform."
Troy, how do you know that? Again, I ask you to produce your own more comprehensive scorecard. At least provide votes that you believe to be important to you, explain which vote adheres to the GOP platform and see how that statistically alters the current scorecard. I am sure your friend Cory can help you out. Just be careful, he tends to speak out of both sides of his mouth.
And Cory, how can you say illegal immigration and Obamacare are not relevant issues? Are you not on the opposite of the stated GOP position on those issues? And if so, shouldn't the grassroots of the GOP question their representatives for not carrying through on the GOP position?
"very much like Sibby harping on the Tenth Amendment and Masons"
Cory, why do you continually harp on Christian Theocrats and want to ignore the New Age Theocracy that the Masons have created? Could it be that you agree with the policy positions of the New Age Theocrats?
My affiliation with the Masons extends no further than dreaming about buying their old lodge in downtown Madison and turning it into the Madville Times World Headquarters with a small-business incubator, art gallery, visitor center, and a giant neon sign. I do not know the policy positions of any Masons. I participate in no theology, New Age, Old Age, or otherwise. Illegal immigration and ObamaCare are not issues that should occupy most of our Legislature's time. Anyone who wants to join the GOP and question, enhance, or change its platform are welcome to do so, but if they spend their time dealing with fringe issues instead of meat-and-potato budget issues, they will lead the Republican Party back to minority status.
Troy makes a keen point: legislators are not obliged to propose amendments to turn every proposal floated into workable legislation. Some bills deserve to be killed on sight, at the earliest opportunity, before they take up any more of the Legislature's valuable time.
So the DWC posts this little nugget looking for who is SDRepublican.org and links it back to Stace.
Stace? Is what Dakota War College claims true that you behind the SDRepublican.org website and behind the whole test that makes you #1?
Sure makes your previous comments seem a little...well you know...
Sorry, here's the link and some key quotes.
The link: http://dakotawarcollege.com/archives/23448
And here's the end of the post from DWC:
"Just like the sdrepublican.org website, stacenelson.com is actually hosted as a subdirectory (http://svn1967.fatcow.com/svn/) under the main site at http://svn1967.fatcow.com.
Iâ€™m not saying that Stace is involved in this ranking of Republicans, which has him at the top of the rankings in the house, aside from the fact that it appears that all three websites share the same web space at svn1967.fatcow.com.
But the State Representative born in 1967, whose initials happen to be SVN, might be the recipient of some pointed questions regarding this web convergence. His email is also an indicator of its own email@example.com."
I really don't care if Stace is behind it. Maybe he built the site and let some John Birch Society folks rank everyone for him or maybe a group of conservatives want to make a point and Stace built the site? I don't care. Stace is a good guy and cares about his country. Sure we all like to beat each other up on blogs but what does it really matter?
The point is that the GOP often forgets that they aren't much different than any other party or political power hungry group.
Mike...you say "what does it really matter?"
Seriously? You can't see how this type of deception from an elected official could matter? Really?
What of the loyal and smart Republicans he was trying to disparage?
And lastly, do you really think Stace is in collusion with the John Birch Society? The John Birch Society? What made you bring that up anyway?
But since you did, it reminds me of this comment from conservative columnist Kathleen Parker.
"Moreover, where Buckley tried to rid the GOP of fringe elements, notably the John Birch Society, todayâ€™s conservatives have let them back in. The 2010 Conservative Political Action Conference was co-sponsored by the Birchers."
You can read the whole thing here:
I'm guessing Stace will clear all of this up in the morning.
It gets better!
The War College just posted this: "Nelson says removal from Ag committee corrupt"
The good news for Stace is that Herman Cain has had a worse week.
Maybe they could get together over pizza and meet some new waitresses.
So Mike...does your statement: "The point is that the GOP often forgets that they arenâ€™t much different than any other party or political power hungry group." also apply to Stace and his friends?
Well well, the GOP Establishment web site and the far-left Jana team up to change the conversation away from the substance of the issues into personal attacks as to who did the work. And the purpose? To invoke retaliation.
Mr. Nelson has denied being associated with this group or website. There may be evidence this is not true. I hope Mr. Nelson will clear this up.
"Steve, I am against HB 1230."
Note that only one Republican and all Democrats voted against it. Note that the scoreboard uses the SDGOP platform to argue that the bill should habe been opposed. Explain how all the Democrats in the South Dakota 2011 Legislation support the position of a group you call right wing theocrats. And I do not believe you to be an offical member of the New Age Theocrats. In his book, From Many Shall Come In My Name, Ray Yungan says, "Few people anymore are not affected by the New Age. Its influence is found in medicine, business, education, the media. and religion." That was wrote in 2007 Cory. I do not mean you harm by pointing out New Age Theocracy, but instead want to warn you and others about what is really going on. Very much the same mindset of those how put the scorecard together and now fear the rath to be unlessed by the wealthy special and powerful interests that run this state, this country, and moving towards world-wide control. They do not want the truth to be told.
And Bill, if you want to invokde paranoid conspiracy at this point, direct it at Jana and her fear of the John Birch Society conspiracy.
Troy, I am still waiting for your comprehensive scorecard. Or are you instead are going to spend your time helping the SDGOP Establishment distract us from the what and redirect it to the who?
Republicans quarreling gives me goosebumps. Think there'll be blood-letting, Steve?
I have no authority to arrogantly select what issues define a Republican. Only primary voters have this authority. Furthermore, I have no desire to make such a claim. In the end, I'm darn proud of this Legislature's willingness to deal with the revenue shortfall by making spending cuts and not increase taxes. In my mind, this makes the whole bunch darn good Republicans and I especially praise the leadership of both houses and the Governor.
"Iâ€™m darn proud of this Legislatureâ€™s willingness to deal with the revenue shortfall by making spending cuts and not increase taxes."
There was no revenue shortful, if you include all sources of funding including federal. And they increased our license plate fees and structured the state aid to education formula so that the local property owners pay more to fund education. Your rhetoric can fool the uniformed, who are being lied to by the media with the same BS. The money is being redirected to Big Business...HB1230 is proof.
Comments are closed.