Rosalinda’s Eyes

We need more people like Rosa Parks. Quiet leadership. Taking action without concern for attention, praise, adulation, or congratulation. Character. Doing the right thing even when nobody is watching. Strength. Standing up for what one believes even when the same opinion isn’t shared by others. Perseverance. Determined to alter the status quo despite the odds.

We need more people like Rosa Parks. She represents important lessons for us all. She saw a bad situation and decided she had to do something to help change it. Her statement was not aggressive or passive, just assertive. She was not consumed with hatred for those who didn’t agree and instead looked for opportunities to enhance relationships with anyone who shared at least part of her vision. She was gracious and unassuming. She encouraged and inspired others to step up and make their opinions known. She made a difference.

We need more people like Rosa Parks.

Baby What a Big Surprise

The successful effort to get the BRAC committee to reject the proposal to close Ellsworth Air Force Base is reason for celebration. All of those involved have plenty of reasons to feel good about what they were able to accomplish. Against all odds they were able to successfully pull together and work for the common good and achieve something significant.

I find it interesting the surprise some are expressing about how our elected leaders can join forces and work together. Such amazement is part of the ugly residue of the campaign that started in the fall of 2001 and which seems to continue today.

Yet should anyone really be surprised or amazed? The idea that our elected officials will work together despite their political differences should be the rule, rather than the exception. After all, they are our elected “leaders.”

Hopefully the BRAC announcement can help shift the acrimonious tone for a while, at least until the next election.

Victim of Love

Check today’s comments at the Northern Valley Beacon for one of the more incredible posting I have come across. Actually some of David’s notions are quite fascinating. They are filled with some amazing assertions and incredible conclusions.

Of course I am happy to oblige for those looking for an abridged version:

“Republicans appear content to let people live their own lives as long as they live them like the Republicans do. But they reserve the right to blackball people.” – Well, at least we reserved the right to blackball people. That shows we were at least polite about it. My mother would have been pleased. Come to think of it though, I have never been invited to the blackball meetings. Oh great, I suppose this means I have been blackballed?!?

“Many Democrats think the war on Iraq is the moral lowpoint in the history of our country. They thought that the 2004 election campaign should have confronted the moral issue of this war--win or lose the election. The moral point lost its edge when people feared being labeled unpatriotic, soft on terror, and even treasonous.” – It’s the pits when you lose your ‘moral edge.’ To get a new moral edge you have do another poll, run a bunch of focus groups, and try to figure out which way the political wind is blowing,,.all that work just to get another ‘moral edge.’ It just isn’t fair that you can’t have a moral position that won’t keep its ‘edge’. You have to change your ‘moral edge’ all the time. It's such a hassle. They just don’t make ‘moral edges’ like they used too.

“The salient record of the war on Iraq is not one of removing weapons of mass destruction, of subduing Al Qaeda, of implanting democracy, or of rebuilding an infrastructure that supports the people. It is a record of fabrications and bungles, war-profiteering, prisoner maltreatment, lives sacrificed to political expedients, and a betrayal of the trust of the American people.”- I guess that is what it all boils down too, doesn’t it? We are just a bunch of fabricating, bungling, profiteering, maltreating, life sacrificing, betraying sons-of-britches. And just when I thought no one would catch on. Darn. I suppose this means we need to go out and get a new ‘moral edge’? Oh rats. I HATE having to get a new 'moral edge.'

And then my personal favorite, already commented on by the fastest Republican in bloggerdom: PP at SDWC,

“Winning elections are not the issue. Keeping the world's last best hope alive is the task. And the regime in power is killing it.”-You might want to get that looked at. I mean, that could be a sign of something serious and you don’t want it to fool around with thoughts like this. It could poison how you view everything else and then where would you be? Being suspicious of everyone, always wondering about their motives, trusting only yourself and your cat…well, yourself anyway. (I know you have always felt you had to be careful about what you did or said around that cat.)

Losing elections is tough. Learning that most people don’t agree with your position is difficult. Not being able to convince more people to your point of view is hard. However, this is not adequate justification for claiming that the electorate was, and continues to be, misled. That implies the electorate is stupid, which is wrong. It only enourages more contempt for an already besmirched political system.

No one ought to stand by while anyone is victimized, yet no one ought to tolerate the perpetual victim. David, tell us more about what you want to do and less about what you don’t like.

Johnny B. Goode

I just filled my car’s gas tank. Uggghhh! The prices are outrageous.

I am reminded of the following joke Johnny Carson told when gas prices were high in the mid-1970’s during one of his infamous monologues:

“I have got bad news and good news.

The bad news is that Martians have landed.

The good news is that they pee gasoline.”

This joke had me laughing for hours as a young adolescent. Just thinking of it could make me laugh out loud. And I guess it still does.

I miss Johnny.

My Little Town

Brooking is a great place. The tag line used to be “Brookings, Someplace Special.” Sounds hokey, but it fits.

A contentious issue is bubbling to the surface in my little town. It is likely provoke each of us as it grows and eventually bursts.

Signatures are being gathered to refer a recent decision made by our City Council to offer substantial incentives to entice and secure a large retail store. Lowes has expressed an interest in opening one of their “Improving Home Improvement” outlets in our fine city. However, Lowes is only interested in coming to Brookings if they secure the financial encouragement. Some cry the proposed incentive as a handout to a large corporation who doesn’t need it. Others insist it is an investment to help recapture sales tax revenue lost to neighboring Sioux Falls and Watertown.

Should a community offer incentives to a retail business? It is not a new question. The issue is representative of the kind of challenge faced and debated by other communities throughout South Dakota and the surrounding area for approximately 25 years. There has been lots of discussion but no true consensus after all this time. Each community has or is struggling with finding the best strategy to continue to grow, and in all to many cases, maintain the status quo or merely survive.

I haven’t made up my mind on the issue. Before I can come to any conclusions I need to gather more information. As I do, I will try to post it here. It may provoke some discussion, which would be welcome. I believe it could be a worthwhile exercise.

Message in a Bottle

Erin writes,

“I wanted to ask you to do a column related to how much our society judges women and girls by their appearance. This competitive atmosphere has caused me to lose friends to anorexia as they drove themselves to attain "perfection" and didn't live to tell about it. Jerry Hinkle of Holabird Advocate blogging fame, thought it was funny to point out how much "older" I looked on KELO on Monday. His insensitive actions have caused me to leave the blogging world in terms of posting or participating actively. I am extremely offended by conversations that involve anyone's appearance as opposed to other more important attributes.”

Well, I was never one to pass notes back and forth for other classmate in class for fear I would get caught (my father is a retired judge and I have always had a healthy respect for authority figures) yet Erin once again raises a good point. Eating disorders are serious and too often have fatal consequences.

So, as I was struggling with my ambivalence you can imagine my relief after reading Jerry posted his own apology on his site where he concludes,

“I want to say that I was out of line, I know that, and I will do better in the future. I had no business trying to make a joke at Erin's expense. For that let me say to Erin, Grandma Bergit, All of the Holabird Advocate Readers, and to the Heavenly Father himself, that am sorry.”

That is very nice Jerry. This is a big step. A courageous step too. It is a good first step.

Now I can only speak for myself (I’ll let Erin, Grandma Bergit, all of Jerry’s readers as well as the big dude watching over all of us do their own talking) although, to take thing to the next level, and really level things out between you, Erin and the readers, well, I think you ought to post a photo of yourself on your blog.

You know, give us to a chance to see what you look like. And then don’t forget to post of a picture of you from behind. Don’t be afraid to show us your business. That would be important in our evaluation as well. And then we could talk about how you look and offer our suggestions for what you could do to enhance your appearance. That would be fair wouldn’t it?

I am only kidding. Jerry I am glad you offered the public apology. It appeared sincere and heartfelt. And Erin, I really think you ought to create your own blog rather than try to communicate your concerns through hopeless surrogates like myself. You do a much better job of explaining your perspective than anyone could ever do.

It’s My Party and I Will Cry Speak Up if I Want Too

(PP at SDWC caught up with his weekend reading and posted about two inflammatory letters to the editor which appeared in the Rapid City Journal. One letter was signed by approximately a dozen self-defined “conservative” Republicans and the second by former candidate and former legislator Alan Aker. Several readers had brought the strident declarations to my attention, asked me to comment, and until now I decided to stay silent. I am amazed after reading them again. I do not want to just sit there and let such fanaticism go unchallenged.)

There was a time I used to envy people who had quick answers to complex questions and issues. Their ability to voice their opinions almost immediately and so decisively suggested extraordinary intellect and a moral certitude. It didn’t take long before I realized how wrong I was.

What I came to understand was that those with the fast responses and firm attitudes are actually limited in the scope and breadth of their ability to think thoroughly. and the quick or easy answers weren’t always the correct ones. Instant analysis really only demonstrates knowledge and comprehension along and maybe some application of a philosophy to a situation.

This doesn’t sound too bad at first glance. However, the quick and easy answers lack the ability to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate that same situation. They further fail to take into account that not everyone shares the same outlook or perspective.

Thinking about things in absolute terms of good or bad and/or wrong or right is simplistic and fails to take into account the complexity of real life. Life is not black or white, it is gray. Sometimes a little darker than others, and other times is brighter than before. We need to avoid seeing things on a two dimensional spectrum. Life is three dimensional with height, width, and depth.

Am I suggesting that we be prepared to compromise and set aside our beliefs merely because others have different beliefs or ideas than ours? No. That is not what I am saying.

I am trying to say we need to avoid the quick and easy answers offered by some to the complicated subjects that are being talked about in our homes, schools, workplaces, courthouses, statehouses, and capital. We need to talk, listen, think, and pray more before coming to any personal conclusions. We then need to see where we agree with others, take action, and later re-evaluate. Failure to do so results only in stalemate, the halt of progress, and eventual bitterness toward anyone who doesn’t share our beliefs.

The model I endorse has no room for stridency because in the real world, no matter how convinced we are that we are right, we still have to work with others to get anything done.

Dear Prudence, Won’t you Come Out to Play?

Chad writes,

“I find it interesting that you want to lay out a bunch of personal attacks at a group of bloggers in the same post you write about "what is important".

No one is out to get Senator Thune. His politics is something a lot of South Dakotans happen to disagree with. Why is everyone so surprised that a group of politically active Democrats are criticizing him? We're in the fricking minority party -- we need to push back.

Are we supposed to just roll over and play dead? Would that make you happy?

That isn't going to happen.”

Yes, I did it, and I regret it. I really do. I am just not ready to say I am sorry.

This is disappointing. I didn’t want to stoop to such a level when I started my blog. Yet I am not at point where I feel ready to apologize to anyone, at least right now. What I did and how I expressed myself is not much different than what I have read on many of the blogs over and over again.

This is an observation, not an excuse.

Such comments are tedious and only provoke the most negative and violent emotions toward those with who we disagree (take my previous post and/or your own comments in reaction to it as an example.)

Yep, I got pulled into the muck. I am not proud of it and I should have avoided it. I feel dirty. Now all I want is to stand under the shower and scrub and rinse off all of this slimy, smelly stuff.

So I am ready to move forward. Maybe we can together. I certainly don’t want anyone to “roll over and die.”

What I would like is a more honest discussion of the issues along with some discussion about possible alternative solutions. And an obvious yet unwritten rule guiding this kind of discussion is that there is no room for personal attacks. Such discussions take us off topic and don’t resolve any problems.

How about you? I may have missed something and I hope you won’t hesitate to tell me. I think a thorough and honest discussion of the issues would be refreshing.

I am starting to feel somewhat better. I might be ready to apologize later.

It’s All Up to What You Value

Quite a weekend in blog-o-land.

There were plenty of accusations, charges, assertions, demands, insinuations, hints, colluding, attacks, counter-attacks, strategizing, hypothesizing, loving, hating, screaming, and whispering in the virtual world of the dozen or so bloggers commenting on the South Dakota political scene. I won’t bother to try and summarize all of the action here (you can find a full account on any one of a number other sites.) Of course I will offer some observations.

• As things started to return to normal today, it would appear that a few children’s need for attention has been met (According to Dreikurs it doesn’t matter if the child gets their needs met in a positive or negative manner, what matters to the child is that their needs be met.)

• We now learn (S U R P R I S E) that there have been some who have been paid by our former Senator’s campaign to rant, stir things up, and kick up a bunch of dust about our current Senator. This doesn’t upset me largely because this group of “professionals” has been so ineffective. Zero, zlitch, nada. The current Senator’s standing with the public remains good and we haven’t seen mass defections from his party to the former Senator’s party. (As far as I concerned, keep paying them boys to be doing such fine work.)

• This also begs the question: who is responsible for paying the boys to post their venomous attacks? It is not hard to imagine that first disciple Steve H. when pressed, will gladly fall on his sword and take total and complete responsibility. Yet what about the former Senator? After all, it is HIS campaign account that is writing the paychecks. What did he know and when did he know it? (Cue the former Senator to take a page from Raffy’s playbook: “I didn’t do this intentionally or knowingly.” Yeah, that ought to work. I would prefer believe that this went on without his knowledge, (I would also like to believe in Santa Claus.)

• I am beginning to get more fed up with any blogger, commentator, or e-mailer who doesn’t have the decency to identify themselves. (I am this close to giving each of your posts to PP at SDWC so I can write to all of your parents and tell them how ashamed you are of your own first and last names. Step out from behind there and let us all get a good look at you.)

• And finally, we are reminded about what is really important after reading TE’s posting today at SD Watch. Todd definitely got his priorities straight. I join everyone (even those who remain anonymous) in wishing Todd and his family the best as they take care of the family business. See you back at the virtual round table soon.

Can’t Touch This: Damn Screeds

I have just tried to follow the thread of Erin v. The Boys at SD Watch, and well, I join TE in trying to understand what any of this is about. The best I can tell is that Erin raised the concerns about the business practices of a Sioux Falls Auto Dealer and the boys are trying to draw a link between the auto dealer and a US Senator. And so Erin’s agenda collides with the boys and when the boys propose marriage, Erin runs away as fast as she can. The boys seek forgiveness and Erin is leery.

What is more fascinating is “Silas” (presumably the name was changed to protect the innocent) righteous description of his claim to be waging battle to smite the heathen godless Thune bloggers who are in his estimation “devoted to personal attacks and hate rhetoric,” with their “rhetorical bag of tricks” as they “analyzed their screeds of defamation and hate rhetoric were hate rhetoric directed toward them.”

(Ahhh, at last, the diabolical plot is finally revealed. We can’t stand idly by while others are analyzing screeds around here. Damn screeds. It just isn’t right! It must stopped!)

Silas, come out from under the rock. It is nice out here in the sunshine and humidity. If you have a problem with someone, let’s talk about it. It would help if you could be specific and if you could use names, including your own. None of us are very good at guessing. After all, we all share your concerns for creating a better community, state, country, and world.

I mean, can’t we all just get along?

Tips for Teens, the Kind You Don’t Find in Magazines: You Only Get What You Give

It is clear the Clean Cut Kid is one Upset Frustrated Child after reading his most recent post.

What is not readily apparent is what specifically he is mad, frustrated and/or anxious about. But after reading through his post a couple of times, this is what I have discerned.

• The offerings from his blog come from his mind, heart, body and soul and have not been or are not for sale.
• He has been threatened for expressing his observations on the actions of those with whom he doesn’t agree.
• He is not happy with the way many things are going at the local, state, and national levels.
• His postings are not part of never-ending campaign from the 2004 election. Instead his positions ought to be considered political activism.
• He is committed to continue his voice his concerns about the people and actions he doesn’t agree.

Well, lots of unhappiness and dissatisfaction from that corner. I may be juggling with a machete, chainsaw, and hatchet, yet I feel the need to respond with my own observations and offer some unsolicited advice.

• I am happy to hear that CCK’s views are his own and he is not part of a cabal of paid political smear-masters who are part of a larger conspiracy to malign elected officials who enjoyed the support of a majority of the citizens who voted in the last election. (I have never believed there is a conspiracy anyway.)
• That one is threatened for expressing one’s views is reprehensible and can not be condoned.
• Suggestion: Threats should be reported to the proper authorities and brought out into the bright sunshine. Turn over the anonymous threats to PP at SDWC – it appears he can reveal the identity of just about anyone.
• Suggestion: Continue to focus on the IDEAS you disagree with and resist the pejorative labels of individuals. There is a difference, a significant one.
• More discussion on possible solutions and less ranting about what wrong.
• Political activism is a virtue as long as the focus is on today instead of yesterday or tomorrow.
• Continue to speak out with respect to those with you disagree – “You only get what you give (see above.)”
• You look better when you smile and the best when you are laughing.

How Can You Mend a Broken Heart?

(Accept my apologies for the Bee Gees title. I do a better job of free associating earlier in the morning.)

Sibby at Sibby Online offers the text of a couple of messages posted by “Erin” at Mt. Blogmore that are worth a look. Erin may be a bit emotional, yet she offers a compelling and persuasive perspective on the “Hildebrand Boys” and their efforts in blog-o-land.

How can anyone be so upset, frustrated, and hurt for so long? It must be love…

Tin Soldiers and Nixon’s Coming

What I know about yesterday’s special Congressional Election in Ohio is what I have read from South Dakota Bloggers. TE at SD Watch got it right, a win is a win and losing sucks.

I am confused again and maybe somebody can help me. What is the reason four energetic and bright young men from South Dakota were needed in Ohio by Democratic candidate Hackett. And no, I won’t be surprised to hear that there were probably plenty of Republican volunteers from all over the country to help candidate Schmidt yesterday.

What are all these enthusiasts actually doing once they arrived? Were both candidates not able to generate enough support within the district that they had to issue a call to all four corners for assistance on Election Day? I can’t help but think that ultimately they aren’t doing anything more than just getting in the way.

Helping get out the vote and making sure that there are no irregularities at the polling place are laudable and important activities. Yet how much credibility do political parties and their candidates have when they have recruit volunteers from not only outside the district, but from approximately 1000 miles away? What effect does this have on the already cynical electorate when political parties and candidates import volunteers from anyone who is willing drop everything to spend a week in Ohio?

The Cult of Personality Peril

Rafael Palmeiro’s 10 day suspension after testing positive for steroids is bad. The suspension coming not more than four months after Palmeiro’s congressional testimony where he vigorously denied ever using the banned substance is worse. And saying yesterday he did not deliberately or willingly take the performance enhancing material is the worst. According to Raffy, “I did not do this intentionally or knowingly.”

Palmeiro is about as convincing as one commander and chief declaring, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” or the imfamous “I am not a crook,” by another. Each of these gentlemen are/were fooling no one, except perhaps themselves in a desperate hope that we might believe them.

A big part of me of me would like to believe Palmeiro (or believed Clinton and Nixon). Instead of the never ending speculation about who, where, what, how and when by the self-proclaimed experts who either malign or defend, wouldn’t it be (or have been) great if each of these incidents were some kind of an error in the reporting of the facts. Unfortunately, that does not appear t0 be (and has not been) the case. Instead it appears to be a mistake in personal judgment.

It is easy to become cynical about what Palmeiro has done and how he explains himself. Another unfortunate example of someone who bends and/or breaks the rules to preserve their position and to get ahead instead of working hard and playing by the rules like the rest of us stiffs. I can feel upset and frustrated just writing about the unfairness of it all.

Yet those negative feelings lead only to the expenditure of negative energy. Trying to understand “why” serves no purpose and leaves one with only a headache and a bad aftertaste. There never seems to be a satisfactory answer that most will agree explains why some people behave the way they do.

Our attention instead should shift to trying to answer the questions of how and what, especially when it relates to people and their actions. A long time ago a very nice lady from Mound City once told me something that I have tried to integrate into my thinking ever since: People, even those with who we align ourselves, will do things that disappoint us. Yet, their mistakes are not enough of a reason to end the pursuit of what is important or to take our eyes off of the prize.

Here is yet another reason that supports the primacy of philosophy over personality. By our very nature, humans are fallible. There isn’t anyone who wouldn’t agree with this observation. Yet we often rush to judgment of individuals who make mistakes. And just as quickly, our views on the group these fallen individuals represent are also negatively influenced. Both are an overgeneralization and are unfair.

So while Palmeiro has been penalized for cheating and has subsequently lied or tried to mislead us on what happened, it is not sufficient reason for one to give up their interest in the game as a fan. The same is true given the lying and misleading done about Monica by Slick Willy or the Watergate cover-up by Tricky Dick and our interest and participation in the political process. It is also a flimsy excuse for attacking those who are represented by the wrong-d0er. The actions of one are often regrettable but ought not to define the debate.

We need to stop the squabbling about the character of our elected officials or lump all who share the same perspective together with the misdeeds of their more visible comrades. Our representatives do and say things that are often inexplicable and lead to endless speculation. Our discussion should elevate to a level to talk about possible solutions to our challenges and the alternatives of how to take advantage of the opportunities we face together.

I think it ought to start here in blog-o-land (sorry KELOland). All the sniping back and forth about what one guy or gal did or said is toxic, triggers cynicism, and leaves one with a headache and a bad aftertaste. We can do better and ought to try. I seek out the debate about the issues rather than the players and invite others to join me.

This is my plea brothers and sisters! Can I get a witness? Can I have an ‘Amen!’?

Ohmigosh!!! A Picture of Ben Stein, Straight Talk and Me!?!

After reading through some terrific and very relevant observations on the political scene given by economist, Presidential speech writer and advisor, film star, and world renowned game show host posted by Straight Talk, scroll down even further and you will see a picture of me.

No, no, not Miss Piggy silly! I am talking about the one just above it with Mr. Straight Talk and Mr. Stein.

Mr. Stein asserts that that Republicans are inherently optimistic, inclusive, kind, and confident. A position I find hard to disagree with and a gentle reminder for those (from within and outside our party) who see the GOP as an exclusionary organization for only those who agree to a very narrow and limited set of beliefs.

Rock on with your bad self Mr. Stein!

Public Servant Warren Lotsberg Announces Early Retirement

Warren Lotsberg of NorthWestern Public Service announces his plan to retire early according to Roger Kasa at the Huron Daily Plainsman. Lotsberg, Government Affairs Director for the utility company is quoted as saying he has no immediate plans except that he "believes he still has one more part-time job left in his life."

I certainly hope so.

I deliberately and respectfully choose the words "Public Servant" to describe Mr. Lotsberg. He is one of hundreds of people who take up part-time residence in Pierre during the legislative session to represent their interests before lawmakers.

Being a lobbyist is an important job. No one expects legislators to be an expert on every subject (although after reading some of the statements from some of our current legislators, being somewhat knowledgable on ANY subject would be nice). Legislators must rely on lobbyists to provide accurate information to help them make decisions.

Credibility is key to being a successful lobbyist. Mislead or lie to a legislator and your career as a lobbyist vanishes - faster than a true South Dakota Conservative at a local chapter meeting of the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA).

And credibility may be the best adjective to describe Mr. Lotsberg and his career: Kasa reports Lotsberg has been working with legislators on issues important to NWPS for 25 years. That translates into Mr. Lotsberg providing honest and reliable information to all legislators, even to those who may have eventually opposed his company's position or voted to kill one of his proposed amendments or bills, for a quarter of a century. Quite an accomplishment and standard for public service.

Mr. Lotsberg has a warm personality and demeanor with almost as many jokes as he has smiles. In no time he can have you laughing so hard that your sides start to hurt.

Mr. Lotsberg definitely is one of the good guys and I am glad he plans to stick around.

A Must Read: This is Bad Math!

Click on this link to “Straight Talk” for a great perspective on how Lincoln’s argument “a house divided against itself can not stand,” is applicable here in South Dakota Republican politics today.

This blogger offers interesting insight. I urge all to check back on this site frequently for discussion that is guaranteed to provoke thought and further discussion.

Someone Actually Reads This Stuff !?! Response to a Comment

Anonymous writes:

“Just one comment on your response to some conservatives wanting more gov't intervention in their lives. In regard to the Ten Commandments issue type things, the only reason some of us feel the need for the gov't to intervene is that it ALREADY has intervened and threatens to intervene even more in preventing God/Christianity from being referred to etc. I would just as soon the gov't got its nose out of our business to, but it's too late, it's already in too far, and some of us are fighting back.”

I think I can understand your perspective in feeling that the government has been steadily encroaching upon the religious rights guaranteed under the constitution. Perhaps I am as sensitive as anyone to being told what I can and can not do (check with my wife for confirmation.)

What I am still confused about is what has caused some to feel it is necessary to go so far in the other direction to correct the situation. In doing so they further disillusion and distant themselves from those who disagree with them as well alienate those who could be somewhat sympathetic.

Politics is a gradual process and to me (pardon the poor analogy with baseball) politics has always been about advancing the runner, a single and a double at a time. I am concerned about the folks swinging wildly for the fences, and when they are called out on a play, seem to be going after the other team, umpires, even the spectators, not to mention their own team members with a baseball bat.

In other words, I see the “Moralists” (my term - see my Mis-diagnosis essay below) are over reaching. They appear to want it all and beware if you don’t agree with them. I encourage them to reassess, identify their priorities, work to correct what is wrong, and then move onto other challenges. If not, they risk losing what they have gained because the pendulum will eventually swing back. It always does.

As the good book says, “You reap what you sow,” and for my secular friends, as the Beatles were heard to sing on the last track of their last recorded album Abbey Road, “The love you take is equal to the love you make.”

Ace Art Kranz

Today Ed Harwood and I were witnesses to one of the most exciting spectacles for a golfer – a hole in one! The single stroke was hit by our brother on the links and my neighbor, Art Kranz. Pulling a six-iron from his bag and striking right at the pin 154 yards away the ball appeared to hit the edge of the green while we stood speechless and counted 1…2…3…and then the ball suddenly disappeared. WOW!!! A hole in one. Awesome.

It couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy!

Coming Out of the Closet

I found myself feeling somewhat empathetic when reading that TE at SD Watch has, "a love affair with moderate Republicans." In the spirit of honest self-disclosure, I guess its time I came out of the closet and admit I have a platonic love for several liberal Democrats (probably no surprise to many of my friends who call themselves “Conservative.")

Actually, my high regard some of those who have chosen the donkey as their party’s symbol isn't difficult for me to admit. Even though I agree very little with their positions or proposed policies, I admire the passion they had for the beliefs, their determination and conviction to convince the rest of us to agree with them, and their fortitude for saying what they believed without regard to how it might effect their chances for re-election (unlike the modern politician—there are several examples from BOTH political parities who align their position as closely as they can to popular opinion.) The Democrats I admire most include George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, Howard Metzenbaum, and Jim Abourezk. These men were among several who relished an honest and vigorous debate about how we ought to proceed.

I miss the debate and believe we need more of it.

Today more of our attention ought to be on the issues and possible solutions and less on individual political personality. Today's politics has degenerated into focusing too much on how any elected official, candidate, or nominee is either virtuous or sinister, the best sound bite, or the best (or worst) campaign ad, etc. We need to have more of a discussion on philosophy and less strategizing on how we can capture the "swing voters."

Both political parities are guilty of such practices and it is time to move beyond it before future generations become even more disillusioned. We want something better, and I think we deserve it.

PS And thanks TE for mentioning PR as one of the blogs you enjoy reading. I have to also admit that your blog is on my short list of things to read each day. (A mutual admiration socieity?) When can we have a lunch summit when we can gaze into each other eyes and debate the role government should or should not play on any of today’s more pressing topics? Good luck with the soccer team!

Congratulations Brookings Blaze!

My daughter's 13 and under softball team, Brookings Blaze, competed in the State Softball Tourney this weekend in Aberdeen. They proudly brought home the fourth place trophy after courageously gutting it out under the blazing 100 plus temperatures and stifling humidity against 28 other teams.

I am proud of all the young women, especially my daughter. She is good player and an important member of her team. This weekend she played the right field and catcher positions. We all watched in amazement as she stood poised behind home plate two different times when runners were barreling toward her and as the ball was being thrown to her from somewhere on the field. She never flinched, held her ground, and concentrated solely on catching the ball and making the play. The first the runner was called safe. The second time she tagged the runner out. I swelled with pride as we cheered for my daughter, just as we did all weekend for each of the girls when they to did something incredible. Things we will talk about for years to come.

The tournament, her team, and my daughter reminded me what life is really all about. You work hard, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose, and despite everything you still have a community of people who you care about as much as they care about you, and together, we do some amazing things.

Mis-Diagnosis?

Ambivalence exists in my profession of mental health (doctor heal thy self) about the use of diagnosis. On one hand (to recycle a phrase used by PP at the SDWC), rendering a diagnosis allows everyone on a treatment team to have the same reference point for a client's symptomatology (avoiding jokes about government profiling to a patient whose chart reads: paranoid schizophrenic with psychotic features can be important information, trust me.)

On the other hand there are concerns that the person eventually evolves into the diagnosis given to them, in terms of how others see them and how they come to see themselves. One treats someone who is said to be depressed as if they were depressed, and the person who is told they are depressed begins to act that way. This can be a serious problem and is one that I believe is analogous to some of my friends who have been "diagnosed" or who have been given and taken on the label of "Conservative."

Conservatives traditionally have believed in our infinite ability to do great things when unencumbered by any form of government. Conservatives have held that one's creativity, ingenuity, and hard work should be fairly rewarded in the greatest contest of them all, the marketplace. And Conservatives believe that people at their very essence are good and will do the right thing without being required to do so. These positions I learned in my high school civics class (thanks Mr. Nelson), and have been positively reaffirmed after carefully watching some of the people who I admire most (yeah, that would be you Joel, Troy, Steve, Judy, Terry, Mark, Tom, Julie, Nelson, Jim, Scott, George, Jan, etc.)

In recent years, though, a vocal minority of those who believe that government must intervene to protect us from ourselves, dictate to us what is morally right and wrong, and stipulate what and how one ought to believe, have been told that they are and have come to believe they are Conservatives.

In the process they have been temporarily successful in displacing traditional Conservative principles with their own. Specifically, these self-proclaimed Conservatives have attempted to convince us that the most pressing challenges facing our country, communities, and families include: denying a marriage license to couples of the same gender, insisting on a constitutional amendment to ban the burning of the flag, ensuring, if not insisting, that our children pray in school, and guaranteeing that the ten commandments be permanently displayed in an Alabama courthouse.

I am encouraged though. I am more convinced than ever that people recognize that the label “Conservative” doesn't fit those who are demanding that government prescribe and proscribe more in our lives. There are several who are been speaking up and offering a "second opinion" to the original diagnosis. (As perhaps is best evidenced in several different blogs.) And at the risk of getting dramatic (I would like to thank the members of the academy, my parents, family, agent...), I am proud to stand with those trying to clarify what is and isn't a Conservative.

I will also continue to work with anyone (Conservative and Liberal, Republican and Democrat) who is working to advance the agenda of better educational opportunities for our children, promoting economic growth to enhance opportunities for everyone, and limiting the involvement of government in our lives and the amount they take out of our paychecks. (I mean, can’t we all just get along?)

PS Might I offer a suggestion to my friends who passionately believe in what I see as contradictory to traditional Conservative principles? Respectfully, they might consider referring to themselves as “Moralists,” which I believe would be a more accurate description. (It is just an idea.) Is there anything worse than getting the wrong diagnosis or label? Get a focus group together, see how they react, and then meet us all in the marketplace of ideas.

Discovered

Thanks to CKC and SDWC for finding me amongest all the sound and fury. Someday one of you is going to show me how you found me so quick. It's is nice to know I'm not just shouting out into the void.

CKC's response to the loss of jobs overseas made me chuckle as I have to wonder why we would want to save jobs making T-shirts when there isn't anyone who would want them. And the Dean of the WC and I did work together back in the day. I enjoyed it then and I anticipate I am going to enjoy throwing ideas back and forth again now.

60 degrees, bright sunny morning without any humidity in Brookings, does it get any better than this? Well...a Bagel Works marble rye bagel with mozerella cheese, green pepper, with salt and pepper, that's how! And all for a $1.50. A must stop when in the Campanile City. Tell ‘em Gabey Good Guy sent ya! They love me there.

And now for something completely different...

Republican Declares Jihad Against (gasp) Republican Party!?!

Senator Bill Napoli (R-Rapid City) explodes that the state Republican Party and its elected leaders have lost their way and are morphing themselves into RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). Citing a lack of loyalty to the Republican Platform (rats, I missed the pledge ceremony) added to the fact that many RINOS are "quite wealthy (I keep forgetting that it is wrong to work hard to enhance one's own financial position) and have contributed buckets of dollars to Rounds and other so-called 'moderate candidates'." (So my contribution to John Thune doesn't count because I didn't put it in a bucket?).

The distinguished gentleman from Rapid City sees impending doom by suggesting that our elected RINO leadership believes" in abortion, same-sex marriage, gun control, less rights, bigger government control and more government programs." (the irony in this duplicitous argument of more AND less government intrusion in our daily lives as defining a conservative is not lost on anyone.) He goes on to uncover the secret RINO plan "to change a decades old conservative party into a fence-walking, liberal, squishy, feel-good, no-guts, no-core values, no-real beliefs, no-morals and no-integrity party, somewhat along their current agenda." Oh, the humanity! Seek shelter immediately! Grab the children and contact your deaf neighbor!

One painfully frustrated hombre, yet I am puzzled and don't understand the angry tone. It's like we are being warned we had better stop it, and if we don't, we are just going to have to go to someone's else's house to play.

What the good man from the Blacks Hills may have forgotten is that we discuss, question, examine our alternatives, weigh the different options, and decide which direction to take every election year. And in the marketplace of ideas and political system like ours, one side eventually wins and others lose, which maybe what is upsetting the legislator from way out there so much.

I have read the Republican Platform and have paid close attention to the actions of our Republican leadership. I agree with most, certainly not all, of their positions. I also feel reasonably satisfied our party's manifesto and elected officials are reasonably congruent with each other and am generally satisfied with how things are going.

Wait though! The west river crusader is offering to step in to save us from ourselves and in the process possibly revealing what he finds most frustrating, "I will be the first to lead a conservative movement, if need be, to save and protect a decades old, conservative Republican Party." Now I think I understand.

Umm, thanks Senator, but, uh, I think we are doing okay for now. And thanks for giving us a better idea of what you maybe most upset about. Look forward to seeing you on the election stump and good luck in the next election!

Welcome and Introduction

Today I join the increasing number of people who share their views on the Internet. I do this with some reservation as it is my inclination to spend more time listening and less time talking. It is not that I do not have any of my own opinions. To the contrary, I have several ideas of how things ought to work. Yet, the occasional success I have had in influencing people or events themselves has come from working backstage or prompting and encouraging the actors rather than standing before the audience under the spotlight myself. It is from behind the curtain I am most comfortable and so it will require some effort on my part to step out onto the stage.

So this forum offers a personal challenge and opportunity. Here is a place where from time to time I will express my perspective on the happenings around us to provoke and invite lively conversation at this virtual round-table. I also look forward to introducing some of the more interesting local policy-makers to a broader audience.

I welcome all comments with only two qualifications: 1) We can agree to disagree in a respectful manner in order to learn more about ourselves and each other; and 2) that the ability to laugh at oneself is encouraged. I believe laughter is essential to well-being and that one can never laugh enough.

Notes on omissions, mis-spellings or poor usage are invited and appreciated. I have never been able to successfully proof my own writing although I am getting better.