We've moved!

Social Icons

twitterfacebooklinkedinrss feed

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Heidelberger Writhes in Crushing Grip of Blanchardian Rhetoric

Ken Blanchard likes to make my life difficult. Saturday the good professor tweaked me (with ever-amusing graphics), fusing me with Steve Hildebrand and other Weiland Wildcats to depict us Dems as double-dealing opportunists (o.k., I overstate, but the phrase was fun!).

The good professor has a point. Place my commentary about Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's recognized ability to check Speaker Pelosi's power alongside my previous criticism of SHS's Blue Dog votes on big issues and my promotion of the all-too-brief Weiland campaign, and I do sound a bit hypocritical.

No more so, though, than in 2008 when my man Dennis Kucinich dropped out and I had to swing behind the all-too-centrist Barack Hussein Obama. No more so than Clinton people who switched to Hope and Change after their gal's last great and fruitless victory in South Dakota, or the Huckabee/Romney/Giuliani people who got behind McCain-Palin. No more so than Dr. Blanchard himself, who was able to look past lots of differences with McCain to deem him preferable to the alternative. And certainly no more so than the Nelson and Curd people (including Curd's former campaign manager) who are now beating the Noem drum.

Dr. Blanchard's mirthful criticism plagues me nonetheless, and to stave off further tossing and turning, I must elaborate: Yes, after all my criticism of Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, I am 95% certain that I will check her name on the November ballot. In encouraging my neighbors to do the same, I will step occasionally out of my Wellstone waders, try on my good-neighbor galoshes, and muck about in others' worldviews. My Friday post on SHS's pull with Pelosi is not an endorsement or criticism on my part of SHS's voting record—I still think the big votes where she bucked the Speaker and the Dem majority were bad, bad, bad. The point of my Friday post was to cite specific evidence that counters the Noem narrative that equates SHS with Pelosi in a fallacious effort to make the election about someone other than the women on the ballot.

I can point out that Noem's rhetoric is wrong without being a Herseth true believer, just as I can point out the contradiction between religion and patriotism without going to church on Sunday.

But I will still have lots of 'splainin' to do... as the good Dr. Blanchard will so persistently, pesteringly, and perfectly appropriately remind me.


  1. Cory, I think we Dems might be better off just starting over. I'll watch the campaign to see what happens, but right now I'm not inclined to vote for SHS. Noem either. I'm thinking of maybe writing your name in... but not if you're gonna do the Belgian Waffle on us. ;^). Might have to be Nemec.

  2. Vote Nemec! He deserves credit for showing excellent Parliamentarian chops at convention! :-)

  3. Nick Nemec is really Yoda, Cory. A Jedi Master in coveralls.

  4. His verbs and nouns were all in the right order... but now that you mention it, Bill, I did get that vibe at convention. The Dems definitely need more Jedi! Time to head to Dagobah for training!

  5. It's pretty fun, Cory. You get custom hand sharpened poking sticks and lot's of practice on Nick's old sow in the hog shed at the Holabird farmyard. (Beats light sabers any day.) And if do real good, "Mrs. Yoda" gives you some great cornbread and a bowl of chili.

    I got my badge a couple of years back. Sibby was there too, but I don't think he was paying very close attention.

  6. Cory,

    Let me bind you a bit tighter.

    If SHS's votes against your views are insufficient to cause you to vote against SHG, why aren't those same votes insufficient for others to change their vote toward SHS?

    What Blanchard is pointing is

    1) SHS claims to be a Blue Dog but her body of work isn't very conservative fiscally. Or

    2) SHS is a true conservative fiscally.

    But, she can't be both.

    Furthermore, there is nothing hypocritical in you moving from Dennis to Barack. Nor is there for Curd supporters going for Noem. You are comparing apples to oranges.

  7. ...must... break... free... ;-)

    Troy, I don't plan to make the case that someone who wants to fight Speaker Pelosi on every vote should vote for SHS instead of Noem. And if you plan to win a Republican House majority in November (chances: 5%?), then all the more reason to pick a new GOP darling to get some pull. All I'm saying is that the SHS=Pelosi narrative doesn't stick when she can be recognized as a thorn in the Speaker's side.

    And I'm still thinking my apples are pretty orangey. Besides, Ken started it! (wah wah) He seemed to find cause for critique and amusement in pointing out my apparently shifting Weiland loyalty. Grimacing under the weight of Blanchard's scorn, I felt the need to put my willingness to vote for SHS and occasionally make her case in the context of previous primary disappointments on both sides. But thank you for absolving me on that small point. (And there remains a 90% chance that I will harass Weiland to run in 2012.)

  8. Cory: I never have any "scorn" for you. I think you are in a difficult position, that's all. I missed this post when it appeared. Sorry.

  9. Thanks, Ken. You are correct: to paraphrase Ulysses Everett McGill, I'm in a tight spot!


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.