In Monday's conversation with newsmen from that Sioux Falls paper, Democrat Matt Varilek said that Rep. Kristi Noem can't reduce the budget deficit with her Grover Norquist fantasies of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires paid for by spending cuts on the backs of the poor. Rep. Noem compounded her own fiscal foolishness by calling for more spending on Native American programs, crop insurance, and the production tax credit for wind power (not spending per se, but certainly an up-front revenue decreaser).
Rep. Noem just sent me a Newspeak campaign flyer saying only she can balance the budget. However, the flyer shows she can't even manage her own campaign money properly. What meathead on Team Noem buys an address database that wastes campaign dollars by sending glossy brochures out to unpersuadable voters like me?
Don't listen to the flyers; listen to economists. A new survey of 236 members of the National Association for Business Economics finds a majority of those experts say Matt Varilek's approach of combining spending cuts with increased taxes is the best way to reduce the deficit. And those tax breaks for the rich to which Rep. Noem is so committed are boosting the debt without much promise of economic stimulus.
CH--I'm surprised that you missed the opportunity to whack Noem for the use of a hair-dressing term, "cut and dry," when "cut and dried" was clearly the intention. You're losing a step.
The thing is Republicans behind closed doors understand they need to find increased revenues to go with the budget cuts. They just don't want to say it out loud.
This country does have a spending problem.
The only reason that we are not feeling the deficit (and national debt) pain right now is because interest rates are very, very low. When rates return to their historic norms, the yearly interest payments will be one of the greatest line items in the budget. Both House candidates are clueless in what is coming down the road, the scale of the fiscal threat to our country and the inevitability of having to someday pay for spending beyond our means. You cannot close your eyes and blame the other guy. We are all responsible.
Michael, cutting taxes will make it worse. That is the point. One candidate supports this, one doesn't. Did you happen to see the skit on SNL this week about undecided voters?
The problem is we don't have enough statesmen/women in office. The 2-year election cycle discourages statesmanship in the house. You do the right thing (raise taxes) and your opponent demagogues it. We know Kristi's not a states(wo)man. She's a talking points pinhead and a showhorse and a demagogue extraordinare. She's a typical politician of the most worthless variety.
Varilek has the possibility of becoming a statesman, but his 2-step on gay marriage shows he's not there yet. We all know though that if you want to make a difference you need to get into office to do it, and you choose what issues to wage your battles on. I just want to see an honest discussion. Varilek is the closest to offering that up while Noem dissembles.
and Noem is still going to win.
Brother Beaker, Noem gives me so much to work with, I sometimes can't get to it all.
DB: you keep chanting those reassurances to yourself. I'm not convinced. Neither is Noem. She's running scared, and ought to be.
The SD Democratic Party just put out another e-mail explaining why Noem won't win. She's not just skipping ag committee, she's also missed 77% of her Indian & Alaska Native Affairs Subcommittee, and didn't even show up once between 5/2011 and 6/2012. When she does show up it's "Jabber, Jabber, Jabber". SD is not represented. Noem simply doesn't have that good old South Dakota work ethic. Voters will send her home to work on that.
I just saw one of her commercials and she was actually using Booker in it. I don't really approve of politicians using their kids in their ads. Let the kids be kids.
I saw a commercial with Varilek and his wife and kids in the background. Both sides are guilty of it ;)
Yup,. and Stephanie did it with little Zachary in 2010, and I didn't like it then, either.
http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/profile/person?personId=12125144&targetid=profile
Here's the stellar resume Matt Varilek doesn't want you to find out about. His plans for deficit reduction involve a National Energy Tax, AKA "Cap & Trade." Noem may have disappointed us, but don't let your disappointment make you vote for Varilek!
still going to win.....I bet that really grinds your gears that the truth is staring you right in the face.
From what I can remember of the other commercials the kids weren't acting. In the one that I saw of Noems, Booker was acting, and grinning for the camera. I can see kind of family picture type thing, but to have the kids performing is another thing. I have a campaign bulletin from one of my, I think he would be my 2nd cousin who was running for something in MN, and there is a family picture on that. This was back before politicians were campaigning on TV-----wouldn't it be nice if it would go back to that?
acting and grinning for the camera.....say it isn't so. Should I be outraged?....bahaha.....bad hair and horses....blah blah blah.
Dan, I didn't mention bad hair. I do say Noem is more concerned with image than substance. And you have offered no rebuttal of the facts here, just noise... rather like Noem's distracting rhetoric.
I'm just keeping up with par for this place. You got a flyer from a Republican.....OMIGOD......That must make their entire campaign inept.....Brilliant....Maybe you should be worried about Obama's tax breaks. You'd think you would care about things that have actually happened, rather than sit and speculate and make yourself look stupid. Noem will win and your empty criticism will never stand with anyone intelligent to look through the bs.