Press "Enter" to skip to content

The Strong Smell of Anti-Semitism: Only Christians Can Amend Constitution?

Curtis Strong probably isn't worth lobbing bombs at. His Constitution Party candidacy for governor will go nowhere. His branding is a mess (why Curtis Strong–Bill of Rights? That makes as much sense as a state-level candidate affixing "American Flag" or "Bald Eagle" to his name.). So are his unbulleted sentence fragments. Aside from his call to end the EB-5 program (and I commend Strong for being the first statewide candidate I can think of to so clearly condemn the troubled program), his issue statements are stock conservative-radio karaoke.

But a pre-Christmas missive Strong sent out on his opposition to a Constitutional Convention deserves our attention. Strong e-mailed the message to us journalists, then added it as a comment to a GOP spin-blog post on the topic.

Strong says we don't dare trust our state legislators to hold a Constitutional Convention because they pass too many laws as it is and would only make the Constitution larger. This claim is simplistic and illogical. We can create a complicated law to deal with a complicated problem and produce positive results. We can create a concise law that does great evil, such as "Indians can not vote."

But then Strong goes Christian dominionist... and maybe anti-Semitic:

A Constitutional Convention would be extremely risky at best until we have firm believers in Christ holding these public offices. Unneeded influence could be passed around a Convention with all the special interest money out there. As I look, scandals at the city, county, state, and federal levels are around every turn. I do not want these individuals changing one of the world’s best ever freedom documents. There is no country in history that has accomplished what this country has in 250 years and I don’t want crooked legislators changing what has been the backbone of this country for a quarter of a millennia [Curtis Strong, Constitution Party candidate for South Dakota governor, press release, 2013.12.24].

Note that one of the ringleaders of the call for a Constitutional Convention is State Senator Dan Lederman (R-16/Dakota Dunes), who happens to be Jewish. Strong appears to be saying that since Lederman does not firmly believe in Christ, Lederman is a "crooked legislator" more susceptible to the influence of money than men of Strong's faith. We thus cannot trust Lederman to amend the Constitution.

Do you see how your words can go wrong, Mr. Strong?

Even if he's not an anti-Semite, Curtis Strong cannot be my governor. He cannot represent my voice at any level of government, because he does not think my non-Christian voice has a place in government.

21 Comments

  1. interested party 2013.12.27

    If the shoe fits, it's bound to drop off the other foot....

  2. Roger Cornelius 2013.12.27

    What Strong hasn't researched is that "professed" Christians are already holding all or most of South Dakota's elected positions. Simply because you are a Christian does not mean you won't steal from the citizens of this great state.

    Ask Rounds/Daugaard and Bosworth if they are Christian?
    Their hands are green from the dollars stolen and mishandled by these fine Chirstians.

    The most important reason there should be no Constitutional Convention is that Republicans would dominate it.

  3. interested party 2013.12.27

    Exactly, Roger. The mystery is why Cory would want to disparage a candidate who will take thousands of votes from DD and zero from Joe Lowe.

  4. Rick 2013.12.27

    There is a value to demonstrating just how mainstream politics are controlled by the Lunatic Fringe of the state GOP. One of the reasons I applaud Larry Pressler's return to politics is he represents an era that preceded the uber-polarized politics of the extreme right. Say what you will about how committed he is to staying in the race, Larry knows right from wrong. He knows the extremists should have a voice, but not the final say on public policy. I hope Larry Pressler begins a new trend in politics, that the real, silent majority of Republicans can take back their party and help Democrats restore integrity to the system of check and balance in governing. And maybe I'm just naive.

    Disparaging an ethnocentric racist provides a public service. Maybe real Republicans will wake up and throw these goofball bums out of their party and set a common sense course in politics. That has more value than betting on whether or not Strong can creep into Daugaard's voter base.

  5. interested party 2013.12.27

    Rick: describe for us how a state selling native children to white foster homes is not "ethnocentric racism."

  6. Roger Cornelius 2013.12.27

    Larry,
    Do you really think Strong could take away thousands of votes from Daugaard? I'd say more like a few hundred at most, if he lasts til the primary.

  7. Rick 2013.12.27

    IP - I wouldn't dispute you on that. Interesting that you raised that issue as it stirs the memory of program abuses that I read about years ago on another, now defunct, blog. I'm not sure how your request is germane to my previous remarks, but this is a topic that deserves our continued attention. Last summer when Governor Daugaard ducked a federal hearing in Rapid City on allegations of South Dakota's foster children scam, the discussion sought to determine why the state would be motivated to participate in it.

    Apparently, some political insiders must think it’s a cash machine. Call it "economic development" for families seeking outside incomes. Take, for instance, Republican Representative Ted Klaudt and professed DWC "rising star of 2007" who took government funds accordingly for his foster services:

    FY 2002 - $11,108.00
    FY 2003 - $25,086.11
    FY 2004 - $33,712.50
    FY 2005 - $36,552.00
    FY 2006 - $38,818.46
    FY 2007 - $12,842.04
    TOTAL: $158,119.11

    Knowing how the GOP Attorneys General interpret conflict of interest laws in our state, I’m sure this was all on the up-and-up. Yup, right.

    I recall early news reports indicating his victims were Native American children placed in his care. Of course, Teddy Boy’s greed didn’t stop with accepting government funds in addition to his legislative pay, which is why he’s safely behind bars.

    Keloland covered this:
    http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm/klaudts-foster-contract-conflict-of-interest/?id=57372

  8. interested party 2013.12.27

    Roger, don't know of another candidate running in a Constitution Party primary.

    Thank you for more reasons to flush Pierre and rebuild it from city government up, Rick.

  9. Aachen 2013.12.27

    Because he's a terrible candidate, and Cory values providing data that allows people to make informed decisions, I warrant.

  10. Aachen 2013.12.27

    edit: the prior post was in response to interested party @3

  11. Kurt Evans 2013.12.28

    I was a South Dakota delegate to the Constitution Party's national convention in 1996. (It was called the U.S. Taxpayers Party back then.) During one especially heated platform debate, the late William Shearer declared, "A political party is not a church."

    Bill died in 2007, and that point of view seems to have lost sway within the party. Last I knew, the official platform included faith-based statements to which no non-Christian could honestly assent.

    Regarding the comment about a Constitution Party primary: Not possible under current circumstances. Candidates need 250 signatures. The party has fewer than 400 registered members, and each member can only sign one petition per office.

  12. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.12.28

    That 250 limit is interesting; essentially, when a party is that small, its "primary" is really just the competition for signatures. So what would happen if two candidates did compete and each got 200 CP members' signatures?

  13. Kevin O'Keeffe 2013.12.28

    While I'm generally rather sympathetic to the political program of the Constitution Party, I'm the first to admit that Curtis Strong is, ahem, shall we say...not the most compelling of candidates? Be that as it may, I think its quite unfair of you to extrapolate his reference to the importance of Christian participation in a proposed Constitutional Convention, as somehow indicative of anti-Semitism. I think its clear that he was expressing a somewhat unsophisticated (and unrealistic) desire to have such a Convention be made up entirely of people who share his beliefs, rather than explicitly calling for the exclusion of Jews per se.

  14. Kurt Evans 2013.12.28

    Cory wrote: "That 250 limit is interesting; essentially, when a party is that small, its 'primary' is really just the competition for signatures. So what would happen if two candidates did compete and each got 200 CP members' signatures?"

    If they were candidates for governor, that would mean that after the party had already collected nearly 8,000 signatures to participate in the primary, it could start planning to collect 8,000 more and try again next election.

    Some of these laws are really bad.

  15. Disgusted Dakotan 2013.12.28

    Sounds like a calling for you Mr Evans. I imagine the signatures needed to run for a state legislative race would be very few indeed?

  16. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.12.29

    Kevin, I'm open to the possibility that Strong's comment was simply unsophisticated rather than intentionally anti-Semitic. But running for statewide office requires a certain level of sophistication. Words used by a candidate will be held to a higher standard of sophistication, just like the words of a governor. If a candidate pops off with words that sound good in the candidate's small political clique or coffee klatsch but carry potentially harmful meanings to other groups, voters can rightly hold the candidate responsible for, at the very least, not thinking through his or her words.

    But I also apply the standard of literary criticism that I learned at SDSU: ascribe to the author intent, not error. Take words at their face value rather than selectively dismissing certain words as mere oopsies. The words Strong uses express a terribly undemocratic attitude toward not just Jews but anyone who doesn't share his specific Christian values. Jew, atheist, Muslim, doubter... pretty much anyone who doesn't pray to his God is a corrupt second-class citizen. That is an unsophisticated view. It's also a dangerous view to which I will not give a pass.

  17. caheidelberger Post author | 2013.12.29

    Kurt's comment makes me wonder how the CP was able to get those 7,928+ signatures required to gain new party status but failed to turn only 378 of those signers into party members.

    The CP and other new parties need only five signatures to run Legislative candidates. They have at least that many members in all but four Legislative districts. Fielding candidates in every district would be an excellent organizing experience for the CP and help them build a credible campaign machine.

  18. Kurt Evans 2013.12.29

    "Disgusted Dakotan" wrote: "Sounds like a calling for you Mr Evans. I imagine the signatures needed to run for a state legislative race would be very few indeed?"

    Yeah, qualifying for the ballot would be easy. At the risk of sounding like a politician, I'm not planning to run for the state legislature, but I'm not ruling it out.

  19. Kurt Evans 2013.12.29

    Cory wrote: "Kurt's comment makes me wonder how the CP was able to get those 7,928+ signatures required to gain new party status but [managed] to turn only 378 of those signers into party members."

    I don't have any inside information, Cory, but it's possible the organizers of the petition drive were hired guns sent in by the national party to secure a ballot line for presidential candidate Virgil Goode. In that case they'd have had little incentive to do any actual party-building.

    Just a thought.

  20. interested party 2013.12.30

    Mr. Evans: you really should go back to the kiddie pool and have someone teach you how to swim.

  21. Kurt Evans 2013.12.30

    "Interested party" wrote: "Mr. Evans: you really should go back to the kiddie pool and have someone teach you how to swim."

    I'm sorry if I've offended you.

Comments are closed.