Tag Archives: argus leader

The Silence of the Sioux Falls Argus Leader

South Dakota bloggers, both Republicans and Democrats, are slamming the Argus Leader‘s hypocritical and sanctimonious non-coverage of the Clean Cut Kid imbroglio.

Like almost everyone else, the behavior of the mainstream media can be predicted this prediction: They love themselves, their friends, and their families more than they love you. The Argus Leader‘s combination of political and personal bias is sickening. The Sioux Falls paper is not reporitng on political news happening down the block, though both regional (Yankton, Rapid City) and national (The Hill, Associated Press) sourcs are.

Fortunately the Mount Rushmore State has a blogosphere capable and responsible enough to criticize the Argus Leader when it’s wrong. And this is one of those times.

Argus Leader: CCK "Isn’t Dealing With Reality"

Ellsworth and BRAC,” by Chad Schuldt, Clean Cut Kid, 13 May 2005, http://www.cleancutkid.com/2005/05/13/ellsworth.

Thune Asking South Dakotans for Money the Same Day Ellsworth Set for Closure,” by Chad Schuldt, Clean Cut Kid, 15 May 2005, http://www.cleancutkid.com/2005/05/15/thune-asking-south-dakotans-for-money-the-same-day-ellsworth-set-for-closure/#comments.

“Ellsworth Closing,” Sioux Falls Argus Leader, page 10B, 15 May 2005.

It really appears [Senator] John [Thune] is looking out for John and little else.

and

Some would call [Senator Thune] a liar, and you can include me in that camp. Perhaps if he wasn’t jetting around the country going to rap concerts with Laura Ingraham, hanging out at Augusta National at the Master’s Golf Tournament, preparing for a run for higher office, and spending an inordinate amount of time raising money for Republicans, Johnny could have spent a few more minutes of his time engaging in ear-whispering to save the $270 million that is about to be withdrawn from the pockets of Rapid Citians.

In other words: Senator Thune doesn’t care about Ellsworth.

South Dakota’s liberal newspaper, the Argus Leader, disagrees

Some will say this wouldn’t have happened, had former Sen. Tom Daschle won his race against Thune in November.

Let it go. The base closure process was designed specifically to be above politics, and by and large, that’s been true. Anyone who thinks our congressional delegation hasn’t been doing all that was possible to keep Ellsworth open just isn’t dealing with reality. The stakes – political and otherwise – are too high.

In fact, [Governor Mike] Rounds says our delegation has been “in lock step” on keeping Ellsworth open. Partisan politics haven’t been a factor, he said. “There is no split on the issue,” he said.”

So who do South Dakota liberals (all three of them) believe: CCK or the Argus Leader?

This isn’t the first time liberals in South Dakota have not been coherent.

Though it is new for Senator Johnson to act surprised be Ellsworth. Along with Daschle, Johnson heroically moved to put Ellsworth on the chopping block.

Thanks Tim.

South Dakota Christian Democrats Make Billboard, DailyKos

Democrats speak out on religion,” by David Kranz, Sioux Falls Argus Leader, 3 May 2005, http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050503/COLUMNISTS02/50503001/1001/NEWS (from Daily Kos through South Dakota Politics).

My state isn’t so big that I can’t congratulate Grassrootdems.org for getting its billboard on both Minnesota avenue and dKos

medium_jesus_cares_for_the_poor_sioux_falls_sm.jpg

Democrats are tired of letting Republicans own the faith and values message, so they are taking their case to the streets.

A billboard campaign was launched Monday by the Minneheha County’s Grassroots Democrats, letting people know what their party stands for, says chairwoman Lisa Engels.

Green, black and white signs at Seventh Street and Minnesota Avenue and at Russell Street and Westport Avenue say: “Jesus cares for the poor, so do we. Democrats make America stronger.”

“The whole thing behind it is to counteract the Christian right and their so-called monopoly on religion,” Engels said. “They have been able to get out there and convince people that the flag wraps better around them than it does us, and that is not true.”

A good start by South Dakota liberals, if a hopeless one. The biggest “liberal” church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America , is regularly ignored by its members and in terminal decline. The state Presbyterian Church (USA) worshippers are in loud revolt against the national leftists. The fastest growing churches are known for their conservatism — the Catholics, Mormons, Orthodox, and “baptists.”

But at least they have some 4GPS2 force. After all, half of the battle is just showing up. (The other half is winning.)

You Are Always A Child

No Smoking,” by John Schaff, South Dakota Politics, http://southdakotapolitics.blogs.com/south_dakota_politics/2005/week3/index.html#a0003290843, 20 January 2005.

for the children… (and from South Dakota Politics).

According to the Sioux Falls Argus Leader this morning, the South Dakota legislature is considering a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places. I am sorry to see that two legislators from up here in Aberdeen are promoting the ban. Now, I am not pro-smoking, but I must say that I am anti-anti-smoking. I think it is a smelly and unhealthy habit, but I don’t think the public has any business telling private people in private places how they should deal with their own health

There is this cult of the body that suggests that anything we do that is unhealthy is not only imprudent, but immoral. Anyone who thinks Americans are no longer puritanical should consider the rhetoric surrounding smoking and fast food. One the sponsors of the bill says this: “I’m serious about this. Tobacco is killing our kids.” This is humorous because the picture that is included with the story is of a guy who looks to be older than spit smoking a cigarette in a bar. This elderly gentleman indicates that he is against the ban. I guess it depends what your definition of “kid” is.

Wages and Prices

“More paychecks starting to shrink,” Sioux Falls Argus Leader, Page 6C, 8 January 2005 (from the Chicago Tribune).

An interesting if poorly worded article from on a dangerous economic development

CHICAGO — More than three years into the economic recovery, U.S. workers’ hourly wages continue to decline when adjusted for inflation with little hope of a dramatic turnaround anytime soon.

My first reaction was “listen to deeds, not words.” “Generous” Democrats wants to tie social security payments to wages to pay retirees more, while “sintgy” Republicans want to swap it to prices to save money. Both parties believe that wages will continue to increase faster than prices. Therefore whatever we are experiencing now will be temporary…

…but later a clarification…

Salary growth historically has averaged between 1 percent and 2 percent above inflation, and it hovered closer to 2 percent in teh late 1990s, according to Mercer Human Resource Consulting’s survey of employers.

“Now it’s closer to 1 percent,” said Steven Gross, leader of Mercer’s U.S. compensation consulting practice.”

What? But this means that real wages are increasing. It says that wages are growing faster than inflation. So how can a newspaper get away with this deception?

“At the same time, companies are payijng more for employee health care, which boosts the costs of total compensation even while salaries lag.

Compensation has been rising at a pretty rapid clip,” said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist for Waltham, Mass.-based research firm Global Insight, Inc. “That’s a trade-off a lot of companies have made.”

Benefit costs are U.S. employers grew at a brisk 6.8 percent for the 12 months ended in September — by the same period when pay grew by 2.4 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

Oh, so the article is wrong. Pay is growing rapidly for employees. But most of the benefit are being eaten by up rising health-care costs.

But still, this is a problem. Health care costs show no signs of stopping. Both Bush and Kerry have some plans, but none are anywhere near comprehensive enough. If we actually wished to solve this problem, we woud

1. Pay for more health care out of taxes paid by the highest earners. The extra marginal costs for each employees dampens the demand for American workers, and contributes to jobs moving oversees
2. End most heroic care. There should be a rational limit, ($100,000/day? $10,000/day for more than 100 days?) of how much society will subsidize health care. Every society in history, including ours, practices some form of triage. But currently American health care is geared to elongating the lives of those who have already lived, while throwing poor workers and families to the wolves.
3. End pandemics in developing countries. Its cheaper for us to fight AIDS over there now than here later. We are exporting our war on terrorism to Iraq, Afghanistan, and others because we’d rather that foreigners be the ones to experience the shock of armed conflict. So why don’t we export our fight against AIDS so that those cultures experience the cultural shocks that destroying that disease will take, and keep ita “nuisance” over here?
4. Socially ostracize those who endanger their own lives. Society should ceased being concerned for smokers and the obese, and the government should stop paying for their problems. Because young men are the most productive workers, cultural intimidation of male homosexuals would have a great cost-benefit ratio. Tolerating a slight increase in targeted bullying early-on could keep many alive and working for decades.
5. Make those who seek care for non-life-saving treatments pay more. Except for extreme cases, no public funds should ever go to dental surgery, birth control, or viagra.

Do I see these real fixes happening? No.

Will welfare recepients, broadly defined, continue to bilk America and suck the blood of American workers? Of course.

American Left Statism

Recruitment, war force look at draft,” Sioux Falls Argus Leader, http://www.argusleader.com/editorial/Wednesdayarticle1.shtml, 29 December 2004 (from South Dakota Politics).

The famous Democratic Sioux Falls Argus Leader gives a facile analysis of the military

America’s National Guard is desperate to reverse a disturbing trend of recruitment shortfalls. We’re doing OK here in South Dakota, in fact ranking No. 1 in maintaining troop strength. But nationwide, the picture is grim: 7,000 short last year, 10,000 short this year and an even bigger goal for the coming year.

Will the new efforts work? Let’s review the cause of the trouble:

• We’re in the middle of a war. Guard units are in harm’s way, just like regular Army soldiers. In some cases, they’re in even more danger.

• Unexpected, lengthy deployments are causing financial and emotional stress on families.

• Even when enlistments are up, soldiers are kept in the service and in the field.

Everyone’s dancing around the real effects of this, though. The recruiting shortfalls call into question the continued viability of our all-volunteer military. When 40 percent of the troops in Iraq are made of National Guard and Reserves, it’s easy to see why there’s concern.

Followed by the ever-so-regreful “fear”

As distasteful as the idea may be, we may have little choice but to consider a draft.

SFAL is correct that the National Guard system is outdated. But its perspective is horribly short. We are not “in the middle of a war.”

The Global War on Terrorism is not going to end soon. Indeed, the front-runners for the White House in ’08 (Senators McCain and Clinton) are both more hawkish than President Bush. Tom Barnett was recently asked how we will know we are winning the Middle East — he answered we will know when we find ourselves in central Africa instead.

We cannot expect our forces to come home, and applauding the de facto merging of the National Guard and Army is insane. We need one force to take out nations and deter China. We need another to fight the dirty wars of peace. The first must be kill-oriented, the second life-oriented. A draft army is neither.

But Sfal gains two things by discussing a draft army. More generously to the editorial board, it seeks to embarras the President by scaring the people. Perhaps more honestly, it advances the American-left infatuation with statism.

Don’t control your schools? Don’t controll your retirement? Don’t control your life in war? Vote leftist.