We've moved!

Social Icons

twitterfacebooklinkedinrss feed

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Nelson, Munsterman Go Hard Right, Take Stage with Radicals

I had hoped Chris Nelson might hold the center and restore a little practical policy sanity to the Republican Party. I had thought Scott Munsterman might be a sensible technocrat who just might concentrate on governing and resist the Wesleyan urge for culture war. Maybe, just maybe...?

Pffft—the cast of characters for this coming Saturday's Pierre Tea Party lets the remaining air out of that flaccid balloon. Nelson and Munsterman are appearing on the same stage as the following right-wing radicals:
  1. Dr. Allen Unruh, who likens federal health care reform to slavery.
  2. Nancy First, South Dakota coordinator of the Second Amendment Sisters, who thinks packing heat in courthouses, bars, and kindergartens is good public policy.
  3. Kitty Werthmann, who skips the foreplay and takes every argument straight to Godwin's Law. Werthmann brands everything she despises as Nazi machinations. (She probably thinks Bush's Real ID plan is part of the Nazi plot as well.) Her all-purpose policy solution: "buy more guns." Werthmann fronts the South Dakota branch of Eagle Forum Schlafly radicalism.
So, any of you Dems still thinking of backing Nelson over Herseth next year? Think hard—really, really hard—about whether you want to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with characters like Unruh, First, and Werthmann.

With their choices of political appearances, Nelson and Munsterman are making clear they are not moderates. They are standing with and seeking the votes of the hardest right-wingnuts we can find in South Dakota.


  1. What a double standard and hypocritical. You were one who said that Obama shouldn't be splashed with mud from Wright or Ayres after Obama spent months with them. And yet, you think Republicans should be dismissed because they share a stage with someone you find "radical."

  2. Wait a minute, Troy: who's splashing mud? I'm saying that Nelson's and Munsterman's willingness to campaign with these people indicates Nelson and Munsterman are not moderates and that Dems (and other voters) looking for moderates should indeed dismiss the idea of voting for these apparently right-tacking ideologues. That's not mud: that's assessment of politics.

    (By the way, your statement above appears to accept the premise that Unruh, First, and Werthmann are "muddy" characters for whom you need to make excuses. Is that the case?)

    Furthermore, Candidate Obama did not share a stage with either of the gents you mention. Candidates Nelson and Munsterman, by making a campaign appearance with these characters, are signaling an ideological allegiance or at least fellow travelership that Candidate Obama never did.

    A more apt comparison would be to look at your own blog's tarring of McGovern and Abourezk as radicals and thus indicting Heidepriem's fitness for office... unless you are prepared to repudiate Mr. Powers's writing on that topic.

  3. Steve Sibson12/01/2009 7:41 PM

    Since when did Americans demanding we return to our founding principles become radicals?

  4. Joseph Bryant

    I am proud to share the stage with these "radicals". The reason I am proud to share the stage with these great Americans is because they stand up for the United States Constitution, stand behind their religions, and cling to their guns. The only person that sees that as extreme is the Obama administration. So if that make me a radical to I am happy to be one. Also you’re wrong that Obama never shared a stage with Ayers or Wright. Obama shared a stage in 1997 with Ayers http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/971106/justice.shtml. Obama shared a stage with Wright when he got married and baptized his children. So just by speaking at an event does that mean everyone at that event supports what everyone at that event believes? I don’t believe so because look at debates and candidate forums and look at the classroom.

  5. I suppose you are just as upset with Herseth for advertising on the Daily Kos and linking that to her website in the last election. Daily Kos is a radically liberal leftist blog BTW for those who don't know. She received lots of money as a result of this.

    Campaigners should go to any venue that invites them in an attempt to speak to all voters. Just because a candidate speaks at a forum does not mean he/she necessarily agrees with all the stances of the inviting organization.

    I would hope that Nelson and Munsterman do agree with following the principles as outlined in our Constitution, in limited government, in fiscal responsibility, in lower taxes. This is not radical. These are what tea parties espouse, which the last I checked are not radical ideas. They seem, however, contrary to your idea of what gov't should be.

  6. John Kelley
    Well if the repubs won't run a moderate will the demos run a democrat?

  7. A couple of months ago, I switched my voter registration from Independent back to Republican, specifically so I can cast my vote in the primary for that right-wing radical ideologue, Scott Munsterman.

  8. Et tu Chris?

  9. There was a time that Kitty was such a fan of "more guns" that she lobbied armed. I'm hoping that's no longer the case.

  10. I stand up for the Constitution, stand behind my Religion and ummm... I know how to shoot my husband's gun, yet I'm not a radical or extremist.

    I usually turn away from radicals and extremists because I can't hear anything past their fear. Their fear obstructs their message. Fear of the unknown, fear that if this happens, then inject fear that this will be the end result.

    All governing bodies have a system set in place for change. If something ends up on the books, that I don't agree with, I can change it. We have done this with the pool issue, the abortion issue, and now the smoking issue.

    I'll give these guys a chance that they are trying to appear in front of a ready made audience. After all how do you increase support if you keep preaching to the choir, but, I have to add that now I have a sharper eye for who they associate with in the future.

    I'll take a Spock over a fear monger anyday.


  11. Munsterman will be and should be responsible for his own positions and not those who share a stage with him. If this became the standards, every politician would soon become a bag of conflicting positions. You attempt to denigrate by association is a standard that is moronic.

    Nothing in my statement is a reflection on your assertion that they are "muddy" characters. I was just taking your premise and trying to expose it for its lunacy.

    Furthermore, Munsterman sharing a stage is certainly less intimate and revealing than Obama's Wright/Ayres relationship. If Munsterman can be indicted by something as fleeting as a passing sharing of a stage, Obama's relationship is substantially less fleeting. P.S. Obama had fundraisers hosted by Ayres. So doesn't that "signal an ideological allegiance?"

    Finally, using your logic, the McGovern/Abouresk issue is more substantive than sharing a stage. McGovern/Abouresk are endorsed agents of Scott's campaign.

    Corey, the best thing about your post though is it confirms my belief that Herseth has significant problem's with her base that imperil her re-election. Your weak attempt to use innuendo and character assassination to solidify Democrats behind Herseth says so much about your candidate that I'm going to do a little dance around my desk. Thanks for making my day again.

  12. Ah, Troy, once again seeing what you wwant and not what is. If you were paying attention to something other than your wishful thinking, you'd know that I'm not trying to solidify Democrats behind SHS. I'd rather see them recognize they have neither moderate options among the Republicans nor a real liberal/progressive in the seat and thus support a Dem primary challenge.

    And yes, I still maintain your analogy to Obama is false. Obama explicitly repudiated the views of the two men you cite. He never appeared with them during the campaign. Perhaps Nelson and Munsterman will surprise me and repudiate some of the radical positions Unruh, Werthmann, and First have expressed and likely will express on Saturday night... but it is much more likely that the candidates will be applauding and voicing support for their fellow speakers at this event. We shall see.

    You still seem to be trying to run from the basic point: Nelson and Munsterman are appearing on the same stage as strong radicals in the far right wing of the GOP. That appearance tells me they are not moderates. I can make that political assessment without venturing anywhere near character assassination (although advocating as First does that we should be free to carry guns in courthouses, bars, and schools is clearly asinine). Get back to the issue, Troy: Nelson and Munsterman are tacking right. They are not moderate choices for Dems or independents. That's all I'm saying, and you keep dancing around it.

    Now, as for McGovern and Abourezk, no problem. If I were a Dem running for governor, I'd be thrilled to have their endorsement and their campaign work. I'll take that liberal stamp of approval. But show me what state-level policies McG/AbZ advocate that would make Heidepriem a bad governor. I can do that for you on the radical rightwingers above. I'm waiting....


Comments are closed, as this portion of the Madville Times is in archive mode. You can join the discussion of current issues at MadvilleTimes.com.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.