The Kristi Noem-Stephanie Herseth Sandlin Race

Kristi Noem (R-CAND-SD-AL) shows very simply how GOP congressional candidates can stamp their ticket to Washington

June 14th
“Any vote for a Democratic House candidate is a vote to keep Nancy Pelosi as Speaker”

Yeah, I’ve said it a few times. Kristi Noem has begun to hammer Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin on her pro-Nancy Pelosi voting record. The result?

53-41

Now it could be argued that Noem is getting a bounce from winning the GOP primary and there is some truth to that. However, whenever the GOP candidate reminds voters of Obamacare, Cap and Trade, the “transparent, open and honest government” backroom negotiations of Democratic leadership using your tax dollars to buy congressional votes for legislation, etc., the ads just write themselves.

Noem cited Herseth-Sandlin’s voting with Pelosi 95% of the time. Herseth-Sandlin’s team cried foul and claimed that Noem wasn’t being truthful and that Herseth-Sandlin only voted with Pelosi 92.7% of the time.

Wow. Killer response from Herseth-Sandlin’s office. That one is likely over all ready. With today’s development of Bob Etheridge assaulting a student who asked him a simple, non-provacative question, the fall from the cliff for the Democrats looks to end with a historic splat that could be remembered for generations to come.

http://www.redstate.com/realquiet/2010/06/14/kristi-noem-r-sd-shows-very-simply-how-gop-congressional-candidates-how-to-stamp-their-ticket-to-washington/

Historic U.S. House campaign begins
Kevin Woster, Journal staff rapidcityjournal.com
June 13, 2010

It is also worth noting that the Washington Post review includes all votes, including many of a procedural nature and various levels of significance. Another review by the National Journal focuses on key votes of substance, many of which can be controversial and clearly divided politically.

And Herseth Sandlin lands in the middle of that review. In 2009, she ranked as the 232nd most liberal member in the 435-member House. Her percentage score on key votes ranked her at 46.8 percent liberal and 53.2 percent conservative. That means that on the votes overall, she was considered more liberal than about 47 percent of her colleagues and more conservative than about 53 percent of them.

Herseth Sandlin won’t move far without running into claims that she sides with Speaker Pelosi and the national Democratic agenda at the expense of South Dakota interests. Noem told the Journal on election night that she would “talk about Herseth Sandlin’s votes and the fact that she’s voting with Pelosi 95 percent of the time.” Herserth Sandlin staffers were quick to respond to that, pointing out first that Herseth Sandlin’s vote rating in a Washington Post review is actually 92.7 percent.

Going with party on a high percentage of votes isn’t unusual, however. At 92.7 percent, Herseth Sandlin is slightly above the overall House average of 90.6 percent and the Democratic members’ average of 92.2 percent.

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_59e8fd68-7696-11df-8270-001cc4c002e0.html

HERSETH SANDLIN AD EXPOSES FALSE NEGATIVE ATTACKS FROM NOEM’S OUT-OF-STATE SUPPORTERS

Secretive Outside Group Floods South Dakota Airwaves to do Noem’s Dirty Work

Sioux Falls, September 14, 2010

Despite the misleading, negative attacks from Noem and her supporters, Herseth Sandlin has consistently voted according to what’s right for South Dakota. Herseth Sandlin voted against the health care bill, the cap-and-trade climate change bill, and all the bailouts.

Herseth Sandlin’s response ad exposes Noem's false attack, citing the nonpartisan National Journal vote rankings – which put Herseth Sandlin at the exact center of the House – and documenting that she voted more conservatively than 53% of all House members. The South Dakota Associated Press and Pierre Capital Journal have both written about the flaws in the statistics used by Noem and her out-of-state attack groups.

http://stephanieforsouthdakota.org/p/salsa/web/news/public/?news_item_KEY=157

Pierre Capital Journal
Fact check: How liberal is Stephanie Herseth Sandlin?
By David Montgomery
Published/Last Modified on Friday, Jun 05, 2009 - 12:41:59 pm CDT

Further, as I said, looking at every single vote isn't a very useful tool, because there's a lot of procedural, unimportant votes. A few months ago, I wrote an article on the National Journal's political ranking model (which got a lot of conservative praise in 2007 for declaring then-Sen. Barack Obama the most liberal member of the Senate). The National Journal uses important, divisive votes where a majority of Democrats voted one way and a majority of Republicans voted the other way -- the real controversial decisions.

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin was given a score of 51.5% -- meaning she was more liberal than 51.5 percent of all members of the House of Representatives, Democrat and Republican alike.

Now, this isn't meant to say that Herseth Sandlin can't be criticized for being out of touch with South Dakota voters.

http://www.capjournal.com/articles/2009/06/05/blog/behind_govt_lines/doc4a29591a37e08253021267.txt


National Journal
August 9, 2010
While Herseth Sandlin hasn't exactly run away from Pelosi like some other Dems, she can't like the fact that Franken, in this generally conservative, GOP-leaning state, would tout her vote for the Speaker. Herseth Sandlin's first TV ad touted her independence, and her opposition to the "trillion dollar health care plan."
State Rep. Kristi Noem (R) -- who already leads the Dem according to automated polling -- has attempted to link Herseth Sandlin to Pelosi in the past, and we bet these comments will end up in a TV ad in the near future. We also bet Franken won't be showing up as a surrogate in too many more GOP-leaning House CDs this fall.

http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/08/franken_herseth.php


As South Dakota’s lone House member, Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D) wants each of her votes to reflect the wholesome, conservative values of this rural rectangle of a state. So she has artfully tailored her record.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/22/AR2010082203217.html

JENNY AND COREY BRIEST FEATURED IN STEPHANIE FOR SOUTH DAKOTA TV SPOT
Sioux Falls, SD - The Stephanie for South Dakota campaign today debuted a new television spot called "Corey." Narrated by Jenny Briest, the spot tells the story of her husband, Corey Briest, who was wounded while serving as part of the South Dakota National Guard’s 1st Battalion, 147th Field Artillery, Charlie Battery, based in Yankton.
Sergeant Briest was injured on December 4, 2005 by a roadside bomb while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Rep. Herseth Sandlin has worked to ensure he's received the care he deserves throughout his recovery.


http://dakotawarcollege.com/archives/14242

Comment by Stace Nelson on September 15, 2010 @ 3:08 pm
Now SHS wants a pat on the back for doing her job? Using this veteran and his family as a campaign prop shows what a no class politician she really is.

Comment by Stace Nelson on September 15, 2010 @ 4:01 pm
I know plenty veterans who DO NOT support SHS & this administration.


Stace Nelson for South Dakota House of Representatives, District 25

http://www.stacenelson.com/

In November, It’s Democrats vs. Obamacare

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/245869/november-it-s-democrats-vs-obamacare-michael-tanner


The repeal of Obamacare is the organizing principle around which we must rally to put us on a path toward the restoration of limited government.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/03/025894.php


Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, endangered Democrat of South Dakota, apparently didn't read Mark Halperin's March assessment of how dangerous opposing Obama's awesome health care bill could be.
Because she's running against the bill, touting her opposition to bail-outs and a trillion-dollar health-care bill in a new ad:
Herseth Sandlin doesn't actually support repeal of the lame, expensive bill she didn't vote for, but hey, you gotta use what works.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ad-wars-herseth-sandlin-touts-her-vote-against-obamacare


Despite their stated opposition to the law, 35 House Democrats have not yet signed onto the repeal effort.

http://heritageforamerica.org/2010/07/press-release-35-house-democrats-absent-from-fight-to-repeal-obamacare/


So worried were some Democrats over losing their seats if they voted for this bill, that House leader Pelosi came up with a strategy to get as many extra yes votes as she could from Democrats with "safe" seats so that Democrats "at risk" could vote no. This deception allows them to appear to have been against the bill.

http://www.rense.com/general90/hlth.htm

Speaker Pelosi secured sufficient votes and permitted Representatives Kratovil, Bright and Sandlin to vote against ObamaCare. Now with elections nearing and the Democratic majority in peril, they have permission to criticize ObamaCare. Kratovil, Bright and Sandlin are privileged, they get to run against the party. The unfortunate Democrats forced to vote for ObamaCare have been coached to say, “The bill does some good. Now, we need to fix it.” Thus is the machination of party politics.

As a member of a legislative body, it is nearly impossible for an individual politician to advance their legislation by themselves. The successful politician must be in the majority, or needed by the majority. Thus, the politician must cooperate and compromise with his fellow members. In America, this is logically accomplished by being a loyal and obedient member of the Democratic or Republican parties.

Obama, Pelosi and Reid set an aggressive liberal agenda and demanded loyalty. Hungering to be a power elite, most Democratic members of Congress obediently voted with their party leaders. Most did not anticipate their constituents’ revulsions to the programs, costs and corruptions.

Normally, constitutes are ignorant of the process and effects of federal legislation. They are busy making a living, raising a family and focused on their immediate community concerns. In normal times and less radical legislation, a politician opts for loyalty to the party with little criticism from his or her constituents.

Realistically, only a vigilant electorate can monitor and stop the nefarious power-urge associated with party politics. Fortunately, the Internet fosters many information sources and universal dispersal of information, which offsets the autocratic control of information by the political elites and their complaint mainstream media. Optimistically, the expansion of information will induce more Americans to closely scrutinize the decision made by their politicians. Ideally, the information age will force the politically powerful to respect most Americans’ desire for a small and limited government protecting personal freedom.

http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/teda/a-total-of-279-house-and-senate-democrats-voted-fo

Stephanie
FOR SOUTH DAKOTA

Herseth Sandlin Ad Exposes False Negative Attacks

“American Future Fund – Outside Group Comes Into South Dakota to Do Noem’s Dirty Work

AFF is a shadowy, out-of state group attempting to influence elections here in South Dakota. Despite planning to spend as much as $25 million in the next two months, the group refuses to reveal its donors, all of whom can give unlimited amounts. Now we know they are pouring out-of-state special interest money into South Dakota to wage a dirty campaign on Kristi Noem’s behalf.”

Who cares who they are when they tell the truth?


“I’m Stephanie Herseth Sandlin and I approve this message.

Kristi Noem wants you to believe Stephanie votes with Nancy Pelosi. It’s a trick, alright.

The voting record shows Stephanie votes more conservatively than 53% of the House.”

FACT: Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin votes with Nancy Pelosi more than 9 out of 10 times according to the Washington Post. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin’s people admitted it themselves.

“What we need is a magician to make false negative ads go away.”

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin’s ad is the false negative ad.

By Tom Lawrence The Daily Republic, Mitchell, S.D.
September 15 2010

Republican congressional candidate Kristi Noem aired her first general election TV ad Tuesday while Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., aired her fourth of the campaign.

"Herseth Sandlin's ad pokes fun at Noem, depicting her as a top-hatted magician, and accuses her of using "a trick, all right" for claiming Herseth Sandlin is a puppet for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.The ad, created by Murphy Putnam Media, an Alexandria, Va., firm that has worked in numerous high-profile Democratic campaigns, says Herseth Sandlin votes more conservatively than 53 percent of other members of Congress, and claims she led an effort that forced Pelosi to scale back her ambitions. Noem campaign manager Josh Shields offered a rebuttal to the ad, using magic tricks as a reference. "Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin votes with Nancy Pelosi more than nine out of 10 times," he said. "Last week, she gave President Obama a 'C' for his work on the economy. That's a record that South Dakotans don't agree with, and she can't put that rabbit back in the hat." Herseth Sandlin deputy campaign manager Betsy Hart attacked what she termed "the misleading, negative attacks from Noem and her supporters.

Noem aired TV ads during the GOP primary campaign in which she emerged from relative obscurity to topple two opponents for the right to challenge Herseth Sandlin. The ads were created by Scott Howell & Company, a Dallas firm that also did ads for Sen. John Thune's successful race for the Senate in 2004, according to Shields, who worked on the Thune campaign. Scott Howell & Company has specialized in working for GOP candidates and using sharp-edged ads that often draw fire from the media and the Democratic candidates targeted in the campaign commercials. The new Noem 30-second ad is running statewide on broadcast and cable TV. It contains new footage shot in South Dakota and some footage left over from primary commercials that were filmed in Texas, Shields said. He said while Herseth Sandlin was alone on TV this summer, it couldn't be helped. "We knew that Herseth Sandlin and Washington, D.C., Democrats were going to have more money than us and would outspend us," Shields said. He declined to say how much the ads cost to produce and air but did say more Noem spots will be on TV this fall. Herseth Sandlin has been airing three TV commercials this summer, one of which features her young son, Zachary, who also appears in the new ad. A third-party conservative group, American Future Fund, launched anti-Herseth Sandlin ads last week.

Shields said Noem will air more ads, although he said the number will be determined later. He said the campaign, sidetracked by revelations of Noem's lengthy driving record in late August, is refocused.

Rasmussen Reports

South Dakota House: Noem (R) 51%, Herseth-Sandlin (D) 42%

August 06, 2010

The latest numbers mark an improvement for the Republican challenger from the 49% to 44% lead she held in July. The month before, right after her Republican Primary win, Noem, a member of the state House of Representatives, jumped out to a 53% to 41% lead over Herseth-Sandlin.

While voters in the state perceive ideological differences between the candidates, most think both women's views are in the mainstream. Both candidates also are generally viewed favorably by most South Dakota voters. But Herseth-Sandlin, who was reelected with 67% of the vote in 2008, faces a difficult political environment and uncertainty in the state about the economy.

Both Noem and Herseth-Sandlin earn just over 75% support from voters in their respective parties. Noem holds a nearly two-to-one advantage among voters not affiliated with either major party.

Noem is viewed as politically conservative by 70% of South Dakota’s voters.

Thirty-six percent (36%) view Herseth-Sandlin as a liberal. But 30% say she’s moderate, while another 30% label her as conservative.

Fifty-four percent (54%) believe Noem’s views are generally mainstream, but 29% view them as extreme.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) describe Herseth-Sandlin's views as mainstream, while 27% say they're extreme.

Rasmussen Reports

Herseth-Sandlin (D) 47%, Noem 45%

September 10, 2010

Herseth-Sandlin has been running ads noting that she was one of the few Democrats who voted against President Obama's health care bill, which is highly unpopular in South Dakota. Noem, meanwhile, has been battling the recent disclosure of a questionable driving record.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of South Dakota voters favor repeal of the national health care bill, well above support for repeal nationally. Thirty-four percent (34%) oppose repeal. This includes 47% who Strongly Favor repeal and 23% who Strongly Oppose it.

Sixty percent (60%) of voters in the state have a favorable opinion of Herseth-Sandlin versus 39% who view her unfavorably. This includes 26% with a Very Favorable opinion and 16% Very Unfavorable. These findings mark little change from a month ago.

Noem is viewed favorably by 53% and unfavorably by 41%. These findings include 30% with a Very Favorable view of her and 18% Very Unfavorable.
It is significant to note that Nem's overall favorables are down ten points from a month ago. Also, the number with a Very Unfavorable opinion of the GOP candidate is up seven points from a month ago.

Noem now has the support of just 66% of the state's Republicans, while 82% of South Dakota Democrats back Herseth-Sandlin. The incumbent has a slight lead among voters not affiliated with either major party.

South Dakota voters are slightly less pessimistic about the economy than voters in many other parts of the country. Eleven percent (11%) in South Dakota rate the economy as good or excellent, while 43% say it's poor. Twenty-seven percent (27%) think the economy is getting better, but 49% say it's getting worse.

Sixty-six percent (66%) know someone who is out of work and looking for a job. That compares to 81% nationally. Twenty-four percent (24%) say the job market is getting better, while 30% say it's getting worse.

Just 39% approve of the job President Obama is doing. Sixty-one percent (61%) disapprove. That's higher disapproval than the president earns nationally in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

Argus Leader
June 9, 2010
While Herseth Sandlin offered her congratulations, the South Dakota Democratic Party went on the offensive Tuesday night, calling Noem an extremist and comparing her to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
"With extreme views that are outside of the mainstream, she became known as 'South Dakota's Sarah Palin,'" state party Executive Director Erin McCarrick said in a statement. "South Dakotans need real solutions, not an extremist like Kristi Noem who isn't ready to lead and has demonstrated a troubling lack of understanding of the challenges facing our state."

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20100609/NEWS/6090318/U-S-House-State-Rep-Kristi-Noem-to-face-Herseth-Sandlin-in-historic-clash


In a campaign punch designed to tag Noem as a conservative extremist, state Democratic Party executive director Erin McCarrick accused Noem of trying to “cover up her far right positions by refusing to say whether she supports the tea party or would join the Tea Party Caucus.”

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_b861f632-9906-11df-a74d-001cc4c002e0.html


“While Kristi Noem supports extreme policies that hurt middle class families, Stephanie continues to focus on the common sense solutions South Dakotans expect and deserve from their lone voice in the U.S. House."

http://dccc.org/blog/entry/herseth_sandlin_leading_noem_in_new_sd-al_poll/


September 17, 2010
I recently heard Kristi speak, at which time she explained she bases her candidacy on:
- Reducing the national debt.
- Creating jobs.
- Securing the borders.
- Protecting life.
- Repealing Obamacare.
These five social and/or economic policy positions surely are the feelings of a majority of South Dakotans.
I would encourage South Dakotans to examine Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin's voting record that supported Speaker-of-the House Nancy Pelosi, 93 percent of the time.
Pelosi is one of the most liberal House members in Congress today. This surely is not representative of South Dakota values.
BILL NACHATILO
Spearfish

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_7bfffa3a-c1e3-11df-a0b6-001cc4c03286.html


Voices Carry
STEVE HICKEY
STATE REP. – DISTRICT 9
February 22, 2010
Recently announced Congressional candidate Steve Hickey of Sioux Falls said he’s still running, but he’s changing tracks from running for a national to a state office. A Republican and Sioux Falls pastor, Hickey announced today that he is withdrawing his bid for US Congress and is pursuing instead his original goal of running for a State House seat in District 9. He plans to enthusiastically support newly announced US House candidate Kristi Noem of Castlewood.
From the beginning, Steve’s campaign was not about himself, it was about seeing common-sense Conservative principles and values prevail in November and he is confident Kristi is guided by those same values and principles and that she is the person who can beat Mrs. Sandlin and best represent the people of South Dakota.

http://www.voicescarryblog.com/im-out-now-lets-get-kristi-noem-in/


June 11, 2010
Ken Blanchard
If I was working for the HS campaign, I would certainly view Noem as the most dangerous opponent. The mere fact that she is a she will neutralize a powerful advantage Herseth-Sandlin has enjoyed in previous elections. Our at-large Congresswoman also has to repair a very weak state party. They couldn’t even come up with a candidate to run against John Thune. The more liberal core of the state Democratic Party is so dissatisfied with HS that they brief attempted to run a primary challenger against her. By contrast, the Republican Party is going to unite enthusiastically behind Kristi Noem.
Of course the experiences of a ranch wife and entrepreneur aren’t necessarily more valid than those of a graduate of Georgetown University in Washington D.C., but they might be at least as valid. A lot of folks in South Dakota who couldn’t afford to go to off to college in D.C. may think that they have just as much right to have a say in government as those who did. They may suspect, rightly or wrongly, that people like Cory are contemptuous of them. Now they have a champion.

http://blog.keloland.com/issues/?p=2450

Democratic Underground
Jul-01-10
sufrommich
Herseth Sandlin(D-S.D.) is now actually bragging that she stopped Pelosi's agenda!
KharmaTrain
All Politics Are Local...
You don't run the same campaign in South Dakota as you do in Salsalito or Scranton, PA or Ft. Lauderdale...each candidate is on their own and do what they need to to win. South Dakota is a very conservative state and to win in that state one has to cater to those voters and that means bucking the party "establishment". The corporate media has already declared this election as being an "anti-incumbent" election and thus we're seeing incumbents (many Democrats in red areas) attempting to say they're running against the "establishment". This is no different than the campaign Lincoln ran and we've seen in other Congressional districts.
The bottom line is to maintain a majority a national party has to be able to include many types of constituents...including Blue Dogs who will vote with you 50% of the time vs. some teabagging rushpublican who won't.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8668612


Stupak and Lessons Learned: Democrats Lie. Chronically
Posted by Lori Ziganto
March 21st
It’s no surprise because Bart Stupak is Pro-Life only if you consider Pro-Life to mean Pro-Political Life, where one does whatever is politically expedient. Bart Stupak’s “hold-out” was pure kabuki theater. He’s not Pro-Life. He’s not a “Conservative Democrat”. There is no such thing. They are ideologically partisan to their very core. Everything is agenda driven and they will even stoop to using the unborn as an agenda and to their advantage, as they have for years.
And then throw them under the figurative bus when they’ve served their political purpose.

http://www.redstate.com/snarkandboobs/2010/03/21/stupak-and-lessons-learned-democrats-lie-chronically/


Herseth Sandlin’s Phony War on Deficits
By Ryan McNeely
Jul 1st, 2010
Roll Call has an extremely flattering profile of Blue Dog Democrat Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD), in which she is portrayed as a thorn in the side of Nancy Pelosi, bravely defending the nation from increased deficits. Her accomplishments include forcing Pelosi to cut her original $200 billion jobs bill in half, and leading the Blue Dogs to trim the war spending bill to include just $10 billion to prevent teacher layoffs — “less than half the amount sought by leadership and President Barack Obama.” Described as a “star” and as someone who “speaks truth to power,” Herseth Sandlin explains that she is merely being consistent in her insistence that all new spending be completely offset.
The problem is that Herseth Sandlin voted to permanently cut the estate tax, which “would have reduced government revenue by an estimated $268 billion over the next decade, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.” There were no corresponding spending cuts. She also voted for the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which contained billions in tax breaks for extremely profitable oil companies. She also voted against the deficit-reducing Affordable Care Act. Finally, she voted for a $100 billion emergency supplemental for the Iraq War without requiring a withdrawl timeline, against the wishes of Democratic leadership.
Now, perhaps the Iraq War funding vote is somewhat forgivable, as the pay-as-you-go rules that Herseth Sandlin now claims tie her hands do contain an exemption for emergencies. Clearly she believed that the possibility of war funding being cut off was an emergency. But an unemployment rate of nearly 10% is also an emergency. That’s what this debate is about — the significance of this crisis and the appropriate federal response. When the media frames this as about deficits without noting that Blue Dogs routinely support measures that increase deficits when it suits them, it does a grave disservice to our discourse. If Herseth Sandlin doesn’t believe it’s worth spending money to help create jobs or to extend UI benefits because she’d rather spend the money elsewhere, then that’s the debate we need to have, not the pretend debate of brave members standing up to Pelosi as part of an “anti-deficit insurgency.”

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/?p=42463

Bret Hayworth | September 1, 2010
In six years of covering Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, I’d never heard the South Dakota congresswoman take any edge in talking issues and politics. The moderate Democrat also has a moderate approach in conversation, whether on conference calls with us scribes or in public events with South Dakotans. But on Monday when I covered her appearance at the Dakota Valley Business Council in North Sioux City, Herseth Sandlin got revved up. I wouldn’t say she was peeved, but her eyes were flashing and she was definitely agitated.
Herseth-Sandlin said she’s representing a tough “swing district,” which makes her different that the left and right ideologues in the House. She noted that many Republicans from Alabama or Democrats from California know they come from safe seats, where they can get away with little campaigning and still win 80 percent of the vote. That, Herseth Sandlin said, shows why congressional redistricting hasn’t done America any favors. Or, more directly, “Redistricting in Congress has been poison.”
In a follow-up interview, she told me she expects Democrats will lose seats but said it will be close in November, with roughly 10 seats being crucial — Dems either holding onto the majority by five or less seats or Republicans taking control of the chamber by at most five seats.

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/app/blogs/politically_speaking/?p=4204


Herseth Sandlin Goes on the Attack
August 30, 2010
Lucas Lentsch
Herseth-Sandlin Abandons Years of Campaign Promises and Goes on the Attack
Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin has completely abandoned her trademark election strategy of staying positive which dates back to her first run for the House of Representatives in 2002. In recent weeks, she has done a complete 180 degree turn and is now pursuing one of the most negative personal attack campaigns South Dakota has ever seen with attack fliers, press releases, and rally signs.
“The Stephanie Herseth Sandlin that South Dakotans have known for the last 8 years who deplored negative campaigning is gone. Instead, now we have a Congresswoman who is orchestrating a full on personal, negative attack against her opponent,” said SD Republican Party Chairman Bob Gray.
“Like most Washington politicians, Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin only supports positive campaigning when it suits her. Now that the polls show her trailing Kristi Noem, Herseth Sandlin seems to be shedding her trademark positive campaign style for a scorched earth strategy,” said Gray.

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2010/08/herseth-sandlin-goes-on-the-attack/

13 September 2010
Written by Sam Hurst
How can I criticize Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin for being a terrible member of Congress, and a worse Democrat, then in the next breath turn around and argue that Democrats have every good reason to vote for her in November? Binary math.
Where she is not wrong, she is timid and disinterested to a fault; on reform of our dysfunctional farm and ranch economy and the chronic failure of federal Indian policy. And yet, none of these particulars are as cutting as her assault on the Party itself. She has long been indifferent to local Democrats, but in her current television "fly over" television commercial she actually attacks liberals and the Democratic Party!
The congresswoman asks Democrats to be sophisticated and responsible in understanding that South Dakota is a conservative state. Even though Democrats might feel betrayed by her key votes or disapprove of her public attacks on the Party she insists that they should nonetheless vote for her because she is the lesser of two evils.
Frankly, given the pathetic condition of the South Dakota Democratic Party, what incumbent wouldn't find it expedient to attack the "liberals in Washington" if it suited their re-election?
Ideological conservatives in the GOP simply concluded that they were no longer willing to trade their core principles for the re-election of incumbents. It has made for a raucous tea party. Suffice to say that even if mainstream Republicans survive, the party will move to the right. That is as it should be. Where have Republicans conducted their family fight? Inside Republican primaries. That is precisely where Democrats should have their family fight.
The South Dakota Democratic Party is broke (in both ways). The mercurial challenge of Dr. Kevin Weiland in May was a naïve, last-minute, act of desperation. The congresswoman dodged a pop gun. But even as Weiland was graciously withdrawing, she refused to learn the lesson, and continued to attack the Party.
She has not given Democrats a single reason to vote for her. She imagines that she has won moderate Republicans with her maneuvering. But the curse of opportunism is that neither side trusts her.
It seems ridiculously off-point to argue that only weeks away from the general election Democrats should be thinking about the 2012 primary, but win or lose, come the first Wednesday in November, South Dakota Democrats should go looking for a new congresswoman, and spend two years preparing for a primary fight in 2012. South Dakota Democrats desperately need to refocus their attention on a family debate about core principles. And the first article of evidence against Herseth-Sandlin should be the "fly over" television commercial.

http://www.dakotaday.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=148:the-logic-of-binary-politics-compels-democrats-to-vote-for-herseth-sandlin&catid=9:archives&Itemid=19

Wall Street Journal
Kimberly Strassel
DECEMBER 18, 2009
Democrats on the Health-Care Precipice

Barack Obama emerged from his meeting with Senate Democrats this week to claim Congress was on the "precipice" of something historic. Believe him. The president is demanding his party unilaterally enact one of the most unpopular and complex pieces of social legislation in history. In the process, he may be sacrificing Democrats' chances at creating a sustainable majority.

Slowly, slowly, the Democratic health agenda is turning into a political suicide pact. Congressional members have been dragged along by momentum, by threat, by bribe, but mostly by the White House's siren song that it would be worse to not pass a bill than it would be to pass one. If that ever were true, it is not today.

Public opinion on ObamaCare is at a low ebb. This week's NBC-WSJ poll: A mere 32% of Americans think it a "good" idea.

Democrats have also been pulled by another White House promise: That once Americans witness reform, they will turn around. Yet even supporters know this ugly bill will not "fix" health care. The problems will remain—with more in addition—and Democrats will own them. Meanwhile, the backlash against the pending health-care legislation is seeping out to hamper Democrats' broader agenda. Pew this week published a poll in which it marveled (fretted?) over the "extent to which the public has moved in a conservative direction on a range of issues" since President Obama took office.

So why the stubborn insistence on passing health reform? Think big. The liberal wing of the party—the Barney Franks, the David Obeys—are focused beyond November 2010, to the long-term political prize. They want a health-care program that inevitably leads to a value-added tax and a permanent welfare state. Big government then becomes fact, and another Ronald Reagan becomes impossible. See Continental Europe.

The entitlement crazes of the 1930s and 1960s also caused a backlash, but liberal Democrats know the programs of those periods survived. They are more than happy to sacrifice a few Blue Dogs, a Blanche Lincoln, a Michael Bennet, if they can expand government so that in the long run it benefits the party of government.

What's extraordinary is that more Democrats have not wised up to the fact that they are being used as pawns in this larger liberal game. Maybe Mr. Obama will see a bump in the polls if health care passes; maybe not. What is certain is that this vote is becoming one that many in his party will not survive.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704238104574602232786471914.html

Herseth Sandlin Racks Up the Cash from Pelosi PAC
By Bob Ellis on September 3rd, 2010

As Noem v. Herseth Sandlin pointed out earlier today, Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) has received significant campaign contributions from Speaker of the House and San Francisco liberal Nancy Pelosi’s “PAC to the Future” Political Action Committee. Incidentally, this is the PAC Nancy Pelosi has used to pay her husband Paul and his company Financial Leasing Services Inc. about $100,000 or more.

Earlier this morning, an intrepid reader pointed me to some other campaign records pertaining to Rep. Herseth Sandlin.

Looking back over the past several campaign cycles, PAC to the Future donated $5,000 to Herseth Sandlin in the 2002 race, $20,000 in the 2004 race, and $10,000 in 2006.

Having received $35,000 in campaign contributions from Speaker Pelosi–more than a lot of South Dakotans make in a year–I could see why Herseth Sandlin votes with Nancy Pelosi between 80%-95% of the time.

What are just a few of the votes Herseth Sandlin and Pelosi have in common?

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2010/09/herseth-sandlin-racks-up-the-cash-from-pelosi-pac/


Herseth Sandlin, Heidepriem Backed By Obama Machine
By Bob Ellis on September 20th, 2010

Bob Mercer at Pure Pierre Politics reports Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) and Democrat gubernatorial candidate Scott Heidepriem are getting cozy with Barack Obama’s political machine, Organizing for America.

This is the organization that was caught recruiting school children for their machine. The reading list for young applicants includes Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” Rules for Radicals has served as a handbook for Marxists and other radicals since the early 1970s, promoting “situation ethics” (translation: do whatever it takes) to advance the liberal agenda.

President Obama and this group are also pushing for the environmentalist “green energy” agenda and the cap and trade global warming tax which would devastate South Dakota and every other state in the union. They also tried to exploit the BP oil spill and use it to push their environmentalist agenda.

I don’t think we need Obama’s style of Chicago politics here in South Dakota, or their radical Leftist agenda. We also don’t need their buddies who support this agenda.

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2010/09/herseth-sandlin-heidepriem-back-by-obama-machine/

Rep. Herseth Sandlin’s Voting Record More Radical Than She Lets On
Lucas Lentsch
May 19th, 2009

In an Associated Press story over the weekend, Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin claimed that recent criticism of her radical voting record does not worry her.

“The fact that our Congresswoman is not worried about being completely out of touch with the vast majority of South Dakotans on the most important issues of the day shows exactly why all South Dakotans need to pay more attention to her voting record,” said South Dakota Republican Party Executive Director Lucas Lentsch.

Herseth Sandlin votes 97% of the time with liberal Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi according to the Washington Post and even voted last week against a measure to protect Americans from the release of dangerous terrorists into the United States.

“Pay attention to her record, not her rhetoric,” cautions Lentsch. “South Dakota is not San Francisco. We need a Representative who cares more about South Dakota’s interests than her own popularity among the liberal elite in Washington. Even though she’s been in Washington, DC for 20 years, she needs to remember who she represents.”

On Thursday, last week, the U.S. House of Representatives voted on a measure that would have put critical safeguards into place to protect American families from terrorists currently detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Herseth Sandlin voted to block an amendment that would have prohibited taxpayer funds from being used to transfer or release Gitmo detainees into the United States.

According to the Associated Press story Herseth Sandlin said, “Blue Dog Democrats are able to influence legislation dealing with budgets, health care and energy to make those measures more moderate,” and that “she represents the vast majority of people who are moderate.” Twenty moderate House Democrats opposed the Obama Budget and seven opposed the stimulus bill. If Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin were truly a moderate ‘Blue Dog’, why wasn’t she among them?

The New York Times reported recently that in spite of the stated intention of the stimulus bill to pump money into the economy quickly, the federal government has distributed that only 6% of those funds thus far.

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is again co-sponsor of the highly controversial and misleadingly named Employee Free Choice Act, which she voted for in 2007. This bill would strip employees of the right to secret ballots in labor union elections and require employers to submit to binding arbitration in labor contract negotiations. Moderates like Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) have announced opposition to the measure.

“The fact remains that Herseth Sandlin’s Blue Dog rhetoric is only that. She doesn’t even vote with the moderate Blue Dogs, but instead votes to sink our country deeper into debt, leaving our children and grandchildren to pay the price for her desire to be popular with liberals in Washington. We need a Representative who cares more about the views of South Dakotans than the liberal elite in Washington,” said Lentsch.

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/05/rep-herseth-sandlins-voting-record-more-radical-than-she-lets-on/

Ben Nelson (D-NE), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Evan Bayh (D-IN), Joe Lieberman (I-CT), and 31 House Democrats have all voiced their opposition to allowing the expiration of the Bush era tax cut for the wealthy. These representatives all claim to be fiscally conservative, yet they're actually fighting to increase the deficit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allison-kilkenny/deficit-hypocrites-need-n_b_721073.html


Herseth Sandlin votes to raise debt ceiling
February 4, 2010
PAYGO mandates that future tax cuts or increases in mandatory spending in the federal budget be offset by new revenue or budget cuts elsewhere.

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_7816aab4-1201-11df-8e48-001cc4c03286.html


She's a deficit poser, not a deficit hawk. She doesn't care about the deficit, she just prefers that money be spent on rich people, big corporations, and foreign wars instead of the unemployed and those without healthcare. Which is fine, I guess. But tell me again why she's a Democrat and why anyone takes her alleged deficit hawkery seriously?

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/07/deficit-poser-alert


As a Blue Dog in a red state, Democrat Stephanie Herseth Sandlin has worked carefully to develop a moderate reputation in an area where Republicans outnumber their rivals.
But while the Blue Dog leadership says that any new spending bill will be heavily scrutinized, there is skepticism among conservative deficit hawks that the Democratic coalition will pull through.
“When it comes down to it, they’ll vote the way their party leadership needs them to vote,” said Phil Kerpen, vice president for policy at Americans for Prosperity, a conservative organization that supports massive federal spending cuts. “We have not seen them actually kill any pieces of legislation, so the suggestion that it will happen now, well, I’m very skeptical about that.”

http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/08/will-the-democratic-fiscal-hawks-challenge-president-obamas-new-stimulus-proposal/

08/03/10
Nearly $200 million worth of earmarks has gone to members of the Blue Dog Coalition — including $150 million in the military construction appropriations bill and over $44 million in the transportation bill.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/112293-blue-dogs-at-risk-get-help-200-million


When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi let 30 Blue Dog Democrats break ranks to vote against the controversial health care overhaul in March, she probably didn't expect them to go the extra mile and campaign against it in the fall.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/22/blue-dog-democrats-use-health-care-overhaul-campaign-punching-bag/


Time Magazine
Jul. 28, 2009
Nancy Pelosi played down the Blue Dogs' threat to the health-care bill, claiming that the $1 trillion overhaul could still be passed without them. But Democratic leaders aren't sure they have enough votes, and this past week has seen both Obama and Pelosi hold lengthy meetings with prominent Blue Dogs in hopes that they can be swayed. At issue are health-care costs (which Blue Dogs think are too high) and rural doctors' Medicare compensation (too low). The Blue Dogs will probably not cause the bill's defeat, but they may have enough leverage to force revisions by other Democrats anxious to get it passed.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1913057,00.html


List of Lap Dog Democrats
What is a Lap Dog Demcorat? It is the corrected term for a self-proclaimed "Blue Dog" Democrat. And what is a Blue Dog Democrat? It is a congressman who pretends to be moderate or conservative when speaking to his or her constituents at home, but when in Washington votes with the extreme fringe of the Democrat Party the vast majority of the time. Here they are, hypocrites all:

http://interestedamerican.blogspot.com/

2010 January 12
Ever hear of a guard dog that licked the face of the thief as he walked away with all the loot? If not, keep an eye on the Blue Dog Democrats in the house. They were supposed to be Democrats with conservative values, but their true values may prove to be party over principles.
Nancy Pelosi, who has recently admitted Health Care reform will pay for abortions, has been saying all along that Blue Dogs would eventually stop barking and start rolling over. Here is Pelosi, late last summer foreshadowing the Blue Dogs weakening:
“The Blue Dogs didn’t like it when I said I had the votes to pass it, because that was indirectly saying to them: ‘their members are going to vote for this’…I promise you that we will have a bill, it will be strong, we will have the votes for it.” – Pelosi
In other words, Brad Ellsworth is ready to allow accounting tricks to cover up taxpayer funded abortion in the new health care bill. Health and Human Services head Kathleen Sebelius has already admitted that a shell game will allow abortion funding, and the Blue Dogs think that is their out.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/01/12/blue-dog-democrats-ready-to-roll-over-for-obamacare/


Nancy Pelosi Neuters Blue Dog Democrats
September 22. 2009
By Daryl L. Hunter
Blue Dog Democrats Heath Shuler of North Carolina and Walt Minnick of my state of Idaho have been metaphorically neutered by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and now like all blue dog Democrats are obediently lining up behind Nancy Pelosi with their tails tucked between their legs to turn America into a socialist, welfare, nanny state.
The Blue Dog Democrats used to stand for something (fiscal conservatism) but now they don’t. Although they claim to be a fiscal conservative, Shuler did vote against the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. That said it was only with a tentative nod from Nancy Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel that he did so as they already had enough votes to pass the bill without Shuler and other blue dogs having to risk the wrath of a conservative district that hesitatingly voted Democrats against their better judgment because of conservative promises.
Reports indicate that many members of Congress, especially Democrats in agriculture and coal states, are still undeclared on many of these issues, but they are facing enormous pressure from (Democrat re-election purse strings) Pelosi, and Obama to start delivering on Cap and Trade and their bastardized socialized medicine witch will bankrupt our country.

http://www.free-press.biz/usa/blue-dog-democrat.html


Posted 01/08/10
I think this past year has unequovically proven one thing: The "blue dog democrat" myth is about as credible as Big Foot or the Loch Ness Monster. We keep being told how these Democrats in conservative districts are really conservative. If I was drinking milk, it would come shooting out of my nose because of how ridiculous that notion is. I'm sorry, but if you are a blue dog democrat, and you voted for the stimulus that you didn't read first, voted for bailouts, voted for cap and tax, and voted for socialistic healthcare reform, there is nothing conservative about you. You are not a "blue dog democrat." You are simply a Democrat. And, in today's environment, there is only one wing of the Democrat party, and that's the far left extremist liberal wing represented by San Francisco values of Nancy Pelosi.

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/has-the-myth-of-the-blue-dog-democrat-been-debunked-for-good/question-813575/


September 23, 2009
Pelosi yanks on the Blue Dogs' leashes
So she's going to push a much more liberal version of the health care bill and then see if she muscle it through the House after having sent the message to the Blue Dogs that she's calling their bluff on whether they'd vote against their party when it comes to that vote on the House floor.
Pelosi pushed her party caucus to walk off the cliff with their votes on cap and trade. Now she's at it again. And if the Blue Dogs thought that they had some sort of deal with the Speaker, they now know differently. The question is whether they'll go along or finally turn around and snap at the Speaker's hand on the leash.

http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/2009/09/pelosi-yanks-on-blue-dogs-leashes.html

Blue dog blues: Nancy Pelosi and the House's moderate Democrats are making life tough for each other.
By Stephen Spruiell
National Review
September 7 2009
Herein lies the Blue Dogs' dilemma: When they get back to Congress in September, they will still have to vote for a very bad piece of legislation. "If he votes against it, he'll find support in this district," Yancheksays, "but not from his own party."
The Blue Dogs were formed in 1995 as a group of conservative Democrats who blamed the party's losses on its lack of fiscal discipline. The 2006 and 2008 elections contributed to the group's importance by adding 19 lawmakers to its membership, bringing the total to 52. They call themselves "Blue Dogs" because their position between the Republicans and the left wing of their own party leaves them squeezed until they turn blue--and because one of the group's founders, Louisiana congressman Billy Tauzin, was fond of paintings of blue hounds. (Tauzin, who later switched parties, is ironically now the CEO of the nation's largest pharmaceutical lobby, PhRMA, which is spending heavily to support the Democrats' plan.)

http://www.allbusiness.com/government/elections-politics-politics-political-parties/12820368-1.html


Wall Street Journal
Kimberly Strassel
AUGUST 6, 2009
Blue Dog Blues
Moderate Democrats may lose simply because voters don’t want Nancy Pelosi in power.
Mrs. Pelosi and the White House surely realize the risk, too, though they may think sacrificing a dozen conservative Democrats on the altar of a sweeping health-care reform is worth it. But that doesn’t bode well for the Democratic Party’s attempts to recruit candidates for conservative districts, a project responsible for its current majority.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204908604574334754074996882.html


“Blue Dogs” Spin Some Nonsense
"Deficit Hawk" Dupes Local Media
Posted by Brian Faughnan
December 31st, 2008

Black Hills Pioneer
Dec. 23, 2008
Herseth Sandlin will hound deficit as leader of Blue Dogs

This piece is laughable from start to finish.
And make no mistake — the promise of a statutory pay-go rule is worthless. First, pay-go does nothing to reduce the deficit; it merely prevents it from being expanded by new tax cuts or entitlement spending. Pay-go is designed to prevent the enactment of measures like President Obama’s tax package and health care reform package; if Blue Dogs plan to back off of pay-go to allow those items to pass, then the rule itself is completely meaningless. Further, pay-go does not affect discretionary spending — which do not need to be ‘paid for’ under pay-go. So Congress and President Obama can go hog-wild on infrastructure spending, alternative energy proposals, education, and a host of other programs — all without running afoul of pay-go.
So Herseth-Sandlin’s solemn promise is that the Blue Dogs will do nothing to keep the barn door shut, but once the animals are gone, they will definitely close it again. South Dakota Republicans must make sure that voters in the state realize how worthless their representative’s promises are. It’s clear that the newspapers aren’t up to the task.

http://www.upgrade.redstate.com/brianfaughnan/2008/12/31/blue-dogs-spin-some-nonsense/

If nothing else, Barack Obama’s presidency has done one thing: expose so-called centrist Democrats for the ideological hacks they are.
Almost half of House Democrats — 105 out of 253 total — scored zero percent.
Blue Dog Democrats, meanwhile, averaged just 11 percent. The coalition’s leadership came in well below that: Reps. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (6 percent), Baron Hill (3 percent), Jim Matheson (11 percent), and Heath Shuler (8 percent).
To his credit, Rep. Walt Minnick of Idaho scored the highest of any Blue Dog at 83 percent.
But in the Democratic Party, their examples are the exception rather than the rule. Blue Dogs might part company with leaders on a few major votes (but only, notice, when the legislation is guaranteed to pass without their support), but the vast majority of the time they line up nicely with Pelosi’s wishes.
There will be consequences this November. Thirteen Blue Dogs are in the “toss up” or “likely/leans GOP” category, according to the count on RealClearPolitics.com. That includes leaders Sandlin and Hill.

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/08/19/the-blue-dog-dogs-of-summer


Open Secrets

Blue Dog Bark Backed by Insurers
June 25, 2009

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/06/blue-dog-bark-backed-by-insure.html

Health Insurers Continue to Woo Blue Dog Democrats in Congress
August 20, 2009

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/08/health-insurers-continue-to-wo.html

Blue Dogs Fill Their Bowls with Cash

http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1572/

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin contributions

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2010&cid=N00024773

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin earmarks

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/earmarks.php?cid=N00024773&cycle=2010

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin Fundraising Events

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/partytime.php?cid=N00024773

Herseth Sandlin looking for a little salvation
June 18, 2010
On Thursday, Lentsch and Erickson assailed Herseth Sandlin for failing to vote to overturn the health-care reform bill that President Obama signed into law earlier this year.
While Herseth Sandlin voted against the bill, she didn’t vote to overturn it, and the Republicans argue she has changed her position to reach out to Democratic voters in the state.
“We think it was for political salvation,” Lentsch said.

http://dakotawarcollege.com/archives/13174


More from SD Right to life on the elections
Posted by PP at the SDWC
September 20, 2010
Just got the South Dakota Right to Life newsletter – And they have more on the races, including a hard smack against Heidepriem, and why they’re focusing on the Secretary of State Contest:
Congressional Race
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin hasn’t met a piece of pro-abortion legislation that she didn’t like. While she may be stressing the fact that she voted against Obama’s massive healthcare bill, pro-lifers will remember that she only opposed it because she thought it cost too much. She also opposed the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, which would have prohibited federal funding of abortion and federal subsidies for insurance coverage of abortion. State House Majority leader Kristi Noem, who is running against Herseth Sandlin vows to maintain a 100% pro-life record if she’s elected to the U.S. House.
Governor Race
A staunch supporter of the Roe vs. Wade decision, Scott Heidepriem vows to maintain the decision at all costs. If elected, he would be the most anti-life Governor the State of South Dakota has ever seen. Lieutenant Governor Dennis Daugaard, on the other hand, has a proven pro-life record throughout his time in the Legislature. He has always been a lawmaker with whom SDRTL could work, and there’s no reason to doubt that he wouldn’t be the same way as governor.
Secretary of State Race
Some may wonder why SDRTL would ever take a stance on the race for Secretary of State. It should be noted that the organization takes an interest in every election for public office, because even U.s. presidents had to start somewhere. You may be surprised to discover how many people in high offices got their initial public service starts on city councilor school boards.
While the Secretary of State doesn’t introduce bills or vote on legislation, he or she does oversee the entire election process. In order to prevent a debacle like that in Florida, or more recently in the Minnesota Senate race, a person of the highest integrity must be elected.
During his ten years in the State Legislature, Ben Nesselhuf has opposed nearly every pro-life measure that SDRTL and pro-life legislators have proposed. To the contrary Jason Gant has supported those same pro-life initiatives. Since the primary mission of SDRTL is to save lives, we need to do all that we can to elect individuals that believe in and will consistently support that worthy mission.
So. What do you think?

http://dakotawarcollege.com/archives/14306

I was interested in Heideprim at first, but is anti life rhetoric put me off.
I wrote to Daugaard asking about his stance on cafos, his response is unsatisfactory.
I am wondering if I will fill in the Gov. blank this year.
If anyone is interested I can post Mr. Daugaard's letter.