Press "Enter" to skip to content

District 12 Democrat Knudson Gets Five Notable Non-Family GOP Endorsements

Last updated on 2012.12.24

Democratic candidate for District 12 House Mike Knudson gets a nice campaign endorsement from his dad and five other well-known Republicans:

Knudson for State House District 12 flyer, endorsements from six South Dakota Republicans, October 2012
Knudson for State House District 12 flyer, endorsements from six South Dakota Republicans, October 2012

Dave Knudson, Jan Nicolay, Mitch Richter, Casey Murschel, Joni Cutler, and Gene Abdallah—six Republicans endorsing a Democrat who dares advertise on the Madville Times? Do we need to take someone's temperature? Or do rather radically right District 12 Republican Reps. Manny Steele and Hal Wick need to start looking for something else to do next January?

The anonymous SDGOP Platform Accountability Project blasts the Republicans on this mailing. This anonymous branch of the unaccountable insurgency against the party leadership cites the Knudson card as "just the latest proof of the fact that liberals and 'progressives' have infiltrated the Republican party at the highest levels."

Dagnabit! If my fellow liberals and progressives have infiltrated the party, why haven't they sent me a memo? Why am I not feeling empowered by this successful conspiracy?

Now if we can get those six Republicans to all throw in for Susan Randall in District 12, too, then maybe we can talk about a successful left-wing insurgency.


  1. Ellen VanBurskirk 2012.10.25

    We all know that Stace Nelson is behind the SDGOP Platform Accountability Project. What concerns me is the language on Stace's own website when explaining his stance on abortion.

    "I am against abortion in all cases.

    For the sake of discussion, in the very rare documented rape/incest unwanted pregnancy cases, and if a woman's life was truly in danger due to documented medical complications, an exception could be allowed by court order if sought by a victim.

    I am for legislation outlawing the other 99.99% of the abortions currently conducted.
    I pray for those who are considering an abortion, and offer to discuss the matter with them. I pray for all who are afflicted by this matter and pray for the day when this trial is taken from us.
    He says he is against abortion in all cases. Then he says, "For the sake of discussion, in the very rare documented rape/incest unwanted pregnancy cases, and if a woman's life was truly in danger due to documented medical complications, an exception could be allowed by court order if sought by a victim."
    So a woman would need to get a court order to receive medical care? What if the woman is bleeding out, does she have to wait to get a court order? What a scary thought.

  2. Stace Nelson 2012.10.25

    Rep Manny Steele has a proven voting record of supporting Republican principles and the SDGOP. He is one of the nicest people you will ever meet and the type of honest good people that we need in our legislature. All the money and RINOs that young Mr Knudson can trot out will not change that.

    If SD Republicans needed any further proof that their Republican values are under attack by people who have infiltrated their party, here it is.

  3. Stace Nelson 2012.10.25

    @Ellen VanBurskirk I received an email announcing the bills that were being considered just like many other legislators as well as Republicans across the state. I forwarded it on to groups and people that I know also forwarded their input back to the person(s) originating the endeavor. I agreed with their lists and their input and I voted on a lot of the bills in question. That little bit of involvement does not make it mine. The voting records are the responsibility of the individual legislators. It is not my site, I never put it up, never designed it, never paid for, don't know for sure who is behind it, and I don't care. I am proud of my voting record there, and in totality, especially on pro-life issues. :-D

  4. Jana 2012.10.25

    Just for fun Stace, would you support a personhood bill in SD?

  5. Stace Nelson 2012.10.25

    @Jana depends on what it is in the bill.

  6. Ellen VanBurskirk 2012.10.25

    Stace, do you truly believe that a woman who is hemmorrhaging should have to wait for a court order to have a life saving abortion? BTW, Colin Powell endorsed President Obama, say good bye to the military vote.

  7. Jana 2012.10.25

    Let's keep it simple. Let's say it is what Paul Ryan co-sponsored, H.R. 212: Sanctity of Human Life Act.

    Here's a link to it if you weren't following the new laws that the GOP likes to inflict on know for more liberty, freedom and smaller government.

  8. Rorschach 2012.10.26

    That's a nice picture of Jan Nicolay. I always thought that she looks a lot like Ben Franklin.

  9. Dougal 2012.10.26

    I don't know Mike Knudson, but I know the six people who endorsed him. They are principled people whose standing is as firmly rooted in the real world as in the GOP political world. Each has carried far more water for their party and its elected leaders than their critics will ever shoulder. The fact they don't participate in smears as in the SDGOP PAP as a tool to beat down or persuade others doesn't mean they are lesser Republicans. The fact that some insecure, immature people feel they need a fake bully pulpit to raise up their own creepy profile says all anyone needs to know about them.

  10. Steve Sibson 2012.10.26

    "They are principled people"

    What are those principles?

  11. Stace Nelson 2012.10.26

    @Ellan Nonsense. Additionally, 99% of our troops today have no clue who Powell is. Not knowing he was "promoted" the night before to the JCS made me lose a meritorious Sgt promotion for not knowing him, looong time ago.

    @Jana I would have to study it more and hear both sides of the issue; however, I think it has merit on the face.

    @Dougal Ironic that I hear the same words of entitlement from such people as Troy Jones who claim such people have certain rights and liberties with GOP principles because they have "earned their bones" and carried water. Hogwash. these people are supposed to carry water for the grass roots Republicans that the party is supposed to be about, not cronys claiming to be one thing to get elected. Rep Manny Steele is respected across the state as one of the best Republican legislators in the legislature. Mr Knudson admittedly embraces positions on issues that are contrary to SD Republicans' and he is admittedly a Democrat. These "Republicans" endorsement of him over Rep Steele is a betrayal of the principles and values of the SDGOP.

  12. Steve Sibson 2012.10.26

    The card proves that RINO blood is thicker than the principles found in the SDGOP platform. It also proves just how much the RINO leadership of the SDGOP hates conservatives who wear their principles on their sleeves.

  13. Bob Mercer 2012.10.26

    The common link between five of the six endorsers is their position on legalized abortion.

  14. Justin 2012.10.26

    So 5 of the 6 endorsers actually represent the majority of South Dakotans? At least somebody in Pierre does.

  15. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Justin, I find it hard to believe that South Dakota would poll to the left of the nation on that issue. Where are you getting your numbers?

  16. Justin 2012.10.26

    From the two referendums on abortion bans we have had in this state. Where the heck are you getting your numbers?

  17. larry kurtz 2012.10.26

    "legalized abortion"=dog whistle.

  18. Owen Reitzel 2012.10.26

    Question Stace. Do you agree with the guy In Indiana you's running for the Senate who says that if a women is raped and becomes pregnant, is it God's will and she should have to have the baby?

  19. Justin 2012.10.26

    When both Mississippi and SD have failed to pass abortion ban referendums, I'm going go out on a limb and say that the comment that the majority of the country supports an abortion ban is asinine. It hasn't sunk in yet for the legislators in Pierre that think they represent a higher power than their constituents. In my opinion, there should be no higher power for somebody in representative government than his or her constituents.

  20. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Justin, referendums on abortions bans are not indicative of pro-life/pro-choice alignment. There are many reasons someone might have voted against an abortion ban, including but not limited to concerns about the wording of the law as well as concerns about the legal tactics involved.

  21. larry kurtz 2012.10.26

    ∴ Pro-Life®=dog whistle.

  22. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    I am shocked that a liberal would turn to highly unlikely "what if" scenarios to try to garner sympathy for morally distasteful agendas.

  23. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    I tell you what, the next time a woman hemmorhages to death due to rape while waiting on the emergency room table for a court-ordered abortion (apparently this is the future where we have access to accurate instanteous pregnancy tests), we'll write an exception into the future presumed anti-abortion law.

  24. Justin 2012.10.26

    In fact, it couldn't be any clearer, Bree.

    We have taken one vote without exceptions for rape and incest, and one vote with exceptions for rape and incest. The margin widened against an abortion ban in SD on the second vote with the exceptions.

    You may find a majority of people that say they don't approve of abortion, but SD has clearly stated in two separate elections that the majority of voters do not support a ban on abortions. That is what pro choice means: We believe the decision should be made by the individual, not by the government.

  25. Justin 2012.10.26

    Write all the exceptions you want, Bree. The people do not agree with you. How many votes and how wide of a margin will it take to prove to you that you don't get to make that decision for others?

  26. Stace Nelson 2012.10.26

    @Owen My position on abortion is crystal clear. If you would like to play gotcha games with someone, please find someone else to engage. If your question was serious, you would have addressed it to all three of the candidates in the race and could have at three different debates.

  27. Justin 2012.10.26

    "I am shocked that a liberal would turn to highly unlikely "what if" scenarios to try to garner sympathy for morally distasteful agendas."

    I am shocked that a conservative would be so deranged to believe that a majority of the people in America, let alone our little state, agree with her point of view when the votes have been in for a long time and they clearly do not.

  28. Justin 2012.10.26

    As a confirmed but non-practicing member of Stace's church, the LCMS, I know that they in fact do believe that God is omnipotent. So everything that happens is God's will. They also believe is is omnibenevolent, which is one of the main reasons I rejected the religious indoctrination of the LCMS.

    I highly doubt Stace is foolish enough to put it into the words that the gentleman from Indiana did. I get where he is coming from, though. If you believe in omnipotence, you have to accept that even things we perceive as bad happen due to God's will.

    I reject the premise, but I perfectly understand why he has to believe in what he said to rationalize such a paradox. Personally, I reject the premises.

  29. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Justin let me provide you with some simple logic. Voting NO on an abortion ban does not equate to a pro-choice viewpoint. I haven't seen a poll on pro-life vs. pro-choice in South Dakota but based on how the rest of the country has been polling over the last few years I highly doubt that South Dakota leans pro-choice.

    Calling me deranged does not improve your illogical argument.

  30. larry kurtz 2012.10.26

    bree's ip address look like julie's, cah?

  31. Justin 2012.10.26

    Ok, Brees.

    Give me the point of view of somebody that is for an abortion ban but voted against it except for cases of rape and incest....

    The vote against the referendum means people don't want the government making that decision. AKA Pro Choice.

    And taking the candidate from Indiana's point further.... Abortions happen, therefore God must want abortions to happen. Why are all the crazies standing in the way of God's will?

  32. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Larry, I don't know where Julie is, but I'm pretty sure my IP address is located near Pierre, SD.

  33. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    If you can't figure out why someone might vote against an abortion ban other than being pro-choice then why should I do your thinking for you? You won't get far in college with that mindset.

  34. Justin 2012.10.26

    College was a long time ago and I managed to graduate in the top 5% at Dartmouth.

    Will you at least grant that everybody who voted for an abortion ban is anti-choice?

  35. Taunia 2012.10.26

    People are way more interested in what's going on in my uterus than if I - the rest of me - eats, works, if my existing children are hungry/educated/ok, etc.

    If I sell access to my uterus on the street, I'm a whore.

    If everyone else jumps in there at their own discretion it's the definition of "smaller government".

    Me and my uterus are fine. Stay out.

  36. Taunia 2012.10.26

    Aside: hi Justin. Saw your comment to me on an earlier thread. Thanks, and it's good to see you again, also.

  37. Rorschach 2012.10.26

    What would Jesus do? Why obviously if he wanted to stop abortion he would run to Pontius Pilate and demand the passage of a law. This business of changing hearts and minds one at a time is way too much work. And we can't trust women with their own bodies, can we?

    But Bree, isn't Justin right? If the rape pregnancy is God's will, isn't the abortion also God's will? Did God give people free will so we could make our own decisions that send us north or south? Or is simply obeying laws enough for us to get through the pearly gates?

  38. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Justin, I'm not surprised to hear that you graduated from Dartmouth. I am surprised to hear that you are not a young man because most older men wouldn't be disrespectful enough to presume to tell a woman (you know, me, the one with the uterus) she is deranged for disagreeing with his viewpoint on abortion. But then again, we all mature in our own time.

  39. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.26

    Larry: no and no! Bree and Beranek both are distinct and honest commenters. I welcome them.

    Bree: We all missed you and your not quite logical arguments. ;-) Actually, I could accept a modified version of your statement: popular referenda do not clearly indicate personal opinions on abortion. They do, however, indicate popular sentiment toward legislative intrusions on your uterus, and South Dakotans have spoken pretty clearly, by 55–45 votes, on that question.

  40. larry kurtz 2012.10.26

    Sorry, CAH: just drawing fire in your absence. Carry on.

  41. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Taunia, I don't believe anyone on this forum harbors a desire to jump in your uterus. I might however, as a woman with her own womb (I don't usually write the word "uterus" more than once in a five minute period), disagree with you on the issue of whose life and freedom takes precedence - the mother or the unborn child. I hope you can accept the disagreement of a fellow woman without spiraling into bitter feminist rants.

  42. Taunia 2012.10.26

    Hey, Bree. Woman to woman. Why does your uterus trump my uterus?

    I'm not interested in yours. I'm pretty sure you have it handled. Why don't you trust me with mine?

  43. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Cory, I would accept that modified version. Nice try playing up to my libertarian side.

  44. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    I'm not a Calvinist Rorschach. And it's too late in the evening to get into a convoluted argument involving Pontius Pilate and uteruses. Normally your arguments are better anyway and less obviously incenseful.

  45. Taunia 2012.10.26

    Bree: I hope that you can accept that I'm not the microscopic set of cells that you reduce others to, to gain control of the situation. Aka: an incubator. If you cannot, I hope that you don't spiral into bitter anti-woman, pro-fetus rants.

  46. Owen Reitzel 2012.10.26

    it wasn't a gottach question Stace. is that what you believe?

  47. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Taunia, an American woman has the freedom to make her own reproductive choices. She has the freedom to have unprotected sex as a single woman while being well-educated about the possible consequences. She should suffer the consequences of her well-educated decisions. Cases of birth control actually failing are rare, and there are hundreds of thousands of hopeful couples who greatly desire to adopt. But no, instead of making the process of adoption easier in order to solve this problem of unwanted children due to irresponsible behavior, let's just continue to murder the innocent unborn.

  48. Taunia 2012.10.26

    Because what that woman does with her uterus is everyone's business.

    Anti woman, pro-fetus.

  49. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Well, I have looked it up and the plural of uterus is uteri. Oh well.

  50. Taunia 2012.10.26

    Bree believes women with unwanted pregnancies should "take one for the team" and repopulate for America's good. It's in everyone else's best interest, after all.

    I want to take women like Bree and hug them and talk to them and find the point in their lives where they ceded the idea that they aren't worth anything if they're not incubators. Really.

  51. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    However, the plural of "fetus" is Children of God.

  52. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Taunia, an incubator is a mechanical device used to keep eggs warm. I am a Mother.

  53. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.26

    [Linguistically ironic that the plural of us is i, isn't it?]

    "suffer the consequences"—oh! there are the magic words wrecking Bree's argument. For too many Republicans, banning abortion isn't about valuing life; it's about punishing women for having sex that they don't approve of. The fact that I don't like the sex you're having doesn't justify my using the power of the state to punish you for having that sex.

    Now Bree, do you really want to objectify fetuses as mere "consequences"? Here's your chance to redirect....

  54. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    I wouldn't consider pregnancy to be "suffering the consequences" personally Cory. In fact, I'm trying to get pregnant again. However, from the perspective of some women it would be considered "suffering." But these women have taken the required sex education classes and are well aware that it takes more than a kiss to get them pregnant. They have access to inexpensive birth control. It may only be "suffering" in their own mind - but yes, they should deal with the consequences of their own irresponsible behavior. Especially when women all over the country who are infertile pray to adopt.

    Certainly, have all the socially unacceptable sex you want. Just pay 50 cents for a condom while you're doing it.

  55. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.26

    That statement, Bree, still advances the notion that banning abortion is about punishing women for finding sex that others find objectionable. Not cool... and probably not constitutional.

    It also exposes a fallacy in your thinking, that having an abortion is a consequenceless act. I didn't think women took a medical procedure that involved inserting harmful objects into their bodies (or being hollered at by prejudicial radicals on the sidewalk) to be a relaxing way to spend an afternoon.

  56. Bree S. 2012.10.26

    Cory, I believe in personal responsibility and freedom not punishment. I believe in limited government interference in our lives. Our government should protect us from foreign enemies, provide public services such as roads and schools, and maintain a fair judicial system. These are my most basic political beliefs.

    Where do you see in my post that demonstrates a desire to punish women for sex (I assume you mean non-monogamous)? I could give a rat's ass what people do in their bedrooms. They just need to take responsibility for their actions as adults - which involves the prudent use of (have I mentioned inexpensive) birth control.

    Abortion isn't a consequenseless act. Neverminding the damage to the soul, it can be physically dangerous. Which is why a woman who either failed to act responsibly or is "suffering" the consequences of failed birth control should put her unwanted child up for adoption, so that he/she can be cherished by a deserving, loving family.

  57. Justin 2012.10.26

    That's exactly why Planned Parenthood counsels women on abortion.
    Some of us don't have the same definition of human life as you do. Still others do, and still believe that the government should not make the decision for women. Between the two groups, we make up the majority of both SD and US voters.

  58. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Thank you, JUSTIN, for keeping me informed about my options regarding "counseling" from such a fabulous organization and I look forward to more direction in the future from male persons who will never ever bear the spiritual consequences from such an irretrievable horrible decision. So glad you could offer your well educated guidance.

  59. Justin 2012.10.27

    It seems the only people you agree with ARE, in fact, male persons.

    Certainly not a majority opinion, even in Hazzard.

  60. Stace Nelson 2012.10.27

    @Owen Did I say it? Do I appear to have a problem saying what I believe? Are you somehow confused on my position on abortion? No, on all three accounts. Your efforts to try and paint me with someone else's comments is offensive. If not when life begins, when would you have a child be protected? Should you and your kind have the right to murder a child even after it is out of the womb well into its early years? At what age, in the womb, or outside of the woman do you advocate people be allowed to murder a child???

    @Justin A candidate's position on protecting unborn children remains a hotbed issue for many voters, and a single issue with many conservative voters. Bree & Mr "H" are correct that just because those measures were beaten does not mean people are pro-abortion.

    @Bree God bless.

  61. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    Stace: repentance looks good on you especially since original sin can't be forgiven by the Great Mystery unless the embryo is brought to term to pay the officiate the thirty pieces.

    Racketeering in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Roman Kiddie Diddlers..

  62. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    Bree: if there were a god, you would be incapable of reproduction.

  63. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.27

    Bree, you said what you said in exactly the line that I highlighted: "suffer the consequences." Wanting women to "suffer" indicates a sense of punishment, just as we say we want criminals to "pay" for their crimes by suffering the fines or imprisonment that we impose.

    Now let me check: are you simply saying that, if a woman with an unwanted pregnancy asks you what she should do, you would urge her to carry the child to term and put it up for adoption? Or are you saying that you want a political solution that imposes that preference by law on all women and criminalizes those who abort and/or those who help her abort?

  64. Justin 2012.10.27

    I completely agree with you Stace (and Bree) and have said as much. In fact, I'm not sure anybody that is pro choice is "pro abortion". But a vote states as clear as day that a person doesn't what government in that decision.

    Abortion is certainly a hotbed issue, and it may be a singular issue for a portion of the Republican voters. As a whole, though, the people have spoken, and the majority grew even when exceptions were added. As an elected official I guess you have decide who you want to represent: the majority, or a group of voters that will vote for you anyway. I think the one party system is clearly failing SD when many see the GOP primary as the election itself.

  65. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Larry, you only feel this way about abortion because you daydream about the day that Gaia aborts the human race from the face of the earth for their environmental sins.

  66. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Cory, you can insist that my belief in accepting personal responsibility for decisions made with knowledge of consequences stems from a giddy judgmental desire to "imprison" all women. But please explain to me the liberal reasoning that states that a 16 year old girl is smart enough to make the decision to end the human life growing in her womb and yet too dumb to understand the consequences of unprotected sex after years of taxpayer funded and liberal-endorsed "health" classes.

  67. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Justin, as a voter I respect any representative who votes the issues the way they said they would regardless of whether or not I agree with them. What I don't respect are elected officials who blatantly lie about their positions on the issues and then vote like no-one's watching, as so recently happened in my own district.

  68. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    "official" would be better replaced with "representative" as I'm referring to a legislator and not a person in an administrative position.

  69. Troy Jones 2012.10.27


    I would not equivocate and would endorse Ryan's personhood bill. It is wholly consistent with the GOP platform. I don't know why one needs more study, especially one who professes fidelity to the GOP platform.

  70. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    Legal personhood already exists at 20 weeks. BS: Gaia would only abort white Republicans from the face of her planet.

  71. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Larry, I get tired of the argument that because something horrible happens to a few people, 150 million women should be allowed to kill their unborn children. I think most of us are pragmatic enough that we would support a rape exclusion in order to save the lives of millions of children.

  72. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    You live in a failed red state now, BS: why worry now?

  73. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Larry, I think you enjoyed the sixties a little too much. Perhaps a thorough detox would remove the "environmental" toxins from your brain.

  74. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    My mental health is an open book: yours is written in public bathrooms.

  75. Jana 2012.10.27

    Thanks for the response Troy. You are right, it is wholly consistent with the GOP platform and while I would disagree with that policy, I respect your beliefs.

    My personal belief is that this law would criminalize most popular forms of family planning and birth control. It would put taking the pill, using an IUD and even using invitro fertilization on equal footing with premeditated murder. I believe the common penalty for that is life imprisonment without parole.

    Good to know that the GOP official policy is about making my family planning and reproductive choices for me.

    And that ladies and gentleman is the reason why this election is so important from the district to the national level. A vote for a Republican is a vote to marginalize women and their right to make their own decisions on birth control and family planning.

    Ask each and every GOP candidate if they support the GOP platform and then you can make your own choices.

  76. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Since I use Natural Family Planning, it's difficult for me to stomache it when someone calls abortion "family planning."

  77. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    When someone uses the capitalized word 'god' it is offensive.

  78. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Now, now Larry don't be childish. I capitalized Gaia for you.

  79. Troy Jones 2012.10.27


    It may be your personal belief but it would be incorrect. There is nothing in Ryan's bill that would restrict the use of contraceptives or an IUD.

    I don't know its affect on invitro fertilization but do not believe it affects that either. I may be mistaken.

  80. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    No person should have to ask permission for access to medical care: that is a fundamental feature of ACA.

  81. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    Every medical procedure is performed for the life of the patient: Republicans have incrementally eviscerated the privacy enjoyed in the exam room or OR.

  82. Taunia 2012.10.27

    Holy Roman Kiddie Diddler. That cracks me up as much now as the first time I saw it in August. Awesomely twisted mind, Kurtz.

  83. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Larry, I didn't realize that it was the Republicans who decided to appoint a board that will dictate acceptable medical procedures, even though they're not even doctors. I do know someone is "eviscerating" my medical freedoms and destroying the doctor-patient relationship.

  84. Jana 2012.10.27

    Troy, do you have a link that shows that the pill does not have an effect on a zygote?

    IUDs work either by preventing the fertilization of the egg or by preventing implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterine wall.

    Here's some popular research from pro-life medical professionals on the pill, IUD devices and other abortifacients.

    I'm just guessing you and the men who drafted the GOP platform already knew this.

  85. Stace Nelson 2012.10.27

    @Troy Jones Nice to see you sticking to form. The post is about RINOs endorsing a Democrat at the determent of Rep Manny Steele, a proven good conservative Republican. You jump into the middle and take a swipe at another conservative Republican. Birds of a feather or just coincidence?

    While you may be blessed to be omniscient with God Himself, us mere mortal conscientious elected legislators attempt to give every bill a fair hearing and hear South Dakotans' testimony pro/con on a bill before coming to final conclusion. I know, I know, back when you were an intern schlepping coffee in the legislature "leadership" told people how to vote on bills in the legislature. Still happens, but I vote on the merits as I see them. That's why my voting record looks different:

  86. larry kurtz 2012.10.27

    speaking of mental illness....

  87. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    He's talking about Troy's first post Larry. The post right after my comment about the RINO in my district.

  88. grudznick 2012.10.27

    Larry is just saying that Mr. Nelson is insaner than most.

  89. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Grudznick, I would truly enjoy reading a protracted conversation between yourself and Mr. Kurtz. Such an experience might even require popcorn.

  90. Jana 2012.10.27

    Bree, just curious about your statement "I do know someone is "eviscerating" my medical freedoms and destroying the doctor-patient relationship."

    Were you talking about the GOP platform on reproductive rights or Obamacare?

  91. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    I don't consider killing unborn children in order to avoid personal responsibility for poor decision-making to be a "right." In fact, I have absolutely no sympathy for a woman who wants to avoid nine months of weight gain and mood swings, rather than face the consequences of unprotected sex, bear the child to term and put her beautiful child up for adoption to a grateful infertile family.

    If a man stands in the middle of an interstate he may be struck by a car and end up with scars. If a woman has unprotected sex she may get pregnant and end up with stretch marks.

  92. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    I was referring to progressive liberals who think I'm too stupid to make my own decisions about my healthcare and too incompetent to take care of myself. These liberals think there is a difference of intellect between themselves and conservatives, rather than a difference of a opinion.

  93. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    Jana, I really don't believe the people advocating for the "personhood" amendment quite understand the science you are referencing. I do. And you are correct. There is a paradox there. I think it would be best to go through it carefully and calmly, with completele emotional detachment in order to get everyone on the same page about it. Do you suppose that's possible on a blog? With the lunatic fringe throwing spitballs from both sides of the peanut gallery? I don't. I've tried it. I gave up.

  94. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Anyone attempting to make birth control illegal based on the idea that is a form of abortion would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to a court of law that every single form of chemical birth control and IUDS work by causing the death of an already fertilized egg. In other words, its just another scare tactic used to put people in fear of losing their birth control if they vote to make abortion illegal.

  95. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.27

    So Bree, just to be clear, you favor using the law to require every pregnant woman to carry that child to term so that she may either give that child up for adoption to a deserving family or raise it herself, correct?

  96. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    Bree, beyond a shadow of a doubt, most eggs that get fertilized (something like 70% of them) fail to implant due to the condition of the uterine wall and are thus eliminated at menses. (It's the reason why the rhythm system, properly timed, usually works.)

    Birth control pills work the same way by mimicing those same natural conditions.

    The morning-after pill is just a really strong dose of the same medicine.

    This is established, proven science and the reason contraceptives are 99% effective.

    Hard fact, and most likely one of the reasons the Catholic Church is opposed to the use of such contraceptives.

  97. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    How birth control pills work has not in any way shape or form been proven.

  98. Rorschach 2012.10.27

    Bree, what specifically is in "Obamacare" that you claim "eviscerates" your medical freedoms and destroys the doctor-patient relationship?

    My understanding of PPACA is that the only thing it takes away is your ability to act as a free rider by going without insurance when you can afford it - thereby preventing you from transferring your risk of catastrophic medical expenses to providers, other paying customers, and taxpayers. While this erstwhile GOP "individual mandate" imposes minimum personal responsibility, it in no way limits your ability to purchase the insurance plan of your choice or to utilize the doctor of your choice. Am I wrong about that? What specifically in "Obamacare" "eviscerates" your freedoms and destroys your doctor-patient relationship?

    Jana's right though. The GOP platform does exactly that to women, treating them as if they are "too stupid to make [their] own decisions about [their] healthcare and too incompetent to take care of [them]self ."

    Facts are stubborn things. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

  99. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Cory, I favor making abortion illegal. Every woman has the option to not get pregnant in the first place. There is no unfairness in what I am suggesting.

  100. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Rorschach, on the topic of Obamacare, I have no plans to read a document that is 1600 pages long just so I can converse intelligently about it with you. I also have no plans to read the Vedic manuscripts anytime in the near future so we won't be able to discuss those documents either. The unelected board I am referring to has been reported about extensively in the news.

    Perhaps we should allow people to murder each other as well without interference by the judicial system. People can just make up their own minds about who they do and do not want to kill.

  101. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27


    "Hormonal contraceptives (the pill, the patch, and the vaginal ring) all contain a small amount of man-made estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work to inhibit the body's natural cyclical hormones to prevent pregnancy. Pregnancy is prevented by a combination of factors. The hormonal contraceptive usually stops the body from ovulating. Hormonal contraceptives also change the cervical mucus to make it difficult for the sperm to find an egg. Hormonal contraceptives can also prevent pregnancy by making the lining of the womb inhospitable for implantation.

    A new option for hormonal contraceptives is extended-cycle pill use; the first one approved is called Seasonale. Seasonale contains the same hormones as in other birth control pills, but they are taken in a longer cycle to reduce the number of yearly menstrual periods from 13 periods a year to only four periods a year. Therefore, women menstruate only once each season.

    Seasonale contains the same combination of two hormones commonly used in other hormonal contraceptives, and are in low doses taken continuously for 12 weeks followed by one week of inactive pills which causes a menstrual cycle.

    What Are Mini Pills?

    These are pills that contain only one hormone (progestin). They do not contain estrogen and may be prescribed in women who are breastfeeding or in women who experience nausea with estrogen.

    How Do Mini Pills Work?

    Mini pills work by thickening the cervical mucus so the sperm cannot reach the egg. The hormone in the pills also changes the lining of the uterus, so that implantation of a fertilized egg is much less likely to occur. In some cases, mini pills prevent the release of an egg. A pill is taken every day.

    How Effective Are Mini Pills?

    If mini pills are used consistently and correctly, they are about 95% effective -- somewhat less effective than standard birth control pills."

  102. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    ...of course we know how they work, Bree.

  103. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.27

    So, Bree, do you consider the six Republicans who have endorsed Mike Knudson, who I hope shares my view that abortion should not be a legislative matter, unworthy of membership in the Republican Party? And would you tell District 12 voters that if Knudson prioritizes all of these major policy issues over banning abortion, they should not vote for him?

  104. LK 2012.10.27

    As pseudonyms go, "Bree" has a more youthful ring than "Julie."

  105. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Bill, what webmd thinks about how birth control pills work is not proof to a court of law. Scientists are not in agreement on that topic.

  106. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Not to mention Bill, each chemical birth control compounds would have its own biochemical pathway that would have to be hypothesized by researchers. Good luck proving a possible biochemical pathway to a court of law.

  107. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    Yes they are, Bree. I'm not going to try to educate you further. That's your responsibility. Just don't confuse facts with fantasy. If you want to declare fertilized eggs "people" there are some significant legal consequences you must consider if you're going to make the argument responsibly. And it's your argument, not mine. I'm just relating the established science, take it or leave it.

  108. Jana 2012.10.27

    Bree, I'd be open to listening to other views from scientists if you would be willing to share.

  109. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Well, I sure as hell wouldn't tell the Republican voters of that district to vote for a pro-choice Democrat rather than their incumbent Republican legislator who by all accounts is doing an excellent job.

  110. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Bill, my only expertise on this matter is the biochemistry, microbiology, and physiology courses I took in college. And last time I heard, the hypothesized biochemical pathways of each individual birth control method had not been proven. And even if one could convince a court of law to make a particular brand of birth control illegal, it wouldn't take them long to come up with a new slightly different chemical cocktail. And even if they managed to adjudicate each and every single chemical birth control method and have them all made illegal, there's still condoms, female condoms, diaphragms, sponges, spermicides IUDs... ETC. So your entire argument is not only improbable it is also pointless because of all the other birth control methods that exist.

  111. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Jana, my biochemistry is rusty and I don't keep up with scientific journals. I just know that proving a biochemical pathway beyond a shadow of a doubt would be very difficult.

  112. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    Sounds like you're in denial, Bree. If contraceptives keep fertilized eggs from implanting the only thing that's certain vis a vis this conversation is that you don't want to know about it. I must confess, that would be my attitude too were I capable of becoming pregnant and didn't want to.

  113. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Okay Bill, let's say you're right just for the sake of argument and all chemical birth control pills in FlemingLand are outlawed. Then besides the diaphragms, sponges, spermicides, condoms, and IUDs that are already available we will now have a market for all the natural herbal birth control methods that have been around and working for thousands of years, in order to fill the demand vacuum left by the outlawing of pharmaceutical birth control pills.

  114. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Not to mention everyone who will just get on the internet and buy their birth control pills from overseas. And all this hypothetical scare mongering over birth control just to try to keep the killing of millions of innocent children every year legal, all so some woman doesn't have to be uncomfortable for nine months.

  115. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    Wouldn't it be better to consider the possibility that a fertilized egg, in and of itself is not yet a "person" Bree? That such a notion is impractical, irrational, and unscientific? A romantic, religious notion perhaps?

  116. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Defining the start of human life as at conception is the most logical choice and would lead to the least legal confusion in my opinion. And as God is the source of all logic, I think he would find that definition acceptable to Him.

  117. Bill Fleming 2012.10.27

    Curious, Bree. You and God know for a scientific fact that a fertilized egg is a person, but not how the science of contraceptives works? Interesting.

  118. Rorschach 2012.10.27

    Why do we bother, Bill? This Bree person won't engage us in a fact-based debate. She can't defend her ideas straight up without trying to change the subject. She won't accept facts because they undermine with her conclusions. You can't reason with such a person who refuses to have an honest debate.

    And you're right Bill. All those fertilized eggs that don't implant - they never become a person. So how could it be that fertilization alone would convey personhood?

  119. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    By the way Bill, I don't use birth control pills. I prefer to use what some call "Natural Family Planning" rather than subject my body to the effects of unnatural chemical substances.

  120. Rorschach 2012.10.27

    And now we hear that Bree doesn't use medicine of any sort because medicine is an "unnatural chemical substance."

  121. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Are we to have a philosophical discussion about God now? All truth which exists within the constraints of time and space is relative. Absolute truth is the domain of an infinite Father God who exists outside time and space and is not comprehensible by the circumscribed human mind. If you had any respect for the relativity of human scientific truths you would realize the silliness of suggesting that scientists today understand exactly how contraceptives work and that their scientific belief system, their religion of science, is provable in a court of law. If you had any respect for the limits of your own mind, you would not suggest that it is not a fact that a fertilized egg is a person just because you do not understand the embryonic potential of God-given life.

  122. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Rorschach, I am a "natural health freak." I do not take any medications except in certain acute circumstances.

  123. Rorschach 2012.10.27

    So Bill, there you have it. Bree won't take medicine because she won't subject her body to any "unnatural chemical substance." Science is silly bunk. Truth is relative, which is why Bree is so loose with it.

  124. Rorschach 2012.10.27

    By the way, any Democrat who can get that many prominent GOP current and former lawmakers to endorse him has got to be good!

  125. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Rorschach, being flippant doesn't prove me wrong.

  126. Rorschach 2012.10.27

    Pointing out the inconsistencies of your arguments proves you wrong.

  127. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Please tell me what is inconsistent about the statement that scientific knowledge is relative truth. Or am I the only one on the planet that notices that scientific "truths" are constantly evolving and changing.

  128. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Wouldn't it be better, for the sake of our souls, to consider the possibility that abortion is murder in the eyes of God? Wouldn't it be logical to err on the side of caution in regards to this moral question? Why do we need abortion in our society when we can achieve female freedom through birth control and adoption? We do not need to give up control over our bodies as women, and we can still save the lives of millions of children.

  129. Taunia 2012.10.27

    Polishing my saddle for my dinosaur ride tomorrow. Yee haw.

  130. Troy 2012.10.27


    Two things:

    Just holding you to the standard you demand of others.

    I am at a loss why someone who claims to be PRO-life would have to hesitate on this bill. Unless of corse one is PRO-life in name only or doesn't pay attention to prove-life issues.

  131. grudznick 2012.10.27

    Bree, what is your current cycle?

  132. Jana 2012.10.27

    Grud, you're last comment to Bree was inappropriate...but then that was the point...right?

  133. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Um, Grudznick, are you asking me about my "woman time?" LOL

  134. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Just leaving the rinse cycle.

  135. Taunia 2012.10.27

    So you're not knocked up. #Fail.

  136. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    That wasn't an attempt at metaphor Taunia. I am not "knocked up" - yet. How was your dinosaur ride?

  137. Les 2012.10.27

    Flem takes the well worn path of another male with higher power knowledge. Roarsback the bully bum looking to Flem for approval, shedding any respect I had for him. Taunia rides her dragon/Dino harmonizing with Larry whose just as flipping crazy as he can possibly concoct while Grudz proves once again he ain't no old man who by now should have the character to debate a woman without probing her personal reproductive state.

    I see Bree standing for her beliefs against a herd of fifth graders who resort to insults and character diminishing comments, almost angry because you cannot draw her down to your street fight level.

  138. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Why thank you Les! I appreciate the support. That's one of the nicest comments I've received.

  139. Troy 2012.10.27


    Ahh, the beautiful, good, and true. Thanks for shining.

  140. Bree S. 2012.10.27

    Why Troy, thanks for noticing. :)

  141. Taunia 2012.10.27

    I love you, Les. *muah*

  142. Taunia 2012.10.27

    Thanks for not reproducing this month, Bree.

  143. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    I took the path of reason, Les. Not all that well worn these days, I fear. Oh well.

  144. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Taunia, does it improve your personal sense of self-worth to belittle other people who disagree with you, and do you feel that it advances your point of view?

  145. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    Having personally spoken with two of these legislators about Kristi Noem [CAH edits: and I'm still not letting this story onto my page until I have people with firsthand knowledge go on the record. Sorry, Larry!]

  146. Les 2012.10.28

    No Flem, you took the path of cut and paste, a new phenomenon that has made educated idiots out of all of us.

  147. jana 2012.10.28

    I'd like to have Stace give an answer as to whether or not he supports the personhood platform of the GOP.

    Troy supports it, but then denies that it affect women and their right to choose the best birth control for themselves. Provided proof that popular forms of birth control do indeed prevent a zygote from implantation, Troy goes mute.

    My position remains that the GOP, from the district level on up, has a goal of taking rights away from women with a law they haven't thought through. It's in their platform. it's what they believe and it doesn't include exemptions. That is exactly what a vote for a Republican will get you.

    Worse yet is their total disregard for the legal ramifications of their personhood platform that Bill brought up. This seems to suggest that they have no clue what they are proposing or they know exactly what they are doing and don't care.

  148. Les 2012.10.28

    A path of reason is just words depending on who is listening.

    Btw, I heard they found life in outer space. Can't be, it's only one cell.

  149. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Les, that's not the point. The point is: was that cell a person?

  150. Les 2012.10.28

    I'm not really into the argument of exactly when life begins Flem.

    You and I both do not support the death penalty for a variety of reasons.

    Prob the most important to me is the possibility of innocence. Also the term life can take on new meaning. I imagine the life lost in Haiti doesn't have the same meaning to some as life lost on some purported higher level, thus the king can determine who exactly is alive or deserves life.

    It really doesn't matter at which end of our term on earth we start to dumb down the process.

  151. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Les. Trust me. This is the science. All life is the same life. Nobody knows when or how it began. Anyone claiming to know more than that is just expressing an opinion or a religious belief, not a fact. Life doesn't. Elgin at conception any more than a tree begins when it sprouts a new branch. Life is a continuum, not a series of unrelated discreet events.

  152. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    ... Life doesn't begin ... Not Elgin... The spell check on this iPhone is so helpful sometimes. Like it has a life of its own. LOL

  153. Stace Nelson 2012.10.28

    @Troy Jones In response to your post above:
    #1. Curious how I am holding anyone to any standards? Because I support voters rights to know how their elected officials vote? Should not Republicans hold themselves to republican standards? Shouldn't grass roots Republicans be allowed to call them out on it when they don't?

    #2. So voters putting out factual voting records showing their elected officials are not voting as claimed is wrong according to you; however, it is okay for you to intentionally ignore my actual voting record in order to spread dishonest statements? Folks can take a look here and listen to the hearings, the floor debate, see my co-sponsorship of the bill and my favorable pro-life votes:

    Actions speak louder than words, Troy. What speaks here is your own inaction on your claims of being pro-life. No where in the records above is their even a mention of the name Troy Jones.

    @Jana the answer is yes. See Page 14

  154. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    The point I am attempting to make is that scientists are not in consensus on the effects of birth control on implantation, that each individual pharmaceutical pill would have a different effect, and that those effects would not be provable in a court of law.

  155. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    That's because there is nothing in the law that would require such investigation Bree. Pass a personhood amendment and there will be. It is extremely easy to discover whether or not there is a fertilized egg in a menses discharge. Pass the amendment, and there will be 'dead people' everywhere you look. It's a road to insanity. An absurd extremist, irrational legal position to hold.

  156. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Bill, if pro-life OBGYNs do not even agree on this issue, how can you make the claim that birth control will be outlawed? Do you really have so little faith in our judicial system? Did you just make the claim that women will be thrown in jail for early term miscarriages if this amendment is passed? Do you find it at all ironic that you believe you are objective and logical?

  157. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Here's another problem with your science fiction thriller about the criminalization of birth control. Slight changes in homeostasis of pH, salts content of fluids, hormonal balance, etc. can easily effect the method of operation of a pharmaceutical substance. Which means that the same pill can work different ways at different times in the same woman. How do you prove to a court of law the molecular effects of a birth control pill, prove which effects occurred at a particular time, prove the time of the occurrence and prove the deliberate premeditation for murder of the woman taking a particular brand of birth control to a court of law?

    Really this is one of the most illogical claims about "What Will Happen If.." that I have ever been subjected to.

  158. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Ok, every single time you read "effect" replace with "affect." Either my brain or this Ipad is not working properly.

  159. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Ok, on a side note.. Cory you're better at grammar than I am. Is it effect or affect above?

  160. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Just trying to be clear, Bree. It sounds to me that you are proposing that we amend the Constitution with language that asserts something you are:

    1. Incapable of establishing as fact, and

    2. the resulting effect of which ('affect' is the verb, 'effect,' the subsequent correlative noun) you have no intention of enforcing.

    Why then waste the American people's time with such things?

  161. Troy Jones 2012.10.28


    Please explain what you mean by the above. I am curious that you are implying the reality I have never been elected means either my sincerity with regards to the sanctity of life is either suspect or not as meaningful/significance as yours. What do you mean?

    "Actions speak louder than words, Troy. What speaks here is your own inaction on your claims of being pro-life. No where in the records above is their even a mention of the name Troy Jones."

  162. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.28

    [Always happy to oblige with a Grammar Note! Every instance of "effect" thus far on this page is correct except for Bree's first use of "effect" in her 10:54 comment. That one should be "affect." Here's a review of the two uses of each of the two words:

    1. affect as verb (more common): to influence or change. Bree's comments affect my readers' moods.
    2. effect as noun (more common): a result. Bree's comments produce various effects on my readers.
    3. effect as verb (less common): to bring into being, to cause, to be effective. Bree's comments effected a lengthy conversation that diverged significantly from the original topic.
    4. effect as noun (even less common): the apparent emotional state or mood of a person or a group. Cory walked in and started shouting grammar advice, which dampened the previously cheerful affect..

    Bonus sentence: Bree affected the discussion by effecting stimulating effects on our affect. (But that sentence is mere vocabularial affectation.)]

  163. Les 2012.10.28

    I do trust you on saying this is science Flem. I guarantee you this science will be changed in 100 years as it has changed in the past hundred years.

    I am not debating when life begins as much as stating at what point do we take doubt out of the equation for casual abortion as I suggest we take doubt out of capital punishment?

  164. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Yes, good Les. And that is an entirely different conversation than the one about the personhood amendment. Agreed?

  165. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Thank you Cory for that gleeful correction, lol.

    So Bill are you claiming that it is a fact that human life does not begin at conception? At which point, then, do you claim that human life does begin. If you believe personally, for example, that human life begins at 2 minutes and 37 seconds after conception, do you think that makes sense as a legal definition of the beginning of human life?

    I have never once had a biological scientist tell me that human life does not begin at conception, and as a legal definition, I find it to be emminently logical.

  166. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Do you not think the gametes that came together to form the zygote were alive, Bree? Do you not think they were human cells? Do you not believe that they contained together separately precisely the same genetic information that they did in the composite?

  167. jana 2012.10.28

    Bree, this is not a "What Will Happen If.." game. VP nominee,Ryan has co-sponsored this legislation in the US House and various states have tried and failed to pass this measure...but yet it stays in the GOP platform.

    That's why I keep saying that voting for the GOP from the local to the national is a bad deal when it comes to the war on women.

  168. Stace Nelson 2012.10.28

    @Troy Please answer the questions posed you first and I will gladly answer your follow on question.

    "#1. Curious how I am holding anyone to any standards? Because I support voters rights to know how their elected officials vote? Should not Republicans hold themselves to republican standards? Shouldn't grass roots Republicans be allowed to call them out on it when they don't?

    #2. So voters putting out factual voting records showing their elected officials are not voting as claimed is wrong according to you; however, it is okay for you to intentionally ignore my actual voting record in order to spread dishonest statements?"

  169. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Bill, if you put millions of sperm in a test tube, they will never spontaneously combine or self-evolve into human life. If you put millions of human ova in a test tube, they will also never spontaneously combine or self-evolve into human life. Only the fertilized combination of sperm and ova will result in human life. Every fertilized egg is unique in traits and potential, a fantastic new representative of the possibilities of humankind.

  170. Les 2012.10.28

    The personhood amendment is no different to me than the NDA act, or the Homeland Insecurity act. The above twisted to not include the best interests of the American citizen Flem. Political at best, treasonous at worst.

  171. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    I have not read the personhood amendment and cannot defend its contents as a whole. However, I can see no logical reason why legally defining conception as the start of human life would have any affect on the legal availability of birth control. Any person claiming that birth control will be outlawed due to that legal definition has made illogical suppositions.

  172. Justin 2012.10.28

    Bravo, Les.

    I don't really care who are "rinos", if they represent their consituents.

    The GOP plank on abortion is an exercise in cowardice. Passing a plank on a voice vote that the majority of sitting GOP candidates won't endorse is bowing to a special interest group in its most facetious form.

  173. Justin 2012.10.28

    Bree, your biggest arguments seem to be that you are too lazy to read.

  174. Les 2012.10.28

    While I agree with you Bree, have you ever seen a politician of any flavor keep it that simple?

  175. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    That's an interesting logical statement Justin. Rather like an upside down house floating in midair, entirely composed of paperclips, feathers, and the ripped up pages of "How to Win an Argument for Dummies."

  176. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Unlikely for anything simple to ever come out of our national legislature.

  177. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Good. Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks for the conversation folks. It went farther along rational lines than most chats like this do. My sole intention was to bring rational thought to the table, not necessarily to reach any conclusions.

    I will posit however, that it does seem we all finally got on the same page about the Personhood amendment least insofar as to say that none of us appears to understand it.

    That's good enough for me for now.

    Happy remainder of your Sunday, neighbors.

  178. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Um, ok Bill, if it makes you feel better to think we are on the same page about this personhood amendment go right ahead. I will assume we are therefore on the same page about Obamacare, which is the biggest pile of mess to ever be concocted by Congress.

  179. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Let's start with this. Who here has read the personhood amendment, in its entirety?

  180. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Well, after a quick look up on the internet, the fact that it is being pushed by Rand Paul in the Senate is a big positive in my book because libertarians don't write messy laws (personal opinion).

  181. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Not much to read but here's the one from Mississippi (that failed BTW).

    "Initiative #26 would amend the Mississippi Constitution to define the word “person” or “persons”, as those terms are used in Article III of the state constitution, to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof."

  182. Troy 2012.10.28

    I will answer your questions.

    1a:. Curious how I am holding anyone to any standards?

    You claim you are able to read the platform, interpret its priority with regard to intent and application infallible and then call anyone who does not adhere to your reading 100% is a RINO. So, I don't understand why you would equivocate on Ryan's personhood amendment considering you don't give the same benefit to others.

    1b). Because I support voters rights to know how their elected officials vote?

    I believe your bill has no context and thus dishonest. For instance just as some cowards are taking votes out of context and asserting views that are false, I think your bill will make such misleading charges more prevalent.

    1c). Should not Republicans hold themselves to republican standards?

    Yes. But, they should also be able to be true to their faith, conscience and particular views of their constituents without regard to a particular plank or interpretation by an anonymous judge and interpreter of the platform.

    1d). Shouldn't grass roots Republicans be allowed to call them out on it when they don't?

    Absolutely. The problem is we don't know who these people are, if the are either grass roots or even Republicans.

    2a). So voters putting out factual voting records showing their elected officials are not voting as claimed is wrong according to you; however, it is okay for you to intentionally ignore my actual voting record in order to spread dishonest statements?"

    I don't know if the people putting this information out are really voters from South Dakota or Republicans. Tell me who they are so I can then assess whether they have the intelligence to interpret legislation, legislators, and context to accurately make the charge they are not who they claim to be.

    Regarding, your voting record, I assume you think I am ignoring some vote or votes you have made with regard to abortion. Or is it something else you are talking about?

    Now, since I have answered at least 4 of your 5 questions with the only one I didn't answer is because I don't know what you are asking, answer my question.

  183. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    So it is Senate Amendment 2479 to Senate Bill 1940 submitted the 25th June 2012. It appears to be the last amendment submitted and it is on page S4483 of the Congressional Record.

    SA 2479. Mr. PAUL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1940, to amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, to restore the financial solvency of the flood insurance fund, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

    At the appropriate place, insert the following:


    (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Life at Conception Act''.

    (b) Right to Life.--To implement equal protection for the right to life of each born and preborn human person, and pursuant to the duty and authority of the Congress, including Congress' power under article I, section 8, to make necessary and proper laws, and Congress' power under section 5 of the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Congress hereby declares that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being.

    (c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:

    (1) HUMAN PERSON; HUMAN BEING.--The terms ``human person'' and ``human being'' include each and every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including, but not limited to, the moment of fertilization, cloning, and other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.

    (2) STATE.--The term ``State'' used in the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States and other applicable provisions of the Constitution includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each other territory or possession of the United States.

  184. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Other than the fact that "at any other moment" seems vague I don't see anything wrong with it.

  185. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Yes, that's the issue. Exactly, Bree. You don't see anything wrong with having such a law on the books. Even though it says exactly what we have been telling you it says, and carries with it consequences precisely as Jana and I have outlined. Perhaps, now that you've finally read it you should take some time to reason it through. No rush. I'm sure the lights will come on for you sooner or later.

  186. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Well I'm glad we figured that out and now I can say with surety that I would personally support this personhood amendment.

  187. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    How does such legislation not increase the number of people seeking citizenship status to merely become impregnated in the US?

  188. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Bill, lol. A slight vagueness in the law does not equate to the criminalization of birth control. Where do you come up with this stuff. Under that premise, the universe will implode upon the complete enactment of Obamacare. Everyone crawl under their desk and put on their helmets, the end of the American Justice System is upon us.

  189. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    Citizenship becomes proscribed the instant anyone is conceived in the US.

  190. Taunia 2012.10.28

    :: head, desk::

  191. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    Paul should add an amendment that says: "only white beings will be afforded citizenship upon implantation in the uterine wall."

  192. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Bill, I am not going to go through, once again, the multitude of reasons why your argument regarding birth control is based on false premises. I understand your end goal. You want abortion to remain legal. You don't have a problem with the casual destruction of life in the womb because you've decided that human life begins when it's drooling, blinking, talking, reading.. or at some other point, you haven't been clear. But come up with another argument besides Republicans Want To Steal Your Birth Control And Throw You In Jail. That argument no longer holds water.

  193. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Not so, Bree. Do you recall how the Supreme Court decided that GWB won the election in Florida by envoking the 14th Amendment, arguing that if only a few counties votes were recounted instead of all of them then that would not be equal protection under the law? In that same manner, how much more relevant would the equal protection of a "person's" life be?

  194. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Bill, I would not presume to have a greater understanding of the law than the Supreme Court simply because I didn't like the end result of a ruling.

  195. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    You would either want the Amendment enforced or you wouldn't, Bree. And the Amendment allows for no exceptions. Period. None. Clearly you are in denial about this. That's okay, I don't blame you. I wouldn't want to accept that reality either if I were the one capable of becoming pregnant.

  196. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    but a virgin conceived a god a couple of thousand years ago.

  197. Stace Nelson 2012.10.28

    @Troy "You claim you are able to read the platform, interpret its priority with regard to intent and application infallible and then call anyone who does not adhere to your reading 100% is a RINO." REALLY!? Please show me where I have said these exact words, show me this asinine claim that you so dishonestly attribute to me.

    "I believe your bill has no context and thus dishonest. For instance just as some cowards are taking votes out of context and asserting views that are false, I think your bill will make such misleading charges more prevalent." How can a bill be dishonest? What bills are cowards taking out of context? Wow! So legislators should be able to hide their votes because they know better than the voters?! Wow!

    "Yes. But, they should also be able to be true to their faith, conscience and particular views of their constituents without regard to a particular plank or interpretation by an anonymous judge and interpreter of the platform." They should be able to be as liberal as they want and vote against Republican values and principles, especially if they have paid their bones and carried water for the establishment machine, is what you mean to say?

    "Absolutely. The problem is we don't know who these people are, if the are either grass roots or even Republicans." You say above that it is NOT okay for the public to know how our "Republican" legislators vote on public bills, or to hold them accountable for it, but you somehow have a right to know the name of every person who disagrees with them so YOU can judge them? Wow!

    "I don't know if the people putting this information out are really voters from South Dakota or Republicans. Tell me who they are so I can then assess whether they have the intelligence to interpret legislation, legislators, and context to accurately make the charge they are not who they claim to be." See my response above. What you are not doing is disagreeing with the bills chosen by these people. You just want to know who they are to discredit them and distract from the real issue, crappy voting records of people claiming to be Republicans.

    "Regarding, your voting record, I assume you think I am ignoring some vote or votes you have made with regard to abortion. Or is it something else you are talking about?" You make the asinine inference that I am somehow not truly pro-life because I have indicated support for the bill, but state I would have to ensure it got a fair hearing and review all of the information before committing to a vote on the matter. My record shows your dishonest inference is ridicules and those cited bills show you have done nothing notable to get pro-life legislation passed even after all your name dropping and professed political influence, while I have two years of legislative effort. Which means your statement was in fact an indictment of your lack of conviction, and not me.

  198. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    Imagine such a bill coming from Rep. Nelson:

    "Embryos conceived of non-white, non-citizens living in South Dakota illegally shall be exempted from beingship."

  199. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    Reproductive rights are the Republican's climate change: even if they outlawed all forms of preventing or terminating a pregnancies, little will stop the de-whiting of America.

  200. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    [Set in the future, the year 2053 A.D. Republicans have taken over the world and all liberals have been turned into meat popsicles and eaten. We are in a court room with a judge dressed in a tight silver outfit. There is no jury, as they have been outlawed by the Republican World Order. Before the judge is a young woman who is crying pitifully.]

    Judge: "The Defendant will rise. I have reviewed the Defendant's personal Ovulation Diary and have determined the exact dates of her ovulation in the year 2052, while she was taking the rogue birth control pill Babykillerin. Advanced scientific techniques have determined that this pill prevents implantation of the fertilized egg 93% of the time as long as the moon is at a certain angle. The moon was at that angle the evening of May 13th, 2052 - at the exact moment of ovulation according to her Ovulation Predictor! While I have no idea why the Defendant would record her ovulation time in a diary while she was taking birth control, due to the new law passed this year - The Life For Greater Than 90% Certainty Act - this allows me to sentence the Defendant to Life In Prison Without Parole because... um... because there are other moments a human comes into being. Yeah. Oh, and because of equal protection under the law. Take her away!"

    [Pitifully crying female is whisked away by guards in a hovercraft, and then put on a shuttle and sent to the Mars Penal Colony, where she was turned into a meat popsicle and eaten.]

    The End.

  201. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Don't give up your day job, Bree. ;^)

  202. Troy 2012.10.28


    I answered your questions. Where is your answer?

  203. Bill Fleming 2012.10.28

    Here are the questions that came up in the Mississippi election. Just becaouse you've not heard them, Bree, doesn't mean they aren't legitimate. It just means that perhaps you've not been paying attention:


    "But in order for Personhood USA to succeed in other states, it will have to settle the questions raised in Mississippi. And all of them are nuanced. At what stage of the fertilization process does “personhood” occur? Will birth control methods like IUDs be illegal? Can pregnant women use the carpool lane?

    Moreover, could, say, obese women be charged with child endangerment under a personhood amendment? The health risks are real. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states, “Obese women should be informed of the risks associated with maternal obesity, be screened for gestational diabetes, and be assessed for the need for supplements of vitamins and minerals, including folate..” A recent CMACE/RCOG guidelines paper began, “Maternal obesity has become one of the most commonly occurring risk factors in obstetric practice.”

    According to the Journal of the American Medical Association: “…the risk of spina bifida was more than twice as high for obese mothers-to-be, and the overall risk of neural tube defects was 87 percent higher for obese mothers compared with women with normal weight.” Obstetricians I spoke with said they are seeing an increasing number of very obese pregnancies causing increasingly severe outcomes. One obstetrician decried some harrowing c-sections and told me severe obesity can be as dangerous to a fetus as alcohol consumption. “And it’s certainly more dangerous than sushi,” she added.

    Could pregnant women who are or become too obese during pregnancy be charged with endangerment of the person they are carrying? When he was prepping the (doomed) 2010 Colorado personhood amendment, I asked Personhood USA co-founder Keith Mason.

    “I can’t answer that because it’s a hypothetical,” he said. But Mason had no problem entertaining hypotheticals about how, under a personhood amendment, pregnant women found to be consuming drugs and alcohol might be liable for criminal charges for abuse."

  204. grudznick 2012.10.28

    You were fooled, Mr. Troy. Young Mr Nelson pulled the football away like on those Charlie Brown comics. He will claim you did not answer his questions and will make you dance the dance again before he pulls away the football yet one more time.

    He might be out getting a new cell phone, too. We may never know.

  205. Stace Nelson 2012.10.28

    Troy Jones makes the following comment in regards to Rep Stace Nelson saying he supports the principle of person hood but would have to wait to see what the testimony of such a bill would disclose for full consideration:

    (Troy):"I am at a loss why someone who claims to be PRO-life would have to hesitate on this bill. Unless of corse one is PRO-life in name only or doesn't pay attention to prove-life issues."

    Stace Nelson cites his actual record in the legislature proving his actual and active support of Pro-life issues

    (Stace): "Actions speak louder than words, Troy. What speaks here is your own inaction on your claims of being pro-life. No where in the records above is their even a mention of the name Troy Jones."

    Troy asks:
    "Please explain what you mean by the above. I am curious that you are implying the reality I have never been elected means either my sincerity with regards to the sanctity of life is either suspect or not as meaningful/significance as yours. What do you mean?"

    Stace Nelson answers:
    "You make the asinine inference that I am somehow not truly pro-life because I have indicated support for the bill, but state I would have to ensure it got a fair hearing and review all of the information before committing to a vote on the matter. My record shows your dishonest inference is ridicules and those cited bills show you have done nothing notable to get pro-life legislation passed even after all your name dropping and professed political influence, while I have two years of legislative effort. Which means your statement was in fact an indictment of your lack of conviction, and not me."

    What part of your dishonest inference of me is ugly hypocrisy, in light of you having nothing real to show in real advocacy, don't you understand?

  206. Justin 2012.10.28

    It's shameful how the loonies fight for the mentally ill minority vote in the primaries that vote only on this issue. It's at most 10% of the population. Listen to the people. There is a reason we were pioneers in the referendum and initiative business: our legislators don't represent voters.

    Bree, that was frightening. Wow is all I can say. Do you talk to angels?

  207. larry kurtz 2012.10.28

    "Black women are not alone in having disproportionately high unintended pregnancy and abortion rates. The abortion rate among Hispanic women, for example, although not as high as the rate among black women, is double the rate among whites. Hispanics also have a higher level of unintended pregnancy than white women. Black women's unintended pregnancy rates are the highest of all.

    Currently, about one-third of all abortions are obtained by white women, and 37 percent are obtained by black women. Latinas comprise a smaller proportion of the women who have abortions, and the rest are obtained by Asians, Pacific Islanders, Native Americans and women of mixed race."

  208. Troy 2012.10.28


    Thank you for restating what you think of new but I asked a real simple question and you said you would answer it. What do you intend to say here: "What speaks here is your own inaction on your claims of being pro-life. No where in the records above is their even a mention of the name Troy Jones."

    What inaction are you referring to and what does the reality I am not a legislator have to do with whether one is PRO-life?

  209. grudznick 2012.10.28

    Mr. Stace is putting the football back on the T-box.

  210. Stace Nelson 2012.10.28


    I am at a loss why someone who claims to be PRO-life, with so many political connections, influence, and purported legislative experience, would not even phone in testimony on the public hearings on the above Pro-Life bills. Unless of course one is PRO-life in name only or doesn't pay attention to prove-life issues?

  211. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.28

    Grudznick you are nailing nails into very hard wood with one swing of the hammer. Yes it is good that none of your assumed "friends" have spiked your back with a knife outing you. Holding your enemies close Grud?

    Bree; listen to Fleming; just for the helluva it.

  212. Troy 2012.10.28

    My legislator, the PRO-Life entity of my church know I am available anytime they believe my overt assistance would be helpful and I have been of assistance privately when they have called. In the meantime, my wife and daughters deploy our time, talent, and treasure more directly and personally.

    If you want a private list of examples and references of these matters call me. I am a private citizen and these actions are private.

  213. Les 2012.10.28

    The bet is still on Corey and you're still the man whose going to handle the money. Larry's just itchn to donate a hundred bucks to SD Right to Life.

    BTW Corey, I do appreciate your character, even if you are a character.

  214. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    Charlie, I have been patiently listening to Bill's panicked ramblings for a full day. I could barely read that blog post it was so asinine. If anyone actually believes that a judge would interpret the personhood amendment as "it's time to start throwing fat pregnant women in jail," then I would have to lose all respect for that person's mental faculties.

    Tell me Charlie, what is your opinion on the personhood amendment?

  215. Stace Nelson 2012.10.28

    @Charlie You mean like an assumed friend who stands by, does NOTHING, and knowingly allows dishonest politicians to lie about their friend and claim he threatened to kill someone so they can try and illegally throw your friend out of the legislature? Not to mention the dishonest caucus edict in absentia. The only one that didn't know everybody knew you were angus & caveman, was you.

    @Troy Well as long as you are available anytime, just not when public testimony on pro-life bills by phone would help. So how did you say it? "PRO-life in name only?"

  216. Troy 2012.10.28


  217. jana 2012.10.28

    Read the 14th Amendment Bree and then apply all things legal to the zygote. Just as a refresher:

    “no state shall … deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

    Now take a peek at child endangerment laws around the country.

    Let's look at Bill's example. There is clear evidence that obesity has a direct harmful and sometime deadly impact on the zygote before and after implantation. Since the personhood act you are championing makes the zygote a child, I would guess that a good lawyer could apply child endangerment laws to help the child.

    If you want asinine, take a look at the state whose dominant party attempted to pass a law saying you could murder a doctor who performs legal abortions. It might have had something to do with astrology, but I can never remember...

  218. Bree S. 2012.10.28

    That's really a stretch Jana. It's up to the judges to interpret the law and set precedent. If we are all really worried about child endangerment laws being applied to zygotes, then I think we should also be worried about being beaten by our husbands with sticks no bigger than a thumb, and also we should be concerned about being arrested for hanging our laundry on the line on Sundays.

    Personally, I'm willing to risk all of the improbable scenarios that have been brought up today in order to save the lives of millions of innocent children. Never again do I want to listen to some 21 year old druggie tell me she's had six abortions.

  219. Bill Fleming 2012.10.29

    Once it becomes law Bree, the police, the prosecutors and the courts are obliged to enforce it. They have no choice in the matter.

  220. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.29

    Bree my opinion really only matters if there are voters making a decision to vote for me based upon this legislation or I am voting on the legislation. My personal opinion is that rape, incest, and the life and health of the mother should be the only legally allowable reasons ever to abort a pregnancy. I am firmly against the death penalty too, if that matters to you.

  221. larry kurtz 2012.10.29

    what about the mental health of the mother, charlie?

  222. larry kurtz 2012.10.29

    and since incest is a crime why include it as an additional qualification?

  223. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.29

    Larry as we all know too well reading this blog you have tried fooling us for a long time as to your mental qualifications but a few of us "get" how intellectually grounded Mr. Kurtz really is. Who really is mentally correct?

    It is a crime to swing my fist into anyone's face breaking their nose; yet the law states paying to fix that broken nose then becomes MY responsibility. The cost of mental health care for any woman who has been raped should be charged upon the rapist for the life of the woman. DNA works every time.

  224. larry kurtz 2012.10.29

    you miss my point, charlie: women have the right to any medical procedure that guarantees her pursuit of happiness.

  225. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Come on Larry. Should women be allowed to shoot anyone they don't like too if it makes them happy? If we're going to start relaxing laws about harming our fellow man, then I'd like to start castrating child molesters - as a fun project on weekends.

  226. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    I would literally be willing to do it, and I wouldn't bat an eyelash at, and then I would go home after a long day of it, and eat a big steak.

  227. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    I am not against the death penalty Charlie, but it is not something I feel strongly about.

  228. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    However, your carefully moderate statement is puzzling considering the district you represent.

  229. Bill Fleming 2012.10.29

    Good Jana. I've been saying I'm pro-life for decades. But as with "Christian" and "Republican" and "American," there are certain folks among us who take umbrage to such claims, thinking themselves better than the rest of us somehow. Some of them even post on South Dakota political blogs from time to time. ;^)

  230. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Bill, are you a states' rights pro-lifer? As in, do you think that the legality of abortion should be determined by each individual state, by its constituents, rather than at the federal level?

  231. Bill Fleming 2012.10.29

    Bree, no. Human rights are not state issues. They are universal human issues.

  232. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Ok Bill. Then if you do not support making abortion illegal, what solutions do you recommend to lower the abortion rate in our country?

  233. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.29

    Bree this is a most serious matter and requires much more thought then what we can do justice given only on a back and forth dialogue here on a blog. My opinion and what I believe are that no woman who has been raped or forced into an incesstual sexual relationship should be then forced also to carry that pregnancy. The very difficult part of this is we must put a time frame on the accusation of rape in order to not get into he said/she said situations for obvious reasons. If you remember the polling done before the last constitutional abortion vote here in SD it seemed the measure would pass but after it was all over we lost by five or six points and not having a rape and incest option in my mind caused the loss. I am against abortion and think it is an absurd way to conduct birth control. The morning after pill given to anyone who has been raped makes sense in the fact that by forcing a young woman to just stand down and wait to see what happens gives the rapist total control over the body of the woman who he raped . And that goes against every common law private and personal property law our constitution was written with. Few understand the process or know how long male sperm live inside a woman and the normal time swimming to find a fertile egg actually take; and how if immediately after a rape the proper drugs are administered flushing the egg, no pregnancy can occur. The answer is actually up to five days days.

    And Breeze what does my district have to do with my personal views on abortion? Most people here know I say it the way I see it and they like it that way. The all or nothing attitude you seem to adhere to caused the first measure to die. Lets hope we all get a little smarter in the future and take a lesson from the Anti-Gun group and go after the abortion issue one step at a time.

  234. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    I, like many voters have been watching the back and forth between you and Stace for months. You could say he expresses his opinions forcefully but I haven't noticed him be inconsistent. I have watched the establishment belittle and attack the conservative wing of the party while not addressing the valid issues raised about the integrity and openness of the process. I think all voters, including independents, are concerned about these issues. Now I'm not saying there's no place for a knowledgeable establishment in Pierre with a more pragmatic MO, but I'm not personally impressed with the high school tactics being employed lately. So what I want to know is - are you and your establishment friends going to be able to work with the conservative wing of the party in a mature and respectful manner or are we going to have more of the same?

  235. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    If conservative Republicans form an alliance with Democrats this next term because they have been ostracized and mistreated by party leadership, I will hold you and your friends personally responsible.

  236. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.29

    Bree: Dang! You figured out my secret plan! (Well, maybe not so secret....) But those Stace-Nelson Republicans need to get serious about swinging the power club... and Dems need to be ready to play. We can find some useful points of common ground, like our opposition to RL14 and RL16. But that marriage seems harder to forge than the combo of sensible Republicans like Nicolay, Murschel, and Cutler supporting a sensible Democrat like Mike Knudson.

  237. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Awesome. I'm not sure that "Mugwumps" will catch on again. Trying to pull the discussion back to the original "sensible" topic? You know I enjoy hijacking your threads.

    I think six Republicans endorsing a Democratic candidate with the same last name as a recent Republican candidate for Governor is sneaky and unprecedented. It's an obvious attack on a conservative incumbent, and it shows the ramshackle and unethical way the Republican Party has been operating in South Dakota. And that the Republican leadership doesn't immediately come out and denounce this move, as well as distance themselves publicly, is disgusting.

  238. Les 2012.10.29

    Oh the stories that should be shared on GOP endorsing Dems Bree and the lies getting it done. I can almost sympathize but have held the line on a Verilek endorsement wishing for our deep GOP bench to step up in 14.

  239. Bill Fleming 2012.10.29

    Not that long ago people in SD used to vote for the best candidate regardless of party affiliation. ...just sayin'.

  240. larry kurtz 2012.10.29

    charlie: you and ip will have scotch together one day.

  241. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Find me a fiscally conservative, pro-gun, pro-life Democrat who isn't going to toe the line and I would support him or her. And I mean vote that way not just say they are. I don't understand how the voter is supposed to pick the best candidate when most of them are lying through their teeth. And I don't understand why some of these very conservative districts have been taken over by the kind of Republican that only belongs in Sioux Falls. It wouldn't take much in the way of resources to get rid of them.

  242. Bill Fleming 2012.10.29

    Yes, I notice you don't understand a lot of things, Bree. Good luck with that.

  243. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Don't tempt me Bill. I'm a very resourceful person and I'm already annoyed.

  244. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.29

    Bree, honestly; we all can see the diversion. You missed the whole Reagan Era; did you not? Start by asking 50 year olds who their mentor was who drove them into the GOP. Then just for fun ask them why they followed this classy Hollywood actor come politician. David Stockman should come up in conversation.

  245. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.29

    [Larry, I say with 95% confidence that BS≠PP.]

  246. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Charlie, as a representative of the people I want you to address my concerns as a South Dakotan in regards to the way you intend to conduct business this coming term.

  247. grudznick 2012.10.29

    larry don't you think it's possible that Mr. Sibby could have those softwares on his computers and be half a dozen names on this board tricking Mr. H's speech pattern filters. Or maybe Sibby just has half a dozen different computers.

  248. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Grudznick, I am really sick and tired of chauvinists like you suggesting that I am a man. Cory knows everything about me including what I look like.

  249. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Since I am married and my last name is not mine, the point of not posting my last name is to protect my in-laws from harassment due to my opinions. I don't really see why you need to know who I am, since it does not affect the validity of my opinions. Besides, do you think it might be slightly hypocritical to be so concerned about who I am GRUDZ?

  250. Taunia 2012.10.29

    "Find me a fiscally conservative, pro-gun, pro-life..."

    Not conflicted at all.

  251. grudznick 2012.10.29

    Mrs. S. Get your emotions under control please.

    My comment was not directed at you or even about you. I was not suggesting you are a man. I was not suggesting Mr. Sibby is pretending to be you using his evil computer powers. I don't care at all who you are except who you say you are, Mrs. S. Up until this point nothing in my comment was to you or about you.

    But your last name is yours. You took your husbands name and now it is yours. Calm the hell down woman and stop being so hysterical.

  252. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Fine Grudznick. I will buy your story that your comment after Larry's was coincidental. I will put down the rolling pin I was going to wack you with. I am still waiting on a reply from Mr. Hoffman.

  253. grudznick 2012.10.29

    Me and larry are buds and I like to tease him. In no sense was I accusing you of being a man. Or of being Sibby. We can both move on from that.

    You and I but not larry.
    larry, what say you? kill kitties, burn trees, frack oil?

  254. Bill Fleming 2012.10.29

    Oh-oh. Bree dropped the rolling pin bomb.

    The ultimate South Dakota domestic throw down.

    Better skeedaddle back to the diner, Grudz.

    You're outta your league here, bud.

    (Me too, come to think of it.)

  255. grudznick 2012.10.29

    Bill, do we have a record yet on this post? Am I setting it with this blog item?

  256. grudznick 2012.10.29

    I am a great blogger but not as great as Bill.

  257. Bree S. 2012.10.29

    Charlie Hoffman, I know you are reading my posts. I demand that you give me your word that you will work with conservative Republicans in a fair and reasonable manner these next two years.

  258. Les 2012.10.29

    Charlie, it looks like Bree has the ol rolling pin poised at your noggin.

    There is no best man on your side of the aisle Flem. I can't accept Verilek or Obama as both represent at least in my mind a radical diminution of American power.

  259. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.29

    So Les, do Mike Knudson and those Republicans endorsing him also represent a diminution of American power?

  260. Les 2012.10.29

    Not by a long shot in comparison to the one colonizing our country and his players of which Mattie V wishes to join.

  261. Taunia 2012.10.29

    Lol. Bless America and her free speech.

  262. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.30

    This is not a court of law Bree and I am only under the assumption that we all offer our thoughts freely here. If you need that final question answered in order to sleep well though I would not want to arrest sleepy eyes wide shut. Of course I will work with Republicans and Independents and Democrats and Libertarians and whomever on all legislation I find good overalll for the entire state of SD and also good for District 23.

  263. Charlie Hoffman 2012.10.30

    Today would be a terrific day to drive to Pierre and attend the Oil Study Committee meeting where we will be looking at over 17 possible pieces of legislation pertaining to the oil industry. 10AM sharp up in 413.

  264. Bill Fleming 2012.10.30

    Grudz, counting back 14, with this post as #1, it looks to me like you tied the Madville post toastie record when you told Bree to calm the hell down, and she subsequently broke it when she played the trusty rolling pin card (across the back of our addled old skulls.)

  265. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.10.30

    Les, I'm glad you can still accept Mike Knudson and his endorsers has reasonable neighbors and fellow citizens looking to do right for our community. Now where does this nutty "colonizer" talk come from? "Colonizer" hints at that sneering, unhealthy "us vs. them" xenophobia that falsely portrays Barack Obama and Matt Varilek as "not one of us." Dare I ask what you think your use of the word "colonizing" means in full?

  266. Bill Fleming 2012.10.30

    Good question Cory. There may be a clue - hidden in the word itself - pertaining to the part of his anatomy from whence Les extracted the 'colonizer' notion.

  267. Les 2012.10.30

    GW, BC and others such as Hillary with her UN gun control are colonizers with executive orders and actions wishing to allow outsiders a restructuring of our nation.

    I'm glad you see it that way Taunia, your lips/tongue would have been long gone under Sharia rule.

  268. Bree S. 2012.10.30

    Wrong answer Charlie.

    Will this Oil Study Committee be explaining to the public why it's lock-step Republican members would support the theft of American lands from its citizens by an abusive foreign company, a company that is being sued by numerous Texas landowners with other pipelines on their land due to this foreign entity's legal tactics and underpayments, all to most likely increase gas prices in the state of South Dakota? Were these Republican members, many of whom are prominent landowners, actually thinking about what's best for their constituents when they allowed South Dakota lands to be stolen, or were they only thinking about the money they could funnel off to pointless committees and stupid pet projects?

  269. Taunia 2012.10.30

    Les: with your side's demeaning women by trying to keep women from affordable, accessible contraceptives and family planning; trying to kill bills for equal pay; cutting child care and child care assistance for working women and families at every turn; cutting government assistance for children and women; demeaning women by redefining the legal term "victim" in rape cases until the perp is convicted; supporting people who publicly call women sluts, whores and everything else to cut women down verbally and emotionally; keeping women from testifying in Congressional hearings about matters that affect them, and so on.

    You tell me who the hell is edging the U.S. closer to Sharia Law than the g*ddamned Tea Party Republicans.

  270. Taunia 2012.10.30

    Your use of the workd colonization is a substitute for N*gger, and everyone knows it.

    Your ignorance shines through in glowing terms. Stay ignorant and afraid, little man.

  271. Bree S. 2012.10.30

    Please Taunia. Your use of emotionally charged and socially unacceptable terms is a childish way to provoke a response. So "our side" is keeping women from testifying in Congressional hearings? Right. Well Taunia, that's because women belong at home making dinner and changing diapers - not interjecting their silly female opinions into what is clearly solely a man's business.

  272. larry kurtz 2012.10.30

    BS: your use of ignorance is off-putting. Go up to Red Scaffold and pray for guidance.

  273. Bill Fleming 2012.10.30

    Huh? Bree, are you channelling Anne Coulter now? Or are you kidding.

  274. Les 2012.10.30

    Taunia, I'll bleed for all the wrongs of "my side" if you'll bleed for all the wrongs of "your side".

    GW, Hillary, and BC somehow relate to your emotional charge Taunia? I will stay small and you stay.....well you just stay there, you seem to be enjoying it.

  275. Bree S. 2012.10.30

    Just using Taunia's tactics against her.

  276. Bree S. 2012.10.30

    Although I don't personally like Ann Coulter, that was a silly reference, Bill. She can't one minute be a brash, obnoxious female by liberal charge - and the next minute be Martha Stewart's doppelganger.

  277. Bill Fleming 2012.10.30

    ( gotta get out more, Bree. ...just sayin ;^)

  278. Donald Pay 2012.10.30

    I would guess there's much more to this than positions on abortion. It is much more likely to be an issue of general respect for women. I graduated from Lincoln High School with two of the women pictured, and both have fought for tougher laws on domestic violence. The same people who want to ban abortions tend also to support lax laws on beating up wives and girlfriends.

  279. Bree S. 2012.10.30

    Ha. That was great. I am now a fan, and require a t-shirt.

  280. Bree S. 2012.10.30

    Yes Donald, but I am a modern woman so I only allow my husband to beat me on Tuesdays.

    *leaves conversation to attend weekly beating*

  281. Bill Fleming 2012.10.30

    I'm a fan too, Bree. Like you, she's completely full of it, but she does have a certain distinctive flair about her that I quite enjoy.

  282. larry kurtz 2012.10.30

    coulter is one analogue of a female newland.

  283. Steve Sibson 2012.10.30

    Can't wait for Coulter to repent and turn to Jesus Christ. That surely will be the end of her popularity.

Comments are closed.