South Dakota Politics

Some Steins Support Our Troops

Jason Heppler has blogged on Joel Stein's infamous piece, "Warriors and Wusses," in the LATimes., which opened with the words "I do not support our troops."    I think this Stein deserves some credit.  He has the backbone to say what he really thinks, and denounce pieties he does not feel.  I suspect he is right that some of the critics of the war are "wusses," who only mouth support for the troops because they are afraid of what people will think about them if they are more honest. 

I'm not for the war. And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they're wussy by definition. It's as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn't to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.

On the other hand, I think this position does a disservice to those on the left (or right!) who oppose the war but nonetheless admire the bravery and patriotism of American soldiers.  The yellow ribbon was devised precisely to allow the expression of the latter sentiment apart from any position on this war or any other.  This make sense if you believe, as I do, that soldiers as such are not responsible for policy.  Nor does that responsibility ultimately lie with the President or Congress; it lies with all of us who vote and participate in politics at any level.  Joel Stein rejects that idea.

Blaming the president is a little too easy. The truth is that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying.  . . . [W]hen you volunteer for the U.S. military, you pretty much know you're not going to be fending off invasions from Mexico and Canada. So you're willingly signing up to be a fighting tool of American imperialism, for better or worse. Sometimes you get lucky and get to fight ethnic genocide in Kosovo, but other times it's Vietnam.

The logical extension of the morality Stein advocates would then be that the U.S. would have no military.  But there is something worse.  It strikes at the very idea of civilian control over the military.  An army that exercised its morality by refusing to fight when called upon might just as well exercise it by removing insufficiently moral presidents and Congresses from office.  When Bill Clinton was elected a student of mine, fresh from military service, said he did not think that the army would willingly serve such a man.  I confess I was a bit sharp in my reply.  The President is captain of the Republic, I said, and the armed forces of the Republic will do what they are told. 

Of course there are limits to what orders a soldier should obey.  If he is called upon to commit and atrocity, he should refuse.  But short of that, policy is not his responsibility.  From Private First Class to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it is the soldiers responsibility to carry out policy made by civilians.  For that reason, if we don't like the policy, blame the policy makers not the soldiers. 

There is another Stein, Ben, who has a different take on how to view our fighting men and women.

The most heroic, ethically courageous, morally resolute men and women in the world today are the Americans, British, and other forces fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are fighting the most evil men and women currently on the world scene. The American Army soldier, Marine, Navy sailor, Air Force warrior, and Coast Guardsman fighting in Ramadi or Mosul is fighting men and women who kill children and old people for sport. The men and women of the United States military are fighting the remnants of a regime so evil that it pioneered the use of torture against children -- just for the amusement of Saddam and his family. The men and women whom Joel despises rid the world of a dictator so twisted and murderous that he openly admired Stalin and Hitler and sought to match their level of atrocities. The men and women who wear the uniform fought, bled, and died to rid the world of the most dangerous man on the planet in the most flammable place on the planet. They died to save a slave people from the genocidal control of a mad killer who thought nothing of gassing his own people, of wiping out entire regions, of setting up special rape rooms to allow his henchmen and his sons to rape women at will, who amused himself by pouring gasoline down the throats of totally innocent people and setting them on fire.

I like Stein 2 a lot better than Stein 1.  But I will confess one thing.  It is just easier to admire our soldiers, sailors, and airmen if you have some sympathy for the policy they are serving.  Its also easier to admire them if you think that there is honor in fighting for one's country. 

Herseth

Here's an excerpt from the Rapid City Journal:

Back in South Dakota from a trip to Afghanistan and Iraq, Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-S.D., said Monday that significant progress is being made in rebuilding both countries though challenges remain.

“It’s clear to me from my briefings and meetings with some of the troops and commanders on the ground that the military objective of training Iraqi security forces, of training the Afghan national army, of raising the police forces in both countries, that significant progress has been made,” she said.

Kranz

I don't normally challenge fellow South Dakota bloggers, but Daschle/Hildebrand employee/blogger Chad Schuldt has come to the defense of Dave Kranz and says it's a "travesty" he was pulled from covering the 2004 Daschle-Thune race. 

Of course, Schuldt doesn't discuss Kranz's long association with Daschle and his association with Democrats, which Kranz has never disclosed.  It is one thing for blogs to be biased, since they never claim to be objective.  It's another to have the state's largest newspaper and the so-called dean of South Dakota politics doing the same.  As lieutenant governor Lowell Hansen wrote of Kranz in 1986, "Everybody is entitled to have a preference.  But, when that someone has access to thousands of readers, the public deserves to know where he's coming from."

Maybe Schuldt should actually address the facts and evidence that have been uncovered.

Filibuster Watch

First John Kerry, now Hillary Clinton is appealing to the hard-line Democrats:

Sen. Hillary Clinton yesterday backed a rebel band of Senate Dems seeking to filibuster a vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito.

Democratic leaders had warned that filibuster efforts were going nowhere and would let President Bush score easy political points, but Clinton said, "I oppose his nomination and support efforts to block his confirmation."

"I do not think Judge Alito would advance the principles Americans hold most dear," she said, adding she would vote against a move to cut off a filibuster should one occur.

Liberal Academics

Rapid City Journal reporter Kevin Woster, when commenting on the new intellectual diversity bill in Pierre, honestly admits that professors in South Dakota are liberals:

I have a number of friends and some relatives teaching at South Dakota colleges and universities. All good, smart, caring people, and fine teachers. And, virtually without exception, liberal. K.W.

Filibluster III

Kent Conrad (Sen-ND) in opposition to the Kerry, Kennedy filibuster.

Among the rank and file, there was opposition to a filibuster from several lawmakers, including liberal Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and North Dakota's Kent Conrad, a moderate who is on the ballot this fall in a Republican state.

Democratic officials said Mikulski had said during this week's closed-door caucus that the 2006 and 2008 elections were more important than a symbolic last stand that would fail to prevent Alito's confirmation. Her spokesman declined comment.

The officials who described the comments did so on condition of anonymity, citing the private nature of the discussions.

In an interview, Conrad said that in remarks to fellow Democrats at the caucus, he outlined several factors. These included Alito's strong backing from the American Bar Association, his uncontested confirmation 15 years ago to the appeals court, public opinion polls and the fact that Republicans had voted overwhelmingly to confirm Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer when President Clinton nominated them. "So I put that all together and I find it makes it hard to justify a filibuster," he said.

That was a thorough and honest list.

 

Filibluster II

From CNN:

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry took to the Senate floor Friday to rally his Democratic colleagues behind a filibuster of Judge Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court.

But senators from both parties -- including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid -- described Kerry's efforts as an uphill battle, at best.  "Everyone knows there are not enough votes to support a filibuster," Reid told Reuters.

Kerry was in Davos, Switzerland, attending the World Economic Forum Thursday when he called for the filibuster. Democratic sources tell CNN that Kerry called fellow Democratic senators Thursday to rally support.

Truth on the Market

One of the great things about the blogosphere is its ability to correct half-truths or hold people accountable.  Case in point, Russell Roberts looks at a supposed "income gap" story by the Associated Press.

Construction Crane Collapses, Downtown Aberdeen

As far as I know no one was hurt.  I was there about ten minutes (around three o'clock) during which time they cut the operator out.  He was walking around on his own.  It looks like the boom buckled and broke while he was manipulating a three story tall concrete slab.  I suspect that the part of the boom that fell on his cab may have saved his life.  You can see below the space he was in.

Too Disturbing For Words

A colleague and I were discussing popular depictions of angels.  So I google imaged the word "angels."  I found the picture below at this site. This creeps me out and I like Dick Cheney. 

Hamas resolution

Senator John Thune acts in response to the Hamas victory:

A nonbinding resolution introduced by Sen. John Thune, R-SD, on Thursday called for the ending of U.S. aid to the Palestinian government if the party controlling the Palestinian parliament advocates the destruction of Israel, as Hamas does.

Stuck on 1968

Arnold Kling:

If 1968 were an influential thinker, it would have many disciples who share its folk beliefs. Those folk beliefs are the mental security blanket still being clutched by my liberal friends, even those who are not old enough to remember 1968.

I want to contrast the way the world might have appeared to a reasonable liberal in 1968 with the way events have unfolded since then. Afterwards, if you still prefer the folk beliefs of 1968 to my views today, so be it. But at least you have an opportunity to reconsider.

Read the whole thing.  HT to Instapundit.

The Kerry Filibluster

Jason notes this story below.  I say its all show, and Alito will be confirmed next week.  John McIntyre at the RCP blog dissects the story. 

Kerry’s push for a filibuster is all about internal Democratic politics and the ’08 election. And it is smart politics for Kerry.

Sen. Kerry in all likelihood is finished at the national level in terms of another presidential run. But Kerry certainly doesn’t believe that, and this is all about trying to put his name out there as the leader who represents the nominating base of the party.

While Kerry has zero chances of beating Hillary in a fight for the nomination, say the unlikely happens and Sen. Clinton doesn’t run, then suddenly Kerry is back in the game and he has probably made a lot of hard core Democrats happy this afternoon.

The Party of John Wayne

Richard Cohen has a delicious piece on John Wayne as a cultural/political icon.  But bear in mind that Cohen is a liberal and is not celebrating.  Well, not much.  He can't resist bragging about meeting the Duke.

The latest poll is not good for the Democrats. I am not talking here of the one showing George Bush's approval rating inching up nor the one showing immense if dangerously ignorant support for domestic spying. I'm talking about the recently released Harris Poll showing John Wayne one of the most popular movie stars of 2005. The one thing he and the Democratic Party have in common is that they are both dead.

That's about as good a first paragraph as ordinary punditry produces.  Then try this one:

You can scan the length and breadth of the Democratic Party and not find any breadth, and no Wayne figure either. It is certainly not Hillary Clinton or Al Gore or John Kerry or Mark Warner. None of them seem to have what it takes to appeal to white, male voters. But if you should happen to be in room 241 of the Russell Senate Office Building, you'll find Wayne galore: pictures of John McCain in various Arizona settings. He's a two-fer -- a military hero and a Westerner. Democrats beware.

What, Those? They're Just WMDs.

Strange that this hasn't received more press coverage.  Or this, which would have killed 80,000 Jordanians. 

By the way, check out the latest book on Hussein's regime in Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein by Georges Sada.

HT to Gateway Pundit.

Kerry

Here we go:

Kerry will try Alito filibuster

Sen. John Kerry will attempt a filibuster to block the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, CNN has learned.

Kerry, in Davos, Switzerland, to attend the World Economic Forum, was marshaling support in phone calls during the day, Democratic sources told CNN.

Sources say Kerry talked to a group of Democratic senators Wednesday, and urged that they join him. He also has the support of fellow Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy.

Some senior Democrats told CNN they are worried that the move could backfire.

Intellectual Diversity Press Release

From the American Council of Trustees & Alumni:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                         CONTACT:  Anne D. Neal, 202-467-6787

LEGISLATION REQUIRES COLLEGES

TO FILE ANNUAL REPORTS ON INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY

UNIVERSITIES MUST OUTLINE STEPS TAKEN

TO ENSURE FREE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS

Washington, DC (Jan. 26, 2006)—A bill has been introduced in South Dakota which will require higher education institutions to report annually on concrete steps taken to ensure the free exchange of ideas on their campuses.

House Bill 1222 was filed by Rep. Phyllis M. Heineman, chairman of the South Dakota House Committee on Education, mandating that the South Dakota Board of Regents require institutions they govern to report on specific steps taken “to ensure and promote intellectual diversity and academic freedom.”  The bill suggests a variety of measures institutions can take, but leaves the contents of the report—which will be made public—up to each reporting institution.

More than thirty legislators have co-sponsored the bill, including both Democrats and Republicans.

The bill comes in the wake of a national initiative, launched by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, to ensure the free exchange of ideas on college and university campuses.  In a report released last month, Intellectual Diversity: Time for Action, ACTA outlined steps universities could take to encourage a mix of ideas on campus and to respond to the growing public concern about the lack of intellectual diversity.

“As legislators we have many good reasons to request a report that assures taxpayers, parents, students and faculty that South Dakota’s public campuses are committed to intellectual diversity and a free exchange of ideas,” said Rep. Heineman (R-Dist. 13), who introduced the bill.  “$528,538,576 of them are our dollars invested (2007 budget request); 30,000 of them are our students enrolled; and 5424 of them are our faculty and staff employed.”

“This has become a nationwide topic with some troublesome situations in some campuses across the country.  Reacting to this growing concern, the American Council on Education, in which virtually all of our South Dakota higher ed institutions are members, issued a statement on Academic Rights & Responsibilities.  It acknowledged the importance of intellectual diversity and noted that this statement could be a resource for policymakers,” said Heineman.  “Accordingly, we are asking for a report on measures taken on each campus to assure this environment.  We suggest some contents, but leave it to the university to create its unique format making it a readable and useful public document.”

Rep. Gerald Lange (D-Dist. 8), who co-sponsored the bill, believes that providing an open forum for diverse points of view is rooted in the Bill of Rights itself.  “It's a no brainer,” said the retired  professor.  “It's in the Constitution.”

“Intellectual diversity and the opportunity to be exposed to a full range of ideas and philosophies is the heart and soul of a college education,” said co-sponsor Senator Lee Schoenbeck (R-Dist. 5).  “College is about learning and maturing and developing through exposure to all of the ideas that unite and divide us as a society.  This legislation is about self-examination by the system to ensure that no part of the college experience is lost to our students.”

Ryan Brunner, President, South Dakota State University Students’ Association, welcomed the proposed legislation.  “Intellectual diversity promotes critical thinking that is an integral part of a college education.  A report on intellectual diversity at universities would help identify areas of improvement, as well as praise the steps the Board of Regents has already taken.  South Dakota universities have taken steps to promote intellectual diversity and a report will give us a chance to highlight those steps.”

“The legislators deserve our praise for emphasizing the importance of intellectual diversity and doing so in a way that is sensitive to the concerns of the academy,” said ACTA president Anne D. Neal.  “By giving a mandate to the board of trustees who already are legally responsible, the legislature has properly placed the burden on the institutions themselves, rather than inserting itself in an inappropriate way.”

The American Council of Trustees and Alumni is a national education nonprofit dedicated to academic freedom, academic excellence, and accountability.  A copy of ACTA’s report, Intellectual Diversity: Time for Action, is available on the ACTA website, www.goacta.org.


To contact:

Anne Neal, ACTA, 202-467-6787

Rep. Phyllis Heineman, [email protected]

Ryan Brunner, South Dakota State University Students’ Association, 605-688-5181

Johnson

Kos isn't happy with Johnson's decision:

Johnson, Tim (SD)* (following the Daschle "winning" formula of going along to, erm, get along. "Smart" move Tim.)

Some of their reader's aren't happy either.  Be sure to note some of those wacky comments.

How I Learned To Start Loving Hamas

Like Prof. Blanchard I actually find some consolation in the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections.  Let's see what the Palestinian people think of Hamas when Hamas is responsible for "making the trains run on time."  Now Hamas has actual responsibility for running a quasi-state.  This might be the worst thing that could have happened to them. 

Johnson On Alito

I was interviewed by a local paper whose name rhymes with Bargus Fleader about Tim Johnson's decision to back Judge Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court.  I essentially said that Johnson's decision was likely equal parts politics and principle.  This is undoubtedly the smart political move in the state if Sen. Johnson intends to run for re-election in 2008, and it is also the principled decision.  Sen. Johnson has seen through his political disagreements with Judge Alito and recognized that Alito is a superb legal mind and a man of high integrity.  Well done, Senator. 

Hamas Wins Palestinian Elections

By a big margin, the terrorist group, Hamas, has won the Palestinian elections.  From the London Times:

In the end it was a landslide. Hamas, the Islamic militant group, won 76 votes in the Palestinian parliamentary elections, compared to 43 for President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement.

The conventional wisdom, predictably is that this is a disaster.  Richard Chesnoff, of the New York Daily News, is right about what gave Hamas the victory.

Yasser Arafat's chickens have come home to roost. After decades of dictatorial and corrupt control by the late Fatah leader and his cohorts, vast numbers of voters in both the West Bank and Gaza have angrily turned their backs on Arafat's heirs and given their support to rival Hamas, the radical Islamic party.

He is wrong, I think, about the consequences of Hamas' victory.

Hamas remains the same terrorist party it's always been, a heavily armed, blood-drenched gang that boasts of suicide bombings and doesn't even pretend to want peace with Israel. Its goals are crystal clear: the total annihilation of the Jewish state in favor of an Islamic state throughout the entire Holy Land. Its presence in a Palestinian government is hardly incentive for Israel to follow up on its recent withdrawal from Gaza and move ahead on the U.S.-sponsored road map to Mideast peace.

The danger is that there are already some in Israel - and a growing flock outside - who talk about the need for Israel to launch a dialogue with Hamas leaders - as though talking to this band of religious fanatics who hate Jews and Christians would be any more successful than trading land for peace was with the Arafat gang.

Israel had already largely abandoned the idea of negotiations with the Palestinians in favor of building a concrete toddler gate to keep the terrorists out of Israel.  I don't think they will be more friendly to Hamas. 

Yet there are those who argue that if Hamas gains political responsibility, it will find itself forced to weed out its militants, eventually turn from terror and moderate its policies.  You mean like the mad mullahs in Iran moderated their policies after they took power?

But the Mad Mullahs did not come to power in an election, and have never submitted their authority to the voters.  Iran has a functioning democracy, of sorts, but the control of the security forces in firmly in the hands of the clerics.  And the latter can decide who is eligible to run for office.  You can't expect democracy to have a beneficial effect on those who are never required to submit to it. 

Hamas has come to power for the first time by means of an election, and that may well prove decisive in shaping the future.  The conventional wisdom that favored Fatah was based on the theory that Fatah was willing and had the power to eventually make peace, which it wasn't and it didn't.  Hamas is only worse in the sense that they actually say what they think.  But Hamas is also a more efficient organization, having experience in building networks of charities, clinics, and schools.  They may actually be capable of building a functioning government, something Yasser Arafat's Kleptocrats were altogether uninterested in.  And having tasted electoral power, they now have something to lose.  I think that will, eventually, make them more responsible. 

I think this is in fact progress.  But if I was in Israel, I would think the Lord for Sharon and his wall.   

Tim Johnson to Vote for Alito

Washington (AP):

South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson said Thursday that he will vote for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, making him the second Democrat to support the judge.

``It does appear his legal skills are excellent and he is a person of integrity, and I do believe it can't be said that his legal viewpoint is outside the mainstream of contemporary jurisprudence,'' Johnson told the Associated Press. ``It was somewhat of a close call for me.''

Still, he said the conservative federal appeals court judge would not have been his pick for the Supreme Court, adding that his deliberation over Alito was more difficult than his decision to support Chief Justice John Roberts last fall.

``I am troubled by Judge Alitos apparent views on matters such as executive power, his past opposition to the principle of one person, one vote, and his narrow interpretation of certain civil rights laws,'' Johnson said. ``Even so, I cannot accept an argument that his views are so radical that the Senate is justified in denying his confirmation.''

He said he would fight any effort by Democrats to filibuster Alito's nomination.

Intellectual Diversity

Here's a breaking news story from the Rapid City Journal:

Saying that they want to ensure that a wide range of views is heard and tolerated on college campuses, a group of state lawmakers is proposing legislation that would ask South Dakota’s six state universities to report periodically on their efforts to promote “intellectual diversity.”

Rep. Phyllis Heineman, R-Sioux Falls, chairwoman of the House Education Committee and the chief sponsor of HB1222, said Wednesday that the goal is to get ahead of situations in other states where students, speakers and faculty members have been harassed because of their views.

“This is not an indictment at all,” Heineman said. “For us, it is good governance.”

She said there have been no such incidents on South Dakota campuses that she is aware of and that she has heard only “anecdotal” reports.

“We are just trying to be proactive and not wait for any incidents, such as the Iraq war veteran who was harassed at Columbia University,” Heineman said.

Tad Perry, executive director of the South Dakota Board of Regents, said he discussed the idea with Heineman but he hasn’t yet read the bill. He said it could raise some concerns.

“If it is just about making a report, we could go along with that,” he said. “If it goes beyond that, I might have some questions.”

For the complete story, see Thursday's Rapid City Journal.

For a little background on intellectual diversity read this piece by the man who conceived it, David Horowitz.

UPDATE:  Here's a copy of the bill.  Here's the Rapid City Journal's full report on the bill.

For more background, see this:

According to Karl Zinsmeister's article, "The Shame of America's One-Party Campuses," The American Enterprise (September 2002), campus political, and hence ideological, diversity is all but absent. Mr. Zinsmeister sampled faculty political affiliation obtained from local voter registration records at several universities. He classified faculty who registered as Democratic, Green or Working Families Party as members of the party of the Left and those registered as Republicans or Libertarians as members of the party of the Right.

The results were: Brown University, 5 percent of faculty were members of the party of the Right; at Cornell it was 3 percent; Harvard, 4 percent; Penn State, 17 percent; Stanford University, 11 percent; UCLA, 6 percent; and at UC Santa Barbara, 1 percent. There are other universities in the survey; however, the pattern is the same - a faculty dominated by leftist ideology. In some departments, such as Women's Studies, African-American Studies, Political Science, Sociology, History and English, the entire faculty is leftist. When it came to the 2000 election, 84 percent of Ivy League faculty voted for Al Gore, 6 percent for Ralph Nader and 9 percent for George Bush. In the general electorate, the vote was split at 48 percent for Gore and Bush and 3 percent for Nader. Zinsmeister concludes that one would find much greater political diversity at a grocery store or on a city bus.

And this from the New York Times:

At the birthplace of the free speech movement, campus radicals have a new target: the faculty that came of age in the 60's. They say their professors have been preaching multiculturalism and diversity while creating a political monoculture on campus.

Conservatism is becoming more visible at the University of California here, where students put out a feisty magazine called The California Patriot and have made the Berkeley Republicans one of the largest groups on campus. But here, as at schools nationwide, the professors seem to be moving in the other direction, as evidenced by their campaign contributions and two studies being published on Nov. 18.

One of the studies, a national survey of more than 1,000 academics, shows that Democratic professors outnumber Republicans by at least seven to one in the humanities and social sciences. That ratio is more than twice as lopsided as it was three decades ago, and it seems quite likely to keep increasing, because the younger faculty members are more consistently Democratic than the ones nearing retirement, said Daniel Klein, an associate professor of economics at Santa Clara University and a co-author of the study.

In a separate study of voter registration records, Professor Klein found a nine-to-one ratio of Democrats to Republicans on the faculties of Berkeley and Stanford. That study, which included professors from the hard sciences, engineering and professional schools as well as the humanities and social sciences, also found the ratio especially lopsided among the younger professors of assistant or associate rank: 183 Democrats versus 6 Republicans.

The political imbalance on faculties has inspired a campaign to have state legislatures and Congress approve an "academic bill of rights" protecting students and faculty members from discrimination for their political beliefs. The campaign is being led by Students for Academic Freedom, a group with chapters at Berkeley and more than 135 other campuses. It was founded last year by the leftist-turned-conservative David Horowitz, who helped start the 1960's antiwar movement while a graduate student at Berkeley.

Is Dave Kranz Biased?

As long time South Dakota Politics readers know, some of our writers think there's a good deal of evidence of bias on the part of the Argus Leader's  political reporter, Dave Kranz. 

For more on this subject, see Mt. Blogmore, where Sibby and Rapid City Journal reporter Kevin Woster are jousting over the bias of Dave Kranz:

Kevin, atleast I have documented and provided a link to my opinion that is supported by scores of other links. And did Don read any of the stuff that Dave Kranz wrote while managing editor of the Mitchell Daily Republic from 1976 to 1983? I have.

BTW: I don’t mind it that Kranz is a partisan Democrat. I too enjoy reading his stuff. I just ask the Argus follow its own ethics policy on full disclosure and then put Kranz on the opinion page. And if they want to say they present both sides, then find a conservative that will give the other side.

Sibster: Any chance you could lighten up and give my buddy Kranz a break? K.W.

More Cuba

Building on Prof. Blanchard's post below, in fact at the New York Public library you can buy Che Guevara watches.  This is the man who started the Cuban prison camp system and who personally assassinated scores of political dissidents. 

American Library Association and Cuba

Poet and commentator Andrei Codrescu was the keynote speaker at the Midwinter Meeting of the American Library Association.  He went off-script. 

It was with a great deal of dismay that I learned that the American Library Association had taken no action to condemn the imprisonment of librarians, the banning of books, the repression of expression and the torture of dissidents only 90 miles away from our shores, in Cuba. In March 1988, two residents of Las Tunas, Roman Colas and Berta Mexidor, opened a private library in their home, dedicated to offering Cubans books not officially available. The Felix-Varela Library was the first of a network of private libraries that were established by the volunteers in Cuba to bring light to the oppressive darkness of Castro’s police state.

103 libraries and 182,000 registered patrons were affiliated with the expanding Independent Libraries Project by the end of 2002. From the very beginning of their existence, the private librarians were subject to threats, harassments, evictions, arrests, police raids, and the seizure of book collections, books that disappeared so quickly they could only have been burned. In November 1999 Ramon Colas was arrested. Amnesty International declared him a “prisoner of conscience.” Hundreds of other librarians were arrested not long afterward, and their libraries and collections were confiscated. The ALA’s International Rights Committee looked, rather late, into the dire situation of the Cuban librarians. On January 13, 2001, the Latin American subcommittee of the IRC conducted a hearing of the ALA Midwinter conference in Washington where reports on the worsening situation in Cuba were presented by witnesses. . . . Amazingly enough, the final report of the ALA declined to recognize the new Cuban libraries as “libraries” and the librarians themselves were referred to as “individuals associated with these collections.” Since then, those “individuals” have been subject to brutal imprisonment and their books have disappeared.

The ALA councilors have remained silent on the issue to this day. Am I hallucinating? Is this the same American Library Association that stands against censorship and for freedom of expression everywhere?

There seem to be two forces working here.  One is that the ALA guards the privledged status of degreed librarians with a tenacity that would make a Medieval guild look generous.  But that is not enough to explain what was said in the exchange after Codrescu's speech.  From Library Journal:

[ALA President Michael] Gorman said there was a dispute about whether the activity of lending books "is being a librarian" and that "there is some dispute about the funding of these people who claim to set up libraries."

People are being thrown in jail and the ALA is concerned that they aren't authentic.  The part about the funding of "these people" is a reference to a rumor that the Independent Library Movement is funded by the CIA.  In fact, the ALA has a soft spot for Castro. 

 

ABC Pulls A CBS?

An interesting story about ABC News ignoring facts in an attempt to disgrace Justice Scalia.  Hat tip to NRO. 

McGovern

Rapid City Journal:

CHADRON, Neb. -- Former South Dakota Sen. George McGovern will be the keynote speaker at the Mari Sandoz Heritage Society's annual meeting at Chadron State College on Thursday, March 30.

The announcement was made during a news conference at CSC to discuss the receipt of the gift of 3,700 acres of Dawes County ranchland from Esther Pilster and her late husband Raleigh to the Sandoz Society.

McGovern, 83, is a South Dakota native who fought as a pilot in World War II and later became involved in politics.

Ron Hull of Lincoln, president of the Sandoz Society, said McGovern was one of his professors at Dakota Wesleyan University in Mitchell in the early 1950s and that they have kept in touch through the years.

McGovern served in the U.S. House of Representatives from South Dakota from 1957-61 and in the U.S. Senate from 1963-80. He was the Democratic Party's nominee for president in 1972. He received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2000 and was appointed the United Nations global ambassador on world hunger in 2001.

Hull said McGovern recently has joined with Bob Dole, the former Kansas senator and Republican nominee for president in 1996, to fight starvation and world hunger.

Who Will Johnson Side With?

According to Congressional Quarterly Weekly, January 9, 2006, Senator Tim Johnson only supports the President 45% of the time.  But his Democratic colleague from Nebraska, Ben Nelson, who has announced he's voting for Alito, supports the President 76% of the time.

Sense and Nonsense on Medicare

Interesting contrast yesterday between two United States Senators in the way they are approaching the current glitches with the Medicare prescription drug benefit.  A small percentage of beneficiaries have had difficulties at the pharmacy counter because a huge influx of enrollments on December 31 and the difficulty getting all of that data into computer systems.  States and pharmacies are having to front the money to make sure these seniors get their prescriptions filled.

Senator John Thune took a no-nonsense approach, asking Medicare to make prompt reimbursements to pharmacies and state treasuries.  From the Aberdeen American News:

"It is only right for CMS to facilitate reimbursements for the state and participating pharmacies," Thune said in a release.  "I'm hopeful my request today will help to speed the process along."

Then there was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, quoted in an AP story:

He (Reid) noted problems with the newly implemented Medicare prescription drug plan.  "The state of our union today is that we have seniors begging in the streets for the medicines they need."

One wonders if, in Reid's home state of Nevada, Las Vegas gamblers are having to step around downtrodden elderly Americans holding up signs saying "Will Work For Prescription Drugs".  There are legitimate discussions to be had about the role of the private sector in Medicare's long-term future, but over-the-top rhetoric suggesting that Medicare is turning U.S. cities into a caricature of Calcutta doesn't contribute to meaningful discourse.

A Penny for my Thoughts

Professor Schaff blogs below on the death of former Congressman Tim Penny's wife.  Some years ago I attended a meeting of local Democrats at the invitation of my colleague, Jerry Rosonke.  The speaker was Tim Penny.  He was short, and I admire that in a man.  He was also thin, and may have been one of the few members of Congress I could wrestle to the ground.  I also admired the fact that he was a fiscal conservative.  Indeed, he was much more so than the current Republican Congress and President.  He also seemed to be a genuinely decent person.  Having been married for almost 25 years, the thought of losing a wife is terrifying.  God bless Tim. 

Joel Stein: "I don't support our troops."

A columnist at the LA Times shows his true colors:

I DON'T SUPPORT our troops. This is a particularly difficult opinion to have, especially if you are the kind of person who likes to put bumper stickers on his car. Supporting the troops is a position that even Calvin is unwilling to urinate on.
...
But blaming the president is a little too easy. The truth is that people who pull triggers are ultimately responsible, whether they're following orders or not. An army of people making individual moral choices may be inefficient, but an army of people ignoring their morality is horrifying. An army of people ignoring their morality, by the way, is also Jack Abramoff's pet name for the House of Representatives.

I do sympathize with people who joined up to protect our country, especially after 9/11, and were tricked into fighting in Iraq. I get mad when I'm tricked into clicking on a pop-up ad, so I can only imagine how they feel.
...

I'm not advocating that we spit on returning veterans like they did after the Vietnam War, but we shouldn't be celebrating people for doing something we don't think was a good idea. All I'm asking is that we give our returning soldiers what they need: hospitals, pensions, mental health and a safe, immediate return. But, please, no parades.

Seriously, the traffic is insufferable.

Some reader comments:

Joel Stein is an ivory tower dwelling Marxist punk. His use of the word "Imperialism" with a straight face alone shows his lack of any connection with reality. He should just go get a pedicure with Zsa Zsa and leave politics to the adults.
Submitted by: Matt Dedinas 3rd ID ('96-'99)
2:25 PM PST, Jan 24, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Joel Stein. Tell me again why the written opinions of an overeducated, underexperienced, snotty little prick are vital to the image and mission of a major US daily newspaper? Glenn Perry Colonel, US Air Force (Ret)
Submitted by: Glenn M. Perry
2:14 PM PST, Jan 24, 2006

Check out Hugh Hewitt's comments.

Argus Bias

Kevin Woster raises the question of whether the Argus Leader is biased and gets this response from a reader:

The Argus biased??? Say it ain’t so Kevin! What were you, born on Mars??? The Argus has repeatedly attempted to sway public opinion and the election process with their “unbiased reporting”. Ask any of the candidates it DIDN’T endorse…Do you think its it fair for the State’s largest paper to endorse one candidate over another??? Does that lead to a “more informed electorate”? And by the way, what collective knowledge well are the editors of the Argus drinking from that the voters of South Dakota aren’t given access? Its plain that the Thune camp just said what the other “victims” haven’t…The Argus doesn’t just give the facts, it gives its spin. If you don’t believe me, ask the Governor… the current and most favored whipping boy for the Argus. The Argus deserves this criticism and should take inventory of its policies. The Argus fast approaching Yellow Journalism, Mr. Kane. If the editor(s) of the Argus have an OPINION, let him/her write a letter like the rest of us and print it with the rest of the concerned citizens…otherwise, REPORT, not OPINE. I have enough bird cage liner, thank you very much.

P.S. Apparently the current “burning issue” of the Governor’s Hunt list isn’t gaining the traction the Argus thought it would, so its expanding its range of fire—otherwise that and the airplane rides would still be Front Page, Above the Fold. (By the way, did you see that the FAA gave the thumbs up to the Governor? HMMM, still think they are unbiased?)

Kos

Sioux Falls blogger Jay Reding is noting that Daily Kos is comparing Republicans to the Taliban:

Let’s not forget that ultimately, Osama’s vision for the Arab world is far more akin to the Right’s vision of America…On homosexuality, on militarism, on women’s rights, on religion in school, on capital punishment, on free speech, on curtailment of civil liberties, and on a million different other issues Islamic fundamentalists don’t share many disagreements with the ideologues running our country.

The reason we hate Islamic fundamentalists is pretty much the same reason we’re fighting to take back this country from the Republicans. They are two peas from the same pod, and diametrically opposed to everything we liberals stand for.

Of course, Senator Tim Johnson is the one who first popularized the comparison between Republicans and the Taliban:

At a campaign rally for Democratic U.S. House candidate Stephanie Herseth on Sunday in Sioux Falls, Johnson delivered this statement to the crowd, according to The Associated Press: "When Stephanie Herseth fills this seat, we are going to have a rising star in the House of Representatives. And how sweet it's going to be on June 2 when the Taliban wing of the Republican Party finds out what's happened in South Dakota."

Header Contest

Just to remind everybody, we're still accepting submissions from anybody that has a new design to replace our SDP header logo.  Keep them coming!

Rendell Supports Alito

Democratic Governor of Pennsylvania Ed Rendell has endorsed Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court.   Here's part of the transcript from Fox News. 

ED RENDELL: I believe he's a qualified judge. He sits on the third circuit
court of appeals in Philadelphia. I don't know if you know this bill, 
my wife is a third circuit court judge. 
 
HEMMER: I'm aware of that. It should give you pretty good knowledge of him? 
 
RENDELL: Right. She has a high opinion of his integrity and his academic
standards. She deals agrees with him on a number of cases and agrees with
him on some. I disagree with a lot of his positions on cases, but I think
the tests should always be one party wins the election. As long as the
Supreme Court justice is appointed who has high academic qualifications,
significant integrity and judge Alito certainly does, we should confirm
him regardless of our disagreement on the way he may interpret one aspect
of the law. I think we've fallen into such partisanship in DC.  Not just
in this but in so many things, it's in some way ways tearing the country
apart. 

It's not secret that I find Gov. Rendell's logic impecable.  I am not sure that we give a president whatever he wants just because he won an election, but I do think that when a judge of high legal quality and of sound ethics comes before the Senate, that judge deserves confirmation.  No one disputes Judge Alito's excellence as a judge or his integrity.  The only reason to oppose him is for low political purposes.  I think Senator Kyl is right on the money (and welcome to our new colleague, Mr. Freeman).  One wonders what Tim Johnson will do?  If he opposes Samuel Alito, what reason could he give other than conservatives don't belong on the Supreme Court.

Eminent Domain

The South Dakota Legislature seems well on its way to passing sensible eminent domain reform in light of the unpopular Kelo v. New London Supreme Court case.  In this case Kelo is a person, not a TV station. 

Al-Qaida is Losing

From Christopher Hitchens at Slate:

I once hypothesized that Osama Bin Laden might be dead. The induction went like this: Proof of life is easy to furnish, but some of the tapes allegedly showing him could easily have been cobbled from earlier releases. Ergo, it mattered to al-Qaida to demonstrate that he was alive. Yet they lacked the ability to demonstrate it. Furthermore, Bin Laden used to be a highly loquacious man, pronouncing on everything from East Timor to Iraq, and seemed at a crucial juncture to have gone quiet.

This reasoning proved inadequate when he popped up during the last U.S. election and made a series of contemporary references, mainly (and ill-advisedly) drawn from Michael Moore's dreadful Fahrenheit 9/11. And we are now assured that the latest audiotape delivered to Al Jazeera has been authenticated also. If we suppose this to be true, then it nonetheless seems to be further evidence that al-Qaida is, as I argued last week, facing a very serious crisis.

Check out the whole thing.

Barb Penny, RIP

I see that Barb Penny, the wife of former congressman Tim Penny, has died of cancer at age 51.  Tim Penny was my representative when I lived in my hometown of Rochester in the First District of Minnesota.  He is exactly the kind of Democrat we need more of, i.e. moderate to conservative on most things.  In fact his moderation kept him from advancing within his party, which led to his relatively early retirement from Congress.  And yes, we need more liberal Republicans, too, as I explained here.  Tim Penny, besides being a good congressman, was and is a good man.  Our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family. 

State Senate

The resolution calling on Senator Tim Johnson to vote for Alito passed the Senate, 25 to 9. 

Greetings and the Alito Vote

At today's Senate Judiciary Committee vote, Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) explained the significance of the party line vote on Joseph Alito and why future Democratic Presidents will have difficulty asking for bipartisanship on judiciary nominations.

I fear a very bad precedent is being set today, a precedent that a unanimous minority will oppose a nominee on political grounds, not because the nominee is in any way unqualified. Republicans did not apply that test to Justices Breyer or Ginsburg.

And I say precedent because it is simply unrealistic to think that one party will put itself at a disadvantage by eschewing political considerations while the other party almost unanimously applies such considerations.

So I say to my Democratic friends, think carefully about what is being done today. Its impact will be felt well beyond this particular nominee.

As this is my inaugural post on South Dakota Politics, I would like to thank the organizers of this site for inviting me to join as an occasional contributor and introduce myself with as little tedium as possible.  I'm Michael Freeman, a native of Freeman, SD, a 1980 South Dakota State University graduate, former communications director for U.S. Senator Jim Abdnor and formerly a press spokesperson for Larry Pressler's first successful U.S. Senate campaign in 1978.  Currently, I am executive vice president for a health care trade association and am occasionally called upon to write speeches for a number of corporations, associations and prominent individuals who shall not be named because I'm too lazy to ask for their permission.  Most importantly, I'm a long-time reader of this site and look forward to adding my voice periodically to the already-excellent mix here.

Senate Judiciary Committee Recommends Alito

From MSNBC:

The Judiciary Committee favorably recommended Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court nomination to the full Senate on a party-line vote Tuesday, ensuring prospects the conservative jurist will join the high court bench.

All 10 Republicans voted for Alito, while all eight Democrats voted against him. The partisan vote was almost preordained, with 15 of the 18 senators announcing their votes even before the committee’s session began.

The full Senate expects to take a final vote on Alito’s nomination before the end of the week. That vote is also expected to follow along party lines, with only one Democrat — Ben Nelson of Nebraska — coming out so far in support of Alito. Republicans hold the balance of power in the Senate 55-44, with one independent.

NYT

The New York Times today notes that Bush-bashing didn't work for the Liberal candidate in Canada:

But as Mr. Martin fell behind in the opinion polls, his campaign came to rely on attack advertisements that were unusually caustic for Canada. He tried to depict Mr. Harper as a fanatical American-style conservative and an ally of President Bush, who is unpopular in Canada.

Senate Democrats

Someone tells David Newquist what they think.  David wrote:

The Democratic leadership in Pierre always appears to have a greater capacity for wetting its pants than in taking any leadership in asserting the basic values of democratic, honest government. It is no wonder Rounds flouts, flaunts, and flies that damned airplane in their faces. He gets away with it--and he would not in most states.

They are intimidated by the threats that they may appear unreasonable and acting against the will of the people if they get assertive on any issue. That is why South Dakota is ranked at the absolute bottom of the states for open, fair government.

The Democratic leadership and the Third-World government it allows is one of the major reasons for the brain-drain in this state. What does it matter if the crime rate is low when graft and abuses of power are, in effect, made legal by those too timid to enforce the standards of open, clean government?

To which someone replied:

Good grief, David, you rank SD right up there with the Third World gov'ts? If this state is so bad, go somewhere else; or if you are so much better (in your opinion) than the leaders of SD, run yourself and change something. My SD district has 3 Dem Congress people, so don't say it can't be done.

Abortion

From KELO, via Matt Drudge:

In the next six weeks, South Dakota lawmakers will decide whether to make abortion a crime.

A bill that would ban abortion in the state will be introduced within the next two days.

The bill will be called the Woman's Health and Life Protection Act. It will ban abortion, but won't prosecute a doctor who performs one to save a woman's life.

Canada

Michael Moore is in shock over Canada's choice of politicians:

"Oh, Canada -- you're not really going to elect a Conservative majority on Monday, are you? That's a joke, right? I know you have a great sense of humor, ... but this is no longer funny," Moore complained in a commentary on his website.

"First, you have the courage to stand against the war in Iraq -- and then you elect a prime minister who's for it. You declare gay people have equal rights -- and then you elect a man who says they don't," Moore moaned.

Conservatives led by Stephen Harper were ahead of Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberals by a comfortable 10 to 12 points, polls showed Saturday, two days before Canadians go to the polls.

In "Bowling for Columbine," his documentary on gun violence in the United States, Moore heads north to Canada to flee the rise of conservatism on US soil.

"A man running the nation to the south of you is hoping you can lend him a hand by picking Stephen Harper, because he's a man who shares his world view. Do you want to help George Bush by turning Canada into his latest conquest?" Moore asked.

"Far be it from me, as an American, to suggest what you should do," he added. "I hope you don't feel this appeal of mine is too intrusive, but I just couldn't sit by, as your friend, and say nothing."

Alito

Excerpt from the National Journal Group:

Pro-Alito Group Puts Pressure On Dakota Dems

By Jennifer Koons

National Journal Group, Jan. 20, 2006

The Coalition for a Fair Judiciary puts Sens. Tim Johnson, D-S.D., and Kent Conrad, D-N.D., in its cross hairs this weekend with a targeted advertising campaign urging the moderate lawmakers to back Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.

A CFJ spokesman characterized the buy as "the first phase of the campaign if [Democrats] continue to make this an election-year issue."

Both ads follow similar scripts and encourage constituents to tell their senators to "vote yes on Judge Alito and stand with mainstream America not Ted Kennedy."

On Thursday, Johnson said he had not yet decided how he will vote on Alito. "I think it's premature for me to be announcing a final position on Judge Alito while the Senate Judiciary Committee is still dealing with his nomination process," the senator told the Sioux Falls Argus Leader.

For his part, Conrad said this week he has agreed to a Bush administration request to meet a second time with the nominee before announcing his vote.

Meanwhile, the pro-Alito Committee For Justice began airing a series of radio ads Thursday aimed at influencing Democratic senators in Louisiana and Arkansas, as well as North and South Dakota.

Also, this from the mailbag:

Senator Johnson considering voting against Judge Alito. Your calls are needed today! ...
AFA has learned that Senator Johnson is seriously considering voting against the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Your calls asking Senator Johnson to vote FOR the confirmation of Judge Alito are needed today. Time is short. You can call his office directly.

SENATOR JOHNSON'S DIRECT NUMBER IS 202-224-5842

Please call today!

Conservatives Win in Canada

From CTV:

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has won a minority government on Monday, putting an end to more than 12 years of Liberal rule.

Polls across the country are now closed and results are pouring in.

The Conservatives have taken a commanding lead with 123 seats, compared to 102 for the second place Liberals.

The Bloc Quebecois currently holds 50 seats, while the NDP has won 30.

Support for the Tories exploded when the polls closed west of Atlantic Canada.

Harper, Canada's next prime minister, has been re-elected in the Alberta riding of Calgary Southwest. The Conservatives dominated in the West, and took most seats in the Prairies, as expected.

But it was in battleground Ontario where the Conservatives made a big breakthrough, with most of the polls showing they're on track to take at least a dozen more seats than the 24 they won in 2004.

Preliminary Results:

National Last updated: 22:55 ET Party Party standing %   Popular vote %

AACEV Party of Canada	0	0.0		21	0.0
Bloc Québécois	50	16.3		652,258	9.5
Canadian Action	0	0.0		2,092	0.0
Christian Heritage Party	0	0.0		15,046	0.2
Communist	0	0.0		1,326	0.0
Conservative	124	40.5		2,513,393	36.5
FPNP	0	0.0		586	0.0
Green Party	0	0.0		289,832	4.2
Independent	1	0.3		33,085	0.5
Liberal	102	33.3		2,152,967	31.2
Libertarian	0	0.0		965	0.0
Marijuana Party	0	0.0		4,180	0.1
Marxist-Leninist	0	0.0		3,524	0.1
N.D.P.	29	9.5		1,217,484	17.7
No Affiliation	0	0.0		3,172	0.1
PC Party	0	0.0		6,224	0.1
WBP	0	0.0		262	0.0

Total number of valid votes:

6,895,918

Polls reporting: 34,598/65,649	Voter turnout: 6,895,918 of 22,636,409 registered electors (30.5%)
The number of registered electors shown in this table does not include electors who registered on election day.

I am sure we are all disappointed at the poor showing for the Marijuana Party. You might say that their political ambitions have gone up in smoke. 

 

Pres Primaries

There goes the lively debate among the SDP contributors.  From the Argus Leader:

A measure seeking to give South Dakota one of the nation’s earliest presidential primaries was killed Monday by a legislative committee after opponents said a special presidential primary would be a waste of time and money.

The Senate State Affairs Committee voted 6-3 to reject SB93, which would have moved the presidential portion of South Dakota’s primary to the last Tuesday in January,

H. Clinton v. McCain

Here's an interesting poll from the Diago Hotline.

Its particularly interesting because the Republican weakness right now is among independents, but Independents prefer McCain to Clinton 57 to 32%.  I remind our readers that I predicted that McCain would be the next Republican candidate for President.  I am going to keep on riding that horse.  If I turn out to be right, I will look really wise by comparison.  If I am wrong, like Jim Phelp's boss in Mission Impossible, I will deny all knowledge of the affair.