South Dakota Politics

This Makes Me Feel Uncomfortable

Julie Neidlinger has some tough words regarding what it is to be a Christian. 

The message of Christ is offensive; Christ said it would be, because it was more than just about love, but about repenting and denying self and eventual judgment. If you find yourself hearing a "christian" message and aren't offended by it, it's very likely something that will market well in a christian bookstore and maybe even make a church grow by thousands. WalMart will probably sell the book. And if you have a strong BS detector, whether you are a Christian or not, it should turn your stomach.

I can't believe I am saying this, but read the whole thing.  I don't know what I make of it, but Julie is certainly challenging. 

Those Dead Israelis Were Just Asking For It

Jason beats me to the punch on the asinine comments by former Senator Abourezk.  The most damnable comments are these:

Terrorism does not exist in a vacuum. It does not come from thin air. It is a result of people who believe that their lives cannot be improved by occupation and that there is nothing left for them to do except to commit acts of terrorism. Professor Robert Pape has written a book, "Dying to Win," in which he displays the results of his study of suicide bombing. It is driven, not by religion, but by the presence of occupation troops in their lands.

The original terrorist groups in the Middle East were the Jewish terrorist groups,In the Arab world such groups are seen as freedom fighters, principally the Irgun and the Stern Gang. Interesting, the leaders of those groups, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, were elected as Prime Ministers of Israel. That proves that it all depends on who the terrorists are if we are to approve or disapprove of terrorism. Further, the U.S. government designates resistance fighters – such as Hizbollah and Hamas – in the Middle East as terrorists if Israel asks us to do so. That makes it easier to propagandize against the resistance when they are labeled as such.  resisting an illegal occupation.

I will not argue with Abourezk that Begin and Shamir belonged to terrorist organizations.  But if I may go back to third grade, I recall that two wrongs don't make a right.  Either purposefully targeting civilians for death is wrong or it isn't.  Abourezk clearly thinks that targeting of civilians is an appropriate tactic.  In particular he believes that when terrorists kill Israeli civilians, those civilians deserve to die simply because, in Abourezk's view, their government has committed unjust acts.  I will leave the question of the justice of Israel's actions regarding occupied lands for another day. For now I will only point out that Abourezk's views are are in direct contradiction to one of the fundamental doctrines of just war theory: to fight a war justly (jus in bello) one must not directly target civilians (the principle is known as "discrimintion"). 

Recent pieces that might put Abourezk's rantings in perspective are Elliot Cohen's take on the Mearsheimer-Walt controversy and Bernard Lewis on Anti-Semitism. 

James Abourezk: Congress Relies on Money from Radical Zionists

Our readers mailed this in.  You can't make this stuff up:

To stop the occupation, one must put an end to the incentives provided to Israel that keep them occupying. Those incentives are the financial and political support provided to that occupation by the United States Congress and president, and the radical Zionists throughout the country. When American taxpayers' money stops flowing to Israel, Israel will stop the occupation and pull back inside the 1967 borders, which will put an end to the conflict there. I am realistic enough to know that, because the Congress is pretty much reliant on money from radical Zionists, stopping the flow of American taxpayers' money to Israel will not come soon. But the sooner it does end, the sooner the violence will stop.

Be sure to read the whole thing.

The Free Press

This is a must read story in the New York Times about a 1918 essay by Hilaire Belloc entitled "The Free Press," which seems to parallel the advent of blogs and their fight against the "Official Press" (or, the "Old Guard" or MSM).  The author concludes:

There are whole paragraphs in Belloc's essay where, if you substitute "blogs" for "the Free Press," you will be struck by the parallels. He notes that the journals of the free press seldom pay their way and that they often suffer from the impediment of "imperfect information," simply because it is not in the politicians' interests to speak to them. They tend to preach to the converted. And they are limited by the founder's vision. "It is difficult," Belloc writes, "to see how any of the papers I have named would long survive a loss of their present editorship."

Belloc's point is not to expose the limitations of bloggers — excuse me, the Free Press. It is to show how, imperfect as they are, they can contribute enormously to our ability to learn what's going on. Anyone who spends much time reading political blogs will hear a familiar note — in far greater prose — among Belloc's certainties. He writes, in short, as a blogger of his own time.

Pot And The Kettle

Tim Johnson calls Tom Tancredo "obscure."  I don't want to dump on Tim  Johnson, but outside of South Dakota, he might as well be Mike Enzi. 

SF Mayor's Race

Turns out Bruce Halverson is helping himself to the non-political Augustana Alumni mailing list.

I was contacted by several Augustana Alumni members who live in the city of Sioux Falls, who have all recieved letters asking for their votes on the days of the mayoral elections. Now, this may not be illegal, but certainly this is extremely unethical behavior.

Bruce Halverson has also stuffed nearly every mailbox here on campus with volunteer requests, vote requests, and even requests for money.

Check out SD War College's post on this too

AL

Argus Leader letter to the editor:

In his March 28 column  about Sen. John Thune, David Kranz states that the senator's veterans positions are "controversial." Who does he go on to quote to make this claim? Roger Andal, a partisan political hack for the Democratic Party. He has used his position, as commander of the DAV, to make partisan attacks on Sen. Thune ever since the senator got into running for national office.

As a 10-year Army vet and a Vietnam vet, I have no respect for that organization here in South Dakota, as long as he is their spokesman. He is using that organization for political purposes and I wish the members would see through that. When he and Sen. Tim Johnson and/or Rep. Stephanie Herseth go public about the VA, all they do is badmouth a great organization. I have dealt with the VA here in Aberdeen and in Sioux Falls, and it does a great job. Of course there will be glitches in an organization with millions of members.

I wish the media would go to the clinics and hospitals to survey the everyday patients, and ask the VFW and American Legion, which work with the VA, how things are. It's time to get another view. I salute the VA and its people.

SF Race Update

Bruce Halverson, challenger to Mayor Dave Munson, has "raised the level of rhetoric" by being the first to publicly criticize Munson's management and leadership skills.  Argus Leader excerpt:

Bruce Halverson raised the level of rhetoric in the mayor's race on Monday by criticizing Mayor Dave Munson's management and leadership skills.

It was the first time that Halverson - or any other candidate - publicly criticized Munson for some of the issues that dogged him during the past year.

"I agree that Dave Munson is a good man," Halverson said. "He is a kind man, he is a gentle man."

But, Halverson said, the next mayor of Sioux Falls will face a number of complex issues. And Halverson argued that he possesses the best background to lead Sioux Falls for the next four years.
...
Munson continued to pound away on the successes he oversaw from City Hall, a central piece of his campaign.

He acknowledged that questions about his leadership and communication "have been circulating around Sioux Falls."

But he said that under his leadership, department directors and the city's police force have become more public-friendly.

Intellectual Diversity

Eugene Volokh takes a look at intellectual diversity at Ohio State:

Interesting Tidbit About the Ohio State (Mansfield) Controversy:

It turns out that Scott Savage, the librarian who is charged with sexual orientation harassment because he had recommended that the school assign to freshmen an apparently anti-gay book, is a conservative Quaker who has given up many modern things, including conventional schooling — his wife home-schools (or at least home-schooled) their five children — and cars; he takes a horse and buggy to work.

This has little to do with the specific legal and academic freedom issues raised by the complaint against him, but I just thought the juxtaposition of Scott Savage's e-mail-born controversy and his horse and buggy was interesting. And perhaps there is also a broader connection to the persistent talk about "diversity" on campus. I suspect that Scott Savage's presence and participation adds more to the cultural diversity of the campus than does the presence and participation of most other faculty, students, and staff. But of course one aspect of cultural diversity is that people who belong to some cultures might not share the dominant university culture's view on some aspects, such as sexual behavior, and might even say things that some see as offensive. What a surprise.

Nastiness on Left II

Michelle Malkin has some examples of hate mail.  Its remarkably misogynistic, considering the source.  Michelle attracked their attention by publicizing the Students Against War, and their actions against military recruiters on campus at U.C. Santa Cruz. 

Governor's Race Update

Democratic Gubernatiroal candidate Dennis Wiese was blaming Governor Rounds for not doing enough to boost ethanol sales.  His solution: ethanol will be mandated everywhere in South Dakota with the logic that it will increase ethanol sales (and telling gas stations what they must sell).  Of course, he admits he's still "working out the details."  In other words, he doesn't have a plan.  Not to mention that ethanol is already sold everywhere in South Dakota.  For the whole story, read "Candidate for governor stresses ethanol plan."  Also of topical interest is that Jack Billion, the other challenger to Governor Rounds, has launched his campaign against the "extremism" and "narrow focus" of "a few ultra conservatives."

UPDATE: It looks like we actually have a race for governor.  Jack Billion has launched his website.

Weather

One constant on the High Plains is weather.  Here's a New York Times story about a series of twisters in Iowa the other day.

The End of Omaha Public Schools

Dan of tdaxp was on top of this before I was, so check out his observations.  From the New York Times:

Ernie Chambers is Nebraska's only African-American state senator, a man who has fought for causes including the abolition of capital punishment and the end of apartheid in South Africa. A magazine writer once described him as the "angriest black man in Nebraska."

He was also a driving force behind a measure passed by the Legislature on Thursday and signed into law by the governor that calls for dividing the Omaha public schools into three racially identifiable districts, one largely black, one white and one mostly Hispanic.

The law, which opponents are calling state-sponsored segregation, has thrown Nebraska into an uproar, prompting fierce debate about the value of integration versus what Mr. Chambers calls a desire by blacks to control a school district in which their children are a majority.

Steyn: Policy Towards Iran Nukes "off-target"

The always-insightful Mark Steyn, writing in today's Chicago Sun-Times, argues that the current policy towards Iran is "off-target":

You know what's great fun to do if you're on, say, a flight from Chicago to New York and you're getting a little bored? Why not play being President Ahmadinejad? Stand up and yell in a loud voice, "I've got a bomb!" Next thing you know the air marshal will be telling people, "It's OK, folks. Nothing to worry about. He hasn't got a bomb." And then the second marshal would say, "And even if he did have a bomb it's highly unlikely he'd ever use it." And then you threaten to kill the two Jews in row 12 and the stewardess says, "Relax, everyone. That's just a harmless rhetorical flourish." And then a group of passengers in rows 4 to 7 point out, "Yes, but it's entirely reasonable of him to have a bomb given the threatening behavior of the marshals and the cabin crew."

That's how it goes with the Iranians. The more they claim they've gone nuclear, the more U.S. intelligence experts -- oops, where are my quote marks? -- the more U.S. intelligence "experts" insist no, no, it won't be for another 10 years yet. The more they conclusively demonstrate their non-compliance with the IAEA, the more the international community warns sternly that, if it were proved that Iran were in non-compliance, that could have very grave consequences. But, fortunately, no matter how thoroughly the Iranians non-comply it's never quite non-compliant enough to rise to the level of grave consequences. You can't blame Ahmadinejad for thinking "our enemies cannot do a damned thing."

It's not the world's job to prove that the Iranians are bluffing. The braggadocio itself is reason enough to act, and prolonged negotiations with a regime that openly admits it's negotiating just for the laughs only damages us further. The perfect summation of the Iranian approach to negotiations came in this gem of a sentence from the New York Times on July 13 last year:

"Iran will resume uranium enrichment if the European Union does not recognize its right to do so, two Iranian nuclear negotiators said in an interview published Thursday."

Got that? If we don't let Iran go nuclear, they'll go nuclear. That position might tax even the nuanced detecting skills of John Kerry.

By comparison, the Tehran press has a clear-sightedness American readers can only envy. A couple of months back, the newspaper Kayhan, owned by Ayatollah Khamenei, ran an editorial called "Our Immortality And The West's Disability," with which it was hard to disagree: Even if one subscribes to the view that sanctions are a sufficient response to states that threaten to nuke their neighbors, Mohammad Jafar Behdad correctly pointed out that they would have no serious impact on Iran but would inflict greater damage on those Western economies that take them seriously (which France certainly won't).

Meanwhile, the Washington Post offers the likes of Ronald D. Asmus, former deputy assistant secretary of state under President Clinton, arguing "Contain Iran: Admit Israel to NATO." "Containment" is a word that should have died with the Cold War, and certainly after the oil-for-food revelations: Aside from the minimal bang for huge numbers of bucks, you can't "contain" a state. Under the illusion of "containment," events are always moving, and usually in favor of the fellow you're trying to contain. But the idea that the way to "contain" Iran is to admit Israel to NATO elevates "containment" from an obsolescent striped-pants reflex to the realm of insanity.

All the doom-mongers want to know why we went into Iraq "without a plan." Well, one reason is surely that, for a year before the invasion, the energy of the U.S. government was primarily devoted to the pointless tap-dance through the United Nations, culminating in the absurd situation of Western foreign ministers chasing each other through Africa to bend the ear of the president of Guinea, who happened to be on the Security Council that week but whose witch doctor had advised against supporting Washington. Allowing the Guinean tail to wag the French rectum of the British hindquarters of the American dog was a huge waste of resources. To go through it all again in order to prevent whichever global colossus chances to be on the Security Council this time (Haiti? The South Sandwich Islands?) from siding with the Russo-Chinese obstructionists would show that the United States had learned nothing.

Bill Clinton, the Sultan of Swing, gave an interesting speech last week, apropos foreign policy: "Anytime somebody said in my presidency, 'If you don't do this, people will think you're weak,' I always asked the same question for eight years: 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?' If we can kill 'em tomorrow, then we're not weak, and we might be wise enough to try to find an alternative way."

The trouble was tomorrow never came -- from the first World Trade Center attack to Khobar Towers to the African Embassy bombings to the USS Cole. Manana is not a policy. The Iranians are merely the latest to understand that.

Read the whole thing.

Hildebrand Now Spokesman for MT Senate Candidate

Here's an excerpt from a Roll Call article today about Democratic hopeful John Morrison and his campaign consultant Steve Hildebrand, Tom Daschle's former campaign manager.  Roll Call excerpt:

The Democratic Party has spent more than a year trying to convince voters that Congressional Republicans are corrupt.

While they have succeeded in making ethics a central 2006 campaign issue, the strategy may have raised the bar for all candidates and now two Democratic hopefuls in highly targeted Senate races are under the microscope for both official and personal actions.

Montana state Auditor John Morrison, who hopes to secure the Democratic nomination to challenge Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), seems to be weathering his storm better than Rhode Island Secretary of State Matt Brown, who faces an uphill battle with former state Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse for the Democratic nod.

The winner of the Rhode Island Democratic showdown will face either Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) or Cranston Mayor Stephen Laffey in November.

Morrison, who faces state Senate President Jon Tester in the Democratic primary, admitted earlier this month to an extramarital affair eight years ago. Subsequently, the woman became engaged to a man Morrison's office ended up investigating for securities fraud.

Morrison ultimately hired an outside lawyer to conduct the investigation so that there could be no conflict-of-interest charges and the man, now the woman's husband, was sentenced to prison and ordered to pay restitution of almost $1 million.

Brown, meanwhile, became embroiled in a controversy that gave the appearance he was attempting to circumvent campaign finance laws.

Three state Democratic parties in Maine, Massachusetts and Hawaii all contributed to Brown's campaign, while donors who had given the maximum amount allowed to Brown in turn contributed to those state parties.

Morrison's campaign and supporters have sought to downplay the revelation.

"I think the situation is such where John was very forthright in describing the situation," said Steve Hildebrand, Morrison's political consultant, adding that little has been written since the initial story broke. "It was a personal situation between he and his wife . . . there's really not anything more to say about it."

Hildebrand said the issue has not dampened enthusiasm for Morrison's candidacy.

"He's had a great week in terms of supporters reaffirming their support, his fundraising calls have been as successful this week as in previous weeks," Hildebrand added.  "There are no signs that donors are going to walk away from him."

Mayoral Musings

South Dakota Straight Talk has this observation on the Sioux Falls mayor's race:

Last year at this time it was generally assumed that Mayor Munson would easily cruise to reelection without much opposition – what happened?

Two things – Dave Munson became a big bulls eye on a target in the sights of a hostile local newspaper and a young councilman with grand political aspirations who joined in a cabal with other councilors to undermine and embarrass the Mayor.

SD History

Jomay Steen of the Rapid City Journal has this article entitled "Preserving the past: Historians worry that S.D. losing its history."  Excerpt:

Despite scores of public libraries, private and public museums and a variety of historical societies throughout South Dakota, some historians and archivists worry that the state is losing an irreplaceable amount of history and heritage.

Experts attributed those losses to the lack of outreach and the lack of general awareness that family records, documents, diaries, journals, letters and maps inherited from family members may be deemed historical and are valuable to a variety of private and public museums and archives.

Others say people cleaning out storage closets, nooks and crannies are tossing out mementos that they later wish they had kept, and many others are selling the mementos on Internet auctions.

Reid Riner, director of the Minnelusa Historical Association and curator of the Minnelusa Pioneer Museum at The Journey Museum, said that the state loses its unique history whenever those historical pieces wind up on the Internet or in the archives of another state. “These items are what make us unique. When they’re gone, that history is lost forever,” he said.

Be sure to read this entire article.

Unfortunate Wording

Seen at the Aberdeen Ramada Inn:

Evidently the bunny is going to be quite rare.   

Happy Easter

From Jesus: The Man Who Lives, by Malcolm Muggeridge:

Either Jesus never was or he still is.  As a typical product of these confused times, with a sceptical mind and sensual disposition, diffidently and unworthily, but with the utmost certainty, I assert that he still is.  If the story of Jesus had ended on Golgotha, it would indeed be of a Man Who dies, but as two thousand years later the Man's promise that where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them, manifestly still holds, it is actually the story of a Man Who Lives.

Rounds

Getting to the Sunday morning newspapers, Dave Kranz is reporting on the likelihood of Governor Rounds' defeat via Hotline editior Chuck Todd:

Gov. Mike Rounds ranks at the bottom, and it is a great place to be. Hotline editor Chuck Todd looked at the condition of the nation’s 36 governors’ races and put South Dakota last – meaning the outcome is most predictable.

“Well, Rounds finally has foes, and he’s actually paying some price in his approval rating due to his abortion decision. Still, it’s hard to imagine him losing or even getting that competitive,” Todd said.

Rounds said last week this gubernatorial race could be his last statewide bid. Should that make Sen. Tim Johnson comfortable?

No. Rounds is like any other politician with a prerogative to change his mind in a minute.

The Left Blogs of Darkness

Master Heppler notes below on David Finkel's piece in the Washington Post, "The Left: Online and Outraged."  I think this story deserves further comment.  Allow me to begin by making a provocative statement: the contemporary left blogosphere is, today and on the whole, nastier than the right blogosphere.  Now allow me to apologize on behalf of my provocation.  I am not saying that the right is innocent of nastiness.  Nor am I saying that all left or liberal bloggers are nasty.  I am saying that if we had device that measured nastiness, nuttiness, and zealotry, lets call it a zealotrometer, the left blogosophere would swing the needle considerably further than the right wing blogs.  Of course we have no such device, and my judgment may well be biased.  So I modify my provocative statement.  The American left, at present, is heavily and disturbingly prone to nastiness and extreme views.  This exercise in being reasonable (or, if you doubt my motives, trying to appear reasonable) explains in part why the blogosphere is so prone to excess.  Reasonableness takes a lot of work.  You have to add all these cautious qualifiers and admit a lot of counter-arguments.  Its just easier to call the French cheese eating surrender monkeys, and be done with it. 

Mr. Finkel's article in the WaPo, not an organ of right wing opinion, provides a lot of support for my view.  Finkel focuses mostly on Maryscott O'Connor, patron saint it would appear, of the angry left.  A couple of examples:

From My Left Wing:

The people she's connected to include Shanikka, who decides one day to post on O'Connor's Web site a 737-word "open letter to President George W. Bush" that says in part: "You can't hide from the truth, Dubbya. You also can't hide from yourself. And it is YOU, Mr. President, that you need to run from. Because you are the problem. You destroy everything you touch professionally when you're left to do what you want. Everything."

To which another of O'Connor's connections, Bill, responds, "A most excelentest rant, shanikka, but don't you think you should distill this down to twenty-five words or less if you want [Bush] to read it? Or have it read to him. I'm sure he has ADD."

To which Nite74 responds, "ADD implies that some attention span is already present to be deficient."

To which Linnaeus responds, "I might say, though, that saying he has ADD is an insult to those who actually have it."

To which Bill, responding to his responders, writes, "It was rather though[t]less of me to compare the most asinine, brutal, criminal, disgusting, enraging, felonious, gross, horrendous, incompetent, jaundiced, kleptocratic, lazy, malicious, nefarious, objectional, psychopathic, quarrelsome, repulsive, sanctimonious, treasonous, unfit, vindictive, wasteful, xenophobic, yahooish, zealotic piece of [expletive] inhabiting the White House and the planet to persons suffering with a neurobiological disorder."

And then there are these gems, eaten up by the legions who read the Daily KOS. 

It also felt good, she says, transforming even, and soon she was posting regularly to Daily Kos, where she became one of the more widely read diarists with attention-getters such as "Go [expletive] Yourself, Mrs. Cheney" and "Bush Must Be HIV Positive By Now (you can't [expletive] 500 million people and not get infected)."

What is most disturbing about this kind of rhetoric is the sheer numbers it attracts.  Okay, so I'm jealous.  I would love it if SDP was getting 3000 visitors a day, like Ms. O'Connor, or 30,000 people an hour like KOS.  But these numbers do suggest a large appetite on the left for the crudest political speech. 

Finkle has a sort of apology for the material he produces. 

Not that long ago, it was the right that was angry and the left that was, at least comparatively, polite. But after years of being the targets of inflammatory rhetoric, not only from fringe groups but also from such mainstream conservative politicians as Newt Gingrich, the left has gone on the attack. And with Republicans in control of Washington, they have much more to be angry about.

This seems like rationalizing to me, but its not completely off base.  There is no question that Bill Clinton inspired a hatred on the right that was all out of proportion to anything he did or was.  Maybe if the blogosphere had expanded a little earlier, we would have seen the same level of nastiness on the right.  But just right now the major left wing blocks are making their counterparts, like Powerline, or Michelle Malkin, or Hugh Hewitt, look like paragons of reasonableness. 

DM&E Opposition

Argus Leader:

The Sierra Club and Mid States Coalition for Progress, two longtime foes of the Dakota Minnesota & Eastern Railroad’s project to haul coal from Wyoming to Midwest and Eastern power plants, are again filing suit in the federal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to try to halt the railroad’s plans.

In addition, the city of Rochester, Minn., the Mayo Clinic and Olmsted County, which oppose coal train traffic through Rochester, all have filed separate petitions for review of a federal transportation agency’s decision. Friday was the deadline for such filings.

Saudi Arabia

Don't miss this fascinating story in The Smithsonian Magazine about modernization being led by youth in Saudi Arabia entitled "Young and Restless: Saudi Arabia's baby boomers, born after the 1973 oil embargo, are redefining the kingdom's relationship with the modern world."  Excerpt:

Saudi Arabia, long bound by tradition and religious conservatism, is beginning to embrace change. You can see it in public places like Al-Nakheel. You hear it in conversations with ordinary Saudis. You read about it in an energetic local press and witness it in Saudi cyberspace. Slowly, tentatively, almost imperceptibly to outsiders, the kingdom is redefining its relationship with the modern world.

The accession of King Abdullah in August has something to do with it. Over the past several months he has freed several liberal reformers from jail, promised women greater rights and tolerated levels of press freedom unseen in Saudi history; he has reached out to marginalized minorities such as the Shiites, reined in the notorious religious “morals” police and taken steps to improve education and judicial systems long dominated by extremist teachers and judges. But a look around Al-Nakheel suggests another reason for change: demography.

Wyoming

Washington Post:

Most millionaire newcomers are building their houses here in Jackson Hole [Wyoming] (the name refers to the valley that lies in the shadow of the Teton Range and encompasses much of Teton County). They have made it the richest and fastest-growing part of the state.

Vice President Cheney has a home here. So do actor Harrison Ford and former World Bank president James D. Wolfensohn and Christy Walton, widow of Wal-Mart heir John T. Walton, whose wealth was estimated by Forbes at $18.2 billion and who died after his home-built aircraft crashed last year near Jackson.

...

As an engine for growth, the rich -- together with their demands for high-end housing, elaborate landscaping, upscale shopping, fresh food and assorted highbrow diversions -- have all but taken over this resort town and several like it in the Rockies.

In the 1990s, despite a decline in tourism and skiing in Jackson Hole, per capita income multiplied at about five times the national rate, unemployment all but disappeared and the Latino population grew rapidly to fill service jobs.

"We used to be a tourism economy; now we are a lifestyle economy," said Jonathan Schechter, executive director of the Charture Institute, a local think tank, and an economic analyst who studies resort towns.

Left Blogs

See David Finkel's article in the Washington Post entitled "The Left, Online and Outraged."

UPDATE:  Ed Morrissey responds:

If I were a liberal blogger, I would cringe with embarrassment after reading this article. Finkel doesn't report on the respectable blogs on the center-left like Jeralynn Merritt at TalkLeft, Ezra Klein, and even John Aravosis at AmericaBlog, who takes strident positions but provides actual argument to support them. The bloggers that Finkel highlights do not appear removed at all from Democratic Underground and Indymedia nutcases. The Post leaves the definite impression that Jeralynn, Ezra, and John are the exceptions to the rule on the Left.

The right-wing has its fever swamp, but they generally don't dominate the upper echelons of the conservative blogosphere as it appears the fever swamp of the Left does with the liberal blogosphere. I don't know anyone among conservative bloggers who wake up foaming at the mouth and retire at night barking at the moon in the manner ascribed to O'Connor. Most of us blog to improve our lives and the nation instead of indiscriminately venting spleen.

UPDATE II:  Powerline has more.

Ohio

Instapundit notes some "crushing of dissent" at Ohio State after a librarian suggested conservative books to students. 

Eugene Volokh responds:  "It's quite sad, I think, that these university professors are responding to offensive ideas not just by arguing against them, but by trying to coercively suppress them (apparently, according to the ADF's letter, with considerable support from their colleagues). I expect that the university will promptly dismiss the complaint, since even under the university's own policy such speech is not prohibited -- among other reasons, the speech wasn't 'based on a person's protected status,' since the statements weren't about the complainants, and weren't targeted towards the complainants because of their sexual orientation. But it reflects badly on the complainants that the complaint is even being filed."

Euston Manifesto

Paul Mirengoff:

Our friend Norm Geras presents the Euston Manifesto, a call by some British leftists for fresh thinking, including an unambiguous democratic commitment with no apology for tyranny. The fresh thinking also includes opposition to anti-Americanism:

The United States of America is a great country and nation. It is the home of a strong democracy with a noble tradition behind it and lasting constitutional and social achievements to its name. Its peoples have produced a vibrant culture that is the pleasure, the source-book and the envy of millions. That US foreign policy has often opposed progressive movements and governments and supported regressive and authoritarian ones does not justify generalized prejudice against either the country or its people.

This is the left that I grew up around, but that began to disappear in this country during the late 1960s. I don't hold out much hope for its revival here, especially the opposition to anti-Americanism part.

Argus Bias

Sibby has done an excellent job tracking the Argus Leader's Newt Gingrich headline blunder.  See his original story, and updates here, here, and here.

Iraq

Strategypage:

The rising threat of a sectarian civil war appears to be helping to avert one. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and some other nations bordering Iraq are increasing measures to curb extremist support in Iraq, and are curbing assistance to groups responsible for actions that are feeding sectarian tensions. Apparently leaders in these countries have decided that an Iraqi civil war along sectarian lines will inevitably spill over onto their soil, as large numbers of refugees flee the fighting, while their own citizens become radicalized in support of co-religionists in Iraq, both events possibly fueling internal disorders. There are a lot of Shia Arabs in places like Saudi Arabia, Syria and Kuwait. Most of these Shia Arabs live near the Saudi and Kuwaiti oil fields. It has always been, at least since the oil was discovered, the policy of both nations, to keep their Shia happy, or at least quiet.

Meanwhile, Iraq is also serving as an experiment on how to create an Arab economy that will flourish. . . . One of the things that has been changed in Iraq is the way the economy is regulated. Since Saddam was tossed out in 2003, the economy has been governed by Western rules. As a result, GDP per capita doubled by the end of 2005, and the GDP is expected to grow another 49 percent by 2008. All this despite continued attacks by Sunni Arab rebels on oil facilities and other economic targets. It's much easier to start a business in Iraq now, even though there's still a lot of corruption. The big change is that now the corruption is illegal, and there is even progress in prosecuting the government officials who take bribes or try to shake down businessmen.

Employment En Francais

By T. A. Frank, in the New Republic. 

"A regular job contract in France is extremely protective. It's very, very hard to fire someone. It takes a long time."

--University of Paris Research Fellow Nicole Bacharan, interviewed on NPR

 

10 March 1974 | Lettre de Discipline

Dear M. Letharge,

This is a warning letter. The length of your most recent lunch break, now entering its fourth day, can no longer be attributed solely to inexperienced waitstaff. Nor do we agree that we are "portion dictators." 

--Le Management

 

10 June 1978 | Lettre de Discipline

This is a second warning letter. (We understand that your appeal of our March 1974 warning is pending.) Naturally, we were delighted by your return to work this week, and those employees who joined the company after 1976 were especially glad to meet you. Still, we cannot help but notice that your colleagues maintain an average sales level of 1.6 sets of our encyclopédies per day, while your total number since your start date in 1970 has remained at zero (or slightly below zero if one counts the set eaten by your bichon frisé). Also, your supervisor, M. Beaucul, could not help but notice the broken window on his Renault and your signed note saying, "I have your radio, little Toulousian girl." We ask that you return his radio, or, at the very least, turn it down when working at your desk. 

--Le Management

 

14 May 1986 | Lettre d'Apologie

This letter constitutes an official apology, as ordered by Judge Droit. It was, as we now understand, entirely wrong of us to dismiss your complaints of seasonal affective disorder. We would be happy to have your rhesus macaque return to the office during the winter months to reestablish the tropical atmosphere you require. And we will move M. Dumas's desk so that the "flinging problem" is alleviated. 

--Le Management

 

14 September 1989 | Lettre de  Discipline

This letter is a warning, although we know that your appeal of our June 1978 warning is pending. (We congratulate you on having your March 1974 warning overturned on the basis of Surfeit Regulation 7B.) We remain committed to workplace equality, and we order that you immediately discontinue the blouse-tearing maneuver that you call "the cougar." It does not break the ice, as you claim, nor do doctors agree that it alleviates carpal tunnel syndrome. Also, we have additional questions for you about your new manager, since, after his meeting with you this morning, he was apparently found dead. 

--Le Management

 

19 April 1992 | Lettre de Discipline

We congratulate you on having your June 1978 warning overturned (the judge was correct that the complaint about low encyclopédies sales levels no longer applies, given the shuttering of the division in 1984). Although we appreciate your postcards--and we agree that the family you've started is lovely--this letter is a serious warning about your absence. If you persist in living in Barbados, we cannot guarantee that your employment here will continue.

--Le Management

 

23 July 2002 | Lettre de Farewell

Thank you for the invitation to your retirement party, but we regret that we will be unable to travel to Brazil. Although we sometimes disagreed, it was rarely a problem after you stopped appearing at the office in the 1990s. Will you be sending anyone to collect your macaque? Boumboum has adjusted well to office life, and the "episodes" have tapered to once or twice a day. Finally, we note that our warning of September 1989 has been upheld, so that, if you were still working for the company, you would officially have one warning lodged against you. 

--Le Management

Two Cheers for Immigration

Here is my piece on immigration published this week in the American News.  It summarizes the arguments that I have been making on this blog.


Immigration needs reform, U.S. allegiance

I'm in a very poor position to criticize immigration. As my family lines unwind backward, all the threads run eastward over the Atlantic. My surname, Blanchard, is French. I think it means "whitey." My mother's maiden name, Daugherty, is pronounced the same in Irish, but is spelled really weird. We even have a family crest, though it looks disturbingly like a deer-crossing sign. For grandmothers I made do with German Shooks and Martins. If I were a salad, it would be labeled "West European Mix."

In the second place, my sentiments on economic questions are mostly libertarian. I think that the exchange of goods and services between two nations always benefits the one and the other. Likewise every job that moves abroad is replaced here by one or more at higher wages. If you compare U.S. job creation with that of more restrictive nations, you will see that this is true. So why shouldn't the same be true when peoples flow across borders?

Lastly, my life has been immeasurably enriched by gifts from abroad. I read classical Greek in a style taught by a German immigrant, Leo Strauss. I collect Celtic music and Reggae, and I cook a mean lamb vindaloo. I attend a Methodist church (John Wesley was a limey, wasn't he?), but I also practice a style of Zen meditation brought to San Francisco by Shunryu Suzuki, a Japanese Yoda about 5 feet tall. It's awkward to complain about Mexican immigration when you're chowing down on chicken mole.

But it's possible to have too much of a good thing. On the whole, the American economy has profited by importing cheap labor from Mexico. It helps to offset demographic decline and to reduce production costs, thus making our goods more competitive abroad. Moreover, it lowers the price of a range of goods from citrus fruit to vibrating hotel beds.

But this does have social costs. It's true, as my libertarian friends point out, that most native-born Americans wouldn't take such jobs. But that might change if the supply of immigrants were to be sharply reduced and wages began to rise. At present, immigration clearly suppresses wages for the least competitive of native-born workers. If we document the 10 million or so undocumented workers, they will then compete for jobs now closed to them, reducing wages higher up the pay scale.

The political implications are more disturbing. When the U.S. House passed a bill with punitive sanctions on illegal immigration, it brought tens of thousands of Mexican Americans onto the streets of Los Angeles. Many were waving the Mexican flag, and one such flag was photographed flying above an inverted U.S. flag. Some protesters carried signs claiming the southwest for Mexico, to which it belonged before the 1840s. It might be that we have purchased cheap gardeners and maids at the price of our own version of Quebec: a non-Anglophone and potentially secessionist population inside our borders.

The implications for party politics might also be dire. The conventional wisdom is that this issue will hurt Republicans. If they press immigration reforms they will lose generations of Hispanic voters, along with Arizona and Florida. Maybe so. But can the Democrats really afford a coalition partner that hoists the U.S. flag upside down? Can they afford to lose black voters, already chafing under political and economic pressure from immigrant groups? When civil rights marchers carried flags, they were red, white and blue.

We need to do two things. First, bring the border under control by beefing up security and coming down hard on employers who ignore immigration law. Second, we need to legalize the population already here. There is no way that most of these folks are ever going anywhere. Republicans will have to suppress their indignation, and Democrats, their loyalty to a loyal voting block. But once the supply of illegals is no longer replenished daily, this immigrant group, like its predecessors, will find that its allegiance lies with the stars and stripes. The rest of us will find that their industry, genius and cultural treasures will continue to enrich us, in all the ways that nations can be enriched.

Kenneth C. Blanchard Jr., is a professor of political science at Northern State University. His columns appears occasionally in the American News. Write to him at the American News, P.O. Box 4430, Aberdeen, SD 57402, or e-mail [email protected]. The views presented are those of the author and do not represent those of Northern State University.

Kranz

In case you missed it in my election day post, Dave Kranz analyzed the Daschle/Janklow factor in the Sioux Falls mayoral race:

Smith is the only identifiable Democrat in this nonpartisan election. The big-name Democrats were loyal to him Tuesday, and now they might feel liberated next time to do what they want. Keep in mind that loyal Democrats also remember Munson got along well with former Sen. Tom Daschle. Some of them suggest that a vote for Munson would be the right thing politically to do regardless of Smith's animosity for Munson. The incumbent will attract some of Smith's vote.

The same thing is true with Brown. A good number of his backers will go now to Halverson. But he, too, had a lot of Democrats backing him, and they may now support Munson because of the Daschle factor.

Political ties might influence what happens to Mitch Richter's vote, too. He served in the Legislature with Munson and ran only because he wasn't sure Munson would get in the race.

Some of Richter's support will go to Halverson, but you might see some behind-the-scenes help from a common friend of Richter and Munson - Bill Janklow. Through the years, Janklow has been one of Munson's strongest supporters, and there isn't much doubt that he would like to see Munson re-elected.

McCain

Jacob Weisberg:

But the literal-minded left has McCain all wrong. He's trying to win over enough of his party's conservative base to win, for sure. But this is a stratagem—the only one, in fact, that gives him a shot at surviving a Republican presidential primary. Discount his repositioning a bit, and McCain looks like the same unconventional character who emerged during the Clinton years: a social progressive, a fiscal conservative, and a military hawk. Should he triumph in the primaries, we can expect this more appealing John McCain to come roaring back.
...

I'm not arguing that McCain is a liberal Trojan horse running in the wrong party. If you need to label him, he's a Teddy Roosevelt progressive—militant, crusading, reformist, and hostile to concentrated power. The Bull Moose has temporarily turned into a performing elephant. But the Moose will be back—around March 2008, if everything goes according to plan.

The Face of the Enemy

Here's why we fight:

Reasserting his role in Sept. 11, al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui told jurors Thursday he has "no regret, no remorse," was disgusted by the heart-rending testimony of victims and relatives and only wished they had suffered more.

He said hearing a Navy officer sobbing in court made his day.

"So you would be happy to see 9/11 again?" Prosecutor Rob Spencer asked.

"Every day until we get you," the bearded 37-year-old Frenchman shot back.

Read the whole article.

Let the Race Begin

Mike Gravel, former U.S. senator from Alaska, will be the first Democrat to formally announce his candidacy for president:

To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor

Contact: Elliott Jacobson, 202-558-6394, 202-460-8340 (cell)

News Advisory:

WHO: Mike Gravel for President 2008

WHAT: Press Conference where former United States Senator Mike Gravel (D-Alaska, 1969-1980) will announce his Candidacy for the Democratic Nomination for President of the United States.

WHEN: Monday, April 17, 10 a.m.

WHERE: The National Press Club, Zenger Room, 13th Floor, 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20045, 202-662-7500, 202-662-7512 - Fax

Paid for by Mike Gravel for President 2008

Murtha and Moran

Congressmen Murtha and Moran hear from troops in support of the war:

"And, Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just arrived back from Afghanistan -- we never got a letter, we never got a visit from you, you didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got was a letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to, but the morale of the troops is very high."

What was the response? Murtha said nothing, while Moran attempted to move on, no pun intended, stating: "That wasn't in the form of a question, it was a statement."

It was indeed a statement; a statement from both a constituent and a veteran that should have elicited something more than silence or a dismissive comment highlighting a supposed breach of protocol. This exchange, captured on video (it was on C-SPAN), has since been forwarded from base to base in military circles. It has not been well received there, and it only raises the already high level of frustration among military personnel that their opinions are not being heard.
...
Murtha undoubtedly knows full well that the greatest single thing that drags on morale in war is the loss of a buddy. But second to that is politicians questioning, in amplified tones, the validity of that loss to our families, colleagues, the nation and the world.

While we don't question his motives, we do question his assumptions. When he called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, there was a sense of respectful disagreement among most military personnel. But when he subsequently stated that he would not join today's military, he made clear to the majority of us that he is out of touch with the troops. Quite frankly, it was received as a slap in the face.

WSJ

Wall Street Journal:

If Republicans lose control of Congress in November, they might want to look back at last Thursday as the day it was lost. That's when the big spenders among House Republicans blew up a deal between the leadership and rank-in-file to impose some modest spending discipline.

Unlike the collapse of the immigration bill, this fiasco can't be blamed on Senate Democrats. This one is all about Republicans and their refusal to give up their power to spend money at will and pass out "earmarks" like a bartender offering drinks on the house. The chief culprits are the House Appropriators, led by Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis of California and his 13 subcommittee chairmen known as "cardinals." If Republicans lose the House--and they are well on their way--Mr. Lewis deserves the moniker of the minority maker. . . .

A category five political storm is building in GOP precincts around the country, and it is going to blow Republicans right out of the majority in November if they don't soon give their supporters some reason to re-elect them. So far this year they've passed limits on free speech that liberals love, but they haven't been able to extend the wildly successful 2003 tax cuts by even a mere two years. And now they won't even allow a vote on budget reforms that their own President and a majority of their own Members support.

At the current pace, a Democratic majority in Congress would be preferable, if only for reasons of truth in advertising

HT to Insty.

Minimum Wage

As someone who has some sympathy for raising the minimum wage, I find this post by Jim Lindgren at Volokh quite interesting.  I did not know that among workers over 25 only 2% earn minumum wage.  This tells us the minimum wage goes almost entirely to those at the very beginning of their earning potential. 

Christian Politics

Here are a couple pieces worth your time if you are interested in the intersection of politics and religion.  First, Garry Wills argues that there is no such thing as "Christian politics," which is true enough.  But Wills may go to far.  This piece offers a nice corrective to Wills.  It makes the point that although it would be incorrect to suggest that Christianity offers specific political prescriptions, nonetheless it seems entirely legitimate to take one's Christian principles and use them as one aid in answering political questions.  But one should be humble in that respect since for the Christian politics lies to a large extent in the realm of prudence.  Christianity offers certain absolute principles but rarely tells us how to apply those principles to specific circumstances. 

Kerry

Instapundit:

KERRY ON MEET THE PRESS:  A late hit, but it connects.  Worth reading for anyone wondering why George W. Bush is President.

Global Warming and Katrina

I noticed a pattern in the press when I was living in California.  Whenever it got really cold, you got more stories on the homeless.  Whenever it got really hot, you got stories on global warming.  These days global warming stories are all year long, but I did notice that whatever the weather is doing, whether it is cold, hot, dry, or wet, it is always evidence of global warming.  Hurricane season?  That's global warming stirring the pot.  Now this by Richard Lindzen, writing in the Wall Street Journal:

To understand the misconceptions perpetuated about climate science and the climate of intimidation, one needs to grasp some of the complex underlying scientific issues. First, let's start where there is agreement. The public, press and policy makers have been repeatedly told that three claims have widespread scientific support: Global temperature has risen about a degree since the late 19th century; levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have increased by about 30% over the same period; and CO2 should contribute to future warming. These claims are true. However, what the public fails to grasp is that the claims neither constitute support for alarm nor establish man's responsibility for the small amount of warming that has occurred. In fact, those who make the most outlandish claims of alarm are actually demonstrating skepticism of the very science they say supports them. It isn't just that the alarmists are trumpeting model results that we know must be wrong. It is that they are trumpeting catastrophes that couldn't happen even if the models were right as justifying costly policies to try to prevent global warming.

If the models are correct, global warming reduces the temperature differences between the poles and the equator. When you have less difference in temperature, you have less excitation of extratropical storms, not more. And, in fact, model runs support this conclusion. Alarmists have drawn some support for increased claims of tropical storminess from a casual claim by Sir John Houghton of the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that a warmer world would have more evaporation, with latent heat providing more energy for disturbances. The problem with this is that the ability of evaporation to drive tropical storms relies not only on temperature but humidity as well, and calls for drier, less humid air. Claims for starkly higher temperatures are based upon there being more humidity, not less--hardly a case for more storminess with global warming.

Election Results

Check my Electon Day post below to follow the updates as they come in during the day.

Argus Bias

Sibby:  Gingrich, latest victim of Argus bias

American Welfare vs. French Welfare

The May Atlantic is out, and it has a piece by Clive Crook that is one of the best things I have read on the immigration debate.  I haven't been able to get access on line yet, but its a mere two pages.  Hit the library and read it.  Meanwhile here is the gist:

Crook begins by observing that a hostility to immigrants is deeply entrenched in most European countries, but not so in the United States.  That Crook is obviously right about Europe may be seen from evidence in my January post Racism and the Welfare State.  It is not of course that the US is free from anti-immigrant racism, but that Americans as a whole, and their two major political parties in particular, are conflicted rather than simply hostile to immigration.  As Professor Schaff has pointed out, Republicans include business interests who like cheap immigrant  labor, and nationalists who see immigration as an erosion of civic unity.  Likewise, Crook says, Democrats include multiculturalists who welcome non-Anglophone newcomers, but also unions that fear cheap labor.

The root of the problem is the difference between the two welfare systems. Compared to Europe, the American system is brutal.  People have to work, and workers at all levels are exposed to competition.  Immigrants who enter this system, legally or not, have to pay their dues, and Americans find it hard to be altogether hostile to people who work hard for themselves and for their children's future.  North African immigrants to France enjoy a package of benefits as soon as they arrive.  But jobs are not in that package.  Jobs are regarded as gifts that, once bestowed, cannot be taken away.  The Gauls want to keep these gifts for themselves and their kin, thank you, as evident in the recent collapse of the CPE in France.  This insures that the immigrant population will remain largely isolated from the French economy.  That creates hostility on the part of both the Gaul and the other, as Derrida would have put it. 

If we want to become more like France, the way to do it is to put real sanctions on employers who hire illegals, without opening a path to citizenship for current undocumented workers.  If Crook is right, we are unlikely to follow that path.  I wish I were as confident as he is.

UPDATE:  here are a couple of key paragraphs from Crook's piece.

Looking ahead, Europe’s quandary is acute. Without doubt, Europe desperately needs immigrants and their children—immigrants who go to work, that is. Its population is growing far more slowly than America’s (even falling, in some countries), and is aging fast. A few decades from now, the costs of its generous state pensions will be insupportable unless these demographic trends change. Yet just as these problems are beginning to manifest, European opposition to immigrants, especially Muslims, is growing.

On the face of it, America’s welfare system is harsher and less hospitable than Europe’s, something that many liberals lament. But in this respect, at least, that appearance is misleading. The unintended consequences of Europe’s milder regime are not just a looming fiscal collapse but also, in the meantime, intensifying and plainly self-destructive anti-immigrant sentiment. America’s harsher insistence on work is not just economically advantageous (which is self-evident) but socially beneficial as well (which some may find surprising). Jobs alone are not enough to ensure successful assimilation of immigrants, but jobs are a necessary condition. By insisting that immigrants work, the host country attacks the incumbents’ intellectual and emotional resistance to immigration. The work requirement increases the dispersed economic benefits; it reduces or eliminates the net fiscal burden; and it lowers cultural barriers. As a result, tempers cool. In these key respects, America’s more brutal model is kinder—in addition to being more sustainable.

AP

Here's an AP story about Daschle's view on illegal immigrants.  Excerpt:

With Congress considering changes in immigration laws, former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle is backing penalties for people who have come to the United States illegally, but not a border-length fence between the U.S. and Mexico.

The South Dakota Democrat made his comments in answering questions Monday night following a lecture he gave at the University of Kansas. His speech was the third annual Dole Lecture, organized by the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics.

...

Daschle said the U.S. must embrace immigration but stop illegal immigration and deal with those already in the United States. He said illegal immigrants should be required to pay back taxes, pay fines for entering the United States illegally and learn English.

I agree with a lot of what Daschle is saying here but I think he's missing the point.  America does embrace immigration as long as it's legal and doesn't sacrifice our national security.  Unfortnately Daschle does not offer an alternative on how to control illegal immigration, so it does little to point out the problem and then offer no solutions.  I mentioned earlier (agreeing with Charles Krauthammer) that immigration reform must go in a sequence: 1) Secure the border, and then 2) deal with the immigrants that are already here.  We cannot expect any serious reform while the "course of least resistance" remains wide open.  And don't forget that this debate is not just about immigration but also national security.

Then again, conservative/libertarian blogger Glenn Reynolds asks: should we "Annex Mexico?"  Dan of tdaxp argues that this course of action would "make us more federalist.  It would make us freer.  It would make us richer."  Just something to think about.

Then there are deeper concerns in the debate of race and immigration that cut into the social fabric of America.  As my colleague Jon Schaff noted, we have "strange bedfellows" in this debate.  We have corproate conservatives who wish to have a continued supply of cheap labor and we have the therapeutic left that wants an unassimilated constituency.  Between these two views we have no room for discussion (which is the same problem with abortion, as I noted a while ago) since arguments are often ridiculed as "racist" or "protectionist."  The problem for America, of course, is ethnic separatism.  If someone approached me in a debate and said, "As a Chicano, I want to say . . .," this self-identifying language is actually bad.  Taking pride in your background is one thing, but self-identification has led to some very bad historical episodes.  Just take a look at Rwanda and the Balkans.  This concern has been covered by two very prominent historians, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and Victor Davis Hanson.  Unfortunately, the far right and far left won't allow an honest and open debate on the issues of race and immigration.  It's time we stop pandering to a political point of view and find a solution for the sake of America.

Why Lord?

One of the best restaurants in the nation, Berghoff's in Chicago, has closed.  I am speechless, for once.  Hat tip to the NLT gang. For those who love Chicago and German food (and who doesn't love both) I highly recommend the Chicago Brauhaus up in Lincoln Park.   

Mail Call

An SDP reader sends in this interesting piece on the Daschle / Piersol / US Attorney / DOJ / Patriot Act story:

Legal Times, April 10, 2006

POWER SHIFT

Buried deep within the bill that renewed portions of the USA Patriot Act last month is a provision that strips federal judges of the power to select interim U.S. attorneys. Previously, when a U.S. attorney vacancy occurred, the Justice Department had the power to name an interim U.S. attorney for a term of 120 days. After that, if a permanent replacement was not selected by the White House and approved by the Senate, the federal court in each district had the power to pick an interim. Typically, federal judges deferred to the Justice Department and simply reappointed the DOJ's choice. But on occasion, to the chagrin of the White House, judges have opted to exercise their right. The most recent instance occurred this winter, when Judge Lawrence Piersol of the U.S. District Court for South Dakota refused to reappoint interim U.S. Attorney Michelle Tapken just days before her 120-day term was due to expire. Piersol, a Clinton nominee who, according to the Sioux Falls Argus Leader , once counted former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle as one of his clients in private practice, indicated he'd tap the state's former attorney general (a moderate Republican) for the interim spot instead. The move drew the ire of both Republican Sen. John Thune (who defeated Daschle in 2004) and the Justice Department. Within days the White House ended the dispute by quickly naming a permanent replacement in Steven Mullins, an Oklahoman, through the back door of a recess appointment. A spokesman for Thune said the senator had nothing to do with crafting the provision, and called its passage so soon after the South Dakota dispute "100 percent coincidental." -- Jason McLure

It's Election Day

The citizens of Sioux Falls, Brookings, and Mitchell are headed to the polling stations today to vote on their candidates for mayor.  Sioux Falls will be interesting to watch with 11 folks who have thrown their name into the hat.  Greg Belfrage has been asking callers all morning who they plan on voting for and why.  It's been interesting to listen to.  My major concern, of course, is the Mitchell election.  I'm hoping that incumbent Alice Claggett is not re-elected, partially because of her stance on the proposed Mitchell convention center.  She has blocked progress on the center, which I think is a very bad move.  If Mitchell is to continue progressing and growing, we need this convention center.  Case in point: the Corn Palace is no longer available to host regional basketball tournaments because it doesn't fulfill the seating requirements.  Anyways, check back later today for updates on the races.

UPDATE:  The Argus Leader is reporting there will be a run-off between Dave Muson and Bruce Halverson in the Sioux Falls mayor race.

UPDATE:  From the mail bag:

I'm here in Sioux Falls watching the results and it looks like the Daschle/Janklow machine took another hit tonight.  The candidate of the Sioux Falls liberals and Daschle's lapdog and Munson basher Darrin Smith finished a pathetic fourth.  And long-time Janklow aide Dave Volk lost.  So what's happening in Mitchell and Brookings??  How will Todd Epp and the Daschle bloggers explain the loss of their long-groomed candidate Smith?  What does this mean for SD Politics?  Heck I don't know--you're the experts!!

Good questions.  We'll probably find out in the next couple of days.  More updates and analysis will be coming as news of the results trickle forth.

UPDATE:  Dave Kranz analyzes the Sioux Falls race in this morning's Argus Leader.  Also, if you have a radio near-by, Greg Belfrage will be talking to Munson and Halverson later in the day on KELO, AM 1320.

UPDATE:  KSFY has a run-down of the results.  In Mitchell, Lou Sebert dominated the race and defeated incumbent Alice Claggett.  In Brookings, incumbent Scott Munsterman won with Aguiar coming in second. 

UPDATE:  SD War College weighs in on the races.

Reservation Abortions

SD War College: "Cecelia Fire Thunder might want to hold off on pouring that concrete."

Ellsworth

Rapid City Journal:

Ellsworth Air Force Base, on the brink of being closed last year, now gets an additional mission — the Air Force Financial Services Center — and 775 new military and civilian jobs.

“This will make Ellsworth one of the premier military bases in the country,” Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters at Western Dakota Technical Institute in Rapid City, seconds after receiving a cell-phone call confirming the news.
...

Rapid City banker Bruce Rampelberg, who is chairman of the chamber of commerce’s Ellsworth Task Force . . . said the most important lesson of last year’s base-realignment and closure process was that bases need several missions to survive. He especially singled out Thune’s staff for “almost hourly contact” with the Pentagon regarding the financial services center.