State Legislature

Complete Insanity!

As I have joked in the past, some in legislature need to be evaluated for mental illness, and while I was being ‘sarcastic’ when I see crap like this, I sometimes wonder;

State lawmakers are proposing legislation that would allow people to carry concealed handguns without a permit in South Dakota.

The so-called constitutional carry legislation was introduced Friday. The proposal languished under former Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard, but new GOP Gov. Kristi Noem offered support for such a law during her campaign.

Republican Rep. Drew Dennert is sponsoring a constitutional carry bill in the House. He says backers have the promise of the governor and support from the public and both legislative chambers.

Support from the Public? Bull . . . . sh*t!

How do you think this will make us safer? Allowing anyone to have a gun without a permit, or a permitting process is complete insanity. Also, how do you think this will help with tourism? If I was a major player in the Tourism industry, the Education system, or heck any business person in this state I would find a way to put a halt to his frightening legislation. We are not living in the Wild West anymore, and if my memory serves me, it wasn’t a very pleasant time. More guns, and especially guns in the hands of people who are not properly vetted is a horrible idea. How do these clowns get elected? Baffling.

Which headline is true?

Ironically, either one could be . . .

You had Ted the amateur gyno

Lynn, who felt it was okay to run over Liberals with cars

Mike the bigot

Matt who thought session was about drinking and having sex with legislative college staff

Gene who wants to watch female lobbyists pee

Saving babies while allowing more guns and cutting education funding . . .

News Growl follows up on Deb Peters

Oh the web the SD GOP likes to weave;

What is more, the closing date for applications was November 9th – just three days after Peters won her election.

For her account of events to make sense Peters must therefore have three highly eventful days between November 6th-9th: Over a 72 hour period she must have discovered a well-publicized job she was unaware of, made a sudden decision to not take the seat she had just won an election for, and then rushed an application for a position she lacked some of the qualifications for as listed in the ad (such as a degree in marketing, communications, or similar field).

Meanwhile, the people of District 9 are preparing for two years of representation in the State House by a politician they did not elect. Or as Scott L. Ehrisman wrote in his South Dacola blog: “Once again a fake incumbent will be appointed by a Republican elect governor.”

Seems like a busy 3 days, even for a savvy Gipper like Peters.

Deb Peters bails on Legislator right after being elected

I had found out last week that Deb Peters had taken a position with SD Association of Healthcare Organizations from a friend in healthcare, but all week I kept checking the staff site and didn’t see anything. If it was true it seems they took a week of silence to do some back room deals to make sure the announcement went smooth. You wonder what kind of horse trading was going on last week?

I did know that they have been looking for someone to fill the position (VP of Communications/Member services) for awhile.

When I first found out, I asked myself, ‘How can she lobby when she is a legislator?’ One of my other lobbyist friends who also was privy to it suggested that she may resign from the legislature. So now once again a fake incumbent will be appointed by a Republican elect governor. Hopefully it won’t be Michael Clark who just got ousted by Saba. We have enough bigots in Pierre, we certainly don’t need more.

One has to speculate on a couple of things;

• How long has Peters known she would get the job? Did she know before the election and just kept quiet? That’s a little shady. While she wouldn’t be able to pull her name from the ballot, she could have at least told people she had no intention of taking the oath.

• Also, aren’t there rules from just leaving the legislature than becoming a lobbyist? I’m sure there will be some fancy foot work on that.

This is what happens when we don’t have ethics rules, or at least ones with clout. It also makes you wonder if they were waiting to see how Amendment W went down?

Why do we continue to elect people who work against our best interest? It’s mind boggling.