Hat tip to a frequent commenter for pointing out the ‘consulting fees’ for the Anti-choice movement;
Besides the fact that a sitting legislator is running this PAC, who exactly is getting these consulting fees?
Abortion will ALWAYS be a political football for both parties and everyone in between.
But let’s have an honest debate on the issues. Who is getting this money?
So far there are 3 candidates running for School Board, Marc Murren who is the incumbent, Gail Swenson (a retired Super) and city councilor Pat Starr. Not sure if anyone else will jump in that race. All 3 would make good school board members (though I suspect that Gail was recruited by current school board members or someone in the administration-they have a lot of secrets to hide and they need inside baseball players*). Kate Sarabentz (Parker) is not running again (I guess they intentionally kept this on the low down for as long as they coulc to discourage others from running). Stupid, childish political games. There is still a chance to get into this race, Friday February 23rd at 5 PM is the nominating petition due date. You might see a few stragglers, but that date is only 13 days away.
*Rumor has it that a few of the more ‘progressive’ school board members have been concerned about the administration’s bullying of school board members when it comes to policy. I could say more, but I think I will just let this play out during the campaign.
As for the city council race. Awful. Only one person running in NW and SW and I have heard ZERO about either candidate (though people in the industry that have worked with the SW candidate don’t have a lot of nice things to say about the fella, I still can’t get the real story why so many people disparage him).
The At-Large is probably going to be more competitive then I thought, but if I was a betting man Thomason takes it. As for the NE District, there are two qualified young professionals running for that seat. I have never spoken to Tarek’s opponent, Miranda, but Tarek and I have had a few good conversations, and he is being helped and mentored by Dave and De Knudson. Not sure what I think of that, but I told Tarek that the Knudson’s can help him get connected to some donors, etc. While De and I don’t really see eye to eye, I would much rather have her helping a candidate then Matt Paulson who is basically funding all the other candidates. While I think the Knudson’s have the best interest of the city whilst helping Tarek, I think Paulson is self serving.
A city official asked me today why no one wants to run, and why the candidate pool is kind of dismal. I would say that the school board candidates, NE candidates and At-Large candidates are pretty good, and fun races to watch, as for the other two seats with no challengers. Not sure what will happen.
I told a group of local government nerds last night that the next two years in city government should be referred to as the ‘dead years’. Since it will be a council made up with mostly people who were recruited by the mayor and supported by Matt Paulson. Transparency will be totally shut down (what little is left) and the mayor will control all policy.
I guess the mayor has been telling people privately that he has ‘lost’ this current council. Maybe you ‘lost’ them because you are a ‘loser’ as a leader and policy advisor. Eight people don’t just walk away because they are the problem.
But who would want to be a city councilor? The mayor forms all the policy, information is closed, deals are made in secret, public inputers are threatened weekly by the mayor, meetings are not properly noticed, and the list goes on.
I encouraged the sustainability folks, the SD Dem Party and other citizen advocacy groups to recruit candidates.
Absolutely Nothing.
But after the election, I guarantee these same folks will show up to the council meetings to bitch about the poor leadership. What did you do to change the course of city politics? Not a damn thing.
If the chosen 4 roll into office this Spring, city government will officially become a dictatorship. Sioux Falls citizens get the government they deserve, ran by a dude in a gold chain and sweat pants. Good Grief!
It just made sense since the park was always closed when it was too cold or too hot;
The Goldilocks principle is named by analogy to the children’s story “The Three Bears”, in which a young girl named Goldilocks tastes three different bowls of porridge and finds she prefers porridge that is neither too hot nor too cold but has just the right temperature.
This place is such a grift for the people involved. We spend millions each year on this place and it is literally not open. Stop the games, turn Great Bear into a public park for winter and summer rec. No more lifts, snow makers and lodges, and let the public decide when and how they are going to use their investment!
I’m not going to get into a big debate about abortion. They always end the same. I will say, personally, I don’t agree with abortion for birth control. People need to take some responsibility in their lives and take the proper steps to prevent pregnancy if possible. But not everyone fits in that category.
Listen to the testimony today on the resolution (that has no legal teeth) (it is the House State Affairs meeting at the top).
The thing that bothers me the most is the republics in the SD State Legislature continue to peddle this lie that if this constitutional amendment passes people will be able to have abortion up until viable delivery. FALSE! It is in the law to protect the health of the LIVING person, the MOTHER! And if the mother doesn’t survive, guess what, the baby will likely die to. The law values the life of the MOTHER, which is the most important factor in this equation. If having a baby is going to kill her, there needs to be laws to protect HER life.
These obvious misogynists have NO clue what is beneficial to the mother only that god has put them on some mission to make sure pregnant women are submissive.
So republics in the SD legislature think in order to stop the abortion of a baby that WILL die or is already dead in the womb is to kill the mother.
WOW!!!!!!
Rep Hansen, who is probably one of the most ignorant right wing rodeo clown’s in the legislature suggested that women should deliver dead babies so they can spend time with the corpse before burying it.
Is there a Hallmark card for that?!
These folks are sick. They want women to suffer so they can have dead babies or babies that will die shortly after birth to fulfill some weird fantasy they have about women, god and death. Women can make these decisions on their own. They don’t need Hansen’s bible shoved up their butts while they are trying to get a medically required abortion.
They need to be surrounded by family, competent medical staff and the clergy of their choosing to make this difficult decision, and they don’t need Hansen or the Alpha Center trying to suggest that having a dead baby fulfills god’s mission.
I think the next resolution Hansen will present is to change the name of the state to South Texas (though technically it is North Texas, where are governor is concerned about all the Nebraskans trying to cross our border.)
Pierre really is the vacuum of intelligence.
I ask any spouse, would you want your wife to die in order to save some child that you have never met and will likely die before birth anyway?
Probably not, and why most pro-choice abortion laws are passing in states across the country. This is a needed medical procedure in certain circumstances and is extremely safe (I think complication from abortions in the US are around 2%).
The republics in Pierre can pass all the ludicrous resolutions they want, but at the end of the day it will be the voters that make the decision, which will ultimately be challenged by the state in court, because these dumb M%643^&*$%6#s can’t help themselves.
l3wis