tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post3391002564395238172..comments2023-08-25T05:18:29.312-06:00Comments on Madville Times: Review: Daschle vs. Thune -- 2004 Over and Overcaheidelbergerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-26020826790590514392008-01-20T19:54:00.000-07:002008-01-20T19:54:00.000-07:00I just finished the book and thought it was really...I just finished the book and thought it was really quite good. The way the liberals were attacking the book I thought it was sacreligious or something. It was very balanced, very factual, and just plain air (even though it didn't need to be against a congenital liar like Daschle).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-17330152235294396212008-01-14T18:42:00.000-07:002008-01-14T18:42:00.000-07:00It's more than wanting more of Lauck, Ronnie. It's...It's more than wanting more of Lauck, Ronnie. It's wanting more of the unique participatory perspective that the participant himself vigorously justifies but does not deliver. Even without any more personal details about the author himself, the text could have provided more insight for future historians as to how things actually happened, more about Thune's record and his decisions.caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-32255196333153025342008-01-14T18:23:00.000-07:002008-01-14T18:23:00.000-07:00I've read the book and the facts and research are ...I've read the book and the facts and research are rock solid. Not even a left-winger like you Corey can deny that. Your comments are about style and are based on you wanted more of Lauck discussed in the book. I think it's fine to focus on the main story. But I think it is very telling that NOBODY had disputed what Lauck said, not Kranz, not Newquist, not Clean Cut Kid...NOBODYAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-79370161421439426742008-01-11T09:52:00.000-07:002008-01-11T09:52:00.000-07:00Thank you, Jon, for taking honest criticism as int...Thank you, Jon, for taking honest criticism as intellectual discussion and not personal attack. <BR/><BR/>Your heavy use of evidence is a point in your favor. The more endnotes and citations, the better! And your Preface shows you are perfectly capable of balancing policy-style citations with LD-style rhetoric to argue a point. (John Miller's successor in <A HREF="http://www3.sdstate.edu/Academics/CollegeOfArtsAndSciences/History/" REL="nofollow">SDSU's History department</A> should include that preface in the history methods class!)<BR/><BR/>You're right: history and autobiography are different genres. Your book doesn't need an account of your career as a Bulldog debater or a description of the lucky stripey underpants you wore on election day. But as a participant, you have a unique perspective -- not just "I wanted Thune to win, so I'm going to recap why we were right," but "I helped form the Dakota Blog Alliance. I co-ordinated with Thune. Here are the discussions we had. Here's what didn't make the news or the blogs but played a key role in forming our decisions and shaping South Dakota and U.S. history." More of that perspective would give historians a richer picture of why 2004 turned out as it did.<BR/><BR/>Martin Connor -- a fine scholar indeed! I wonder how he'd review your book?caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-2540169117742066142008-01-11T09:24:00.000-07:002008-01-11T09:24:00.000-07:00Cory:Thanks so much for taking the time to read th...Cory:<BR/><BR/>Thanks so much for taking the time to read the book seriously and for offering a sophisticated response to the book. An author could ask for no less. It's much preferable to the Newquist/Kos line of thought, i.e. "if he doesn't agree with me he must be a fascist." Yes, the book is heavy on evidence and footnotes. But remember, I was a policy debater with 8 briefcases of evidence and you were the more elegant and polished LD debater who understood style and passion better than us policy wonks with the 15-step nuclear war disads. Anyway, I take your point, but don't you find it a little annoying when authors just go about about themselves? It's too offer a distraction for me as a reader when I want to know the basic facts of a historical event. Finally, it was great to see a Martin Connor reference. Truly a great man, a lover of literature, a wonderful teacher, and a Fenian patriot that students at MHS were lucky to have. Thanks again Cory.<BR/><BR/>JonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-81797097116028333212008-01-10T13:27:00.000-07:002008-01-10T13:27:00.000-07:00It seems to me your review does fact check Lauck's...It seems to me your review does fact check Lauck's overall premise that Tom Daschle was brought down by the great sweep of history termed the "Reagan Revolution". Or, at least it states what a load that assertion is:<BR/><BR/>"Lauck's conclusion suggests that his synecdochification of the Daschle-Thune contest is more wish than historical assessment. Reagan never went out of style in South Dakota; South Dakota was Reagan before Reagan was Reagan." <BR/><BR/>Indeed, Daschle built much of his political carreer during the "Reagan Era" including winning his senate seat from a Republican incumbent while Reagan was still president. He was not "swept" out of office by a mass movement toward a political ideal. Rather, he was narrowly defeated after enduring a relentless onslaught of personal attacks perpetrated by the likes of Lauck and Bush henchman, Karl Rove. For Lauck to claim otherwise seems no more than a self-aggrandizing attempt to make his own slime-mongering role in Daschle's defeat something more lofty than the vitriolic character assassin he played.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-48264055428640584832008-01-09T15:07:00.001-07:002008-01-09T15:07:00.001-07:00Paul, sshhh... people outside our world don't know...Paul, sshhh... people outside our world don't know about speaker-point inflation! Your kids are safe... until they start running disaster-porn kritiks.<BR/><BR/>Besides, Jon and I are old school. Speaker points never bugged us. Back in our day, we debated with stone knives and bearskins. And we had to walk to Speech Fiesta, uphill, both ways.caheidelbergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03261598066395322681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-75525428146117014902008-01-09T14:51:00.000-07:002008-01-09T14:51:00.000-07:00But he mentioned my favorite History prof at SDSU,...But he mentioned my favorite History prof at SDSU, Todd, so I'm gonna cut Cory some slack!Jackrabit1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15819146935849889760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-12289752941550894012008-01-09T14:50:00.000-07:002008-01-09T14:50:00.000-07:0024 points!!!!?!?!?! I certainly hope you aren't t...24 points!!!!?!?!?! I certainly hope you aren't that harsh with my little policy kids from Vermillion! pwtpwthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15643617771508680556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15329279.post-61830276212535730902008-01-09T13:19:00.000-07:002008-01-09T13:19:00.000-07:00CAH--This post was of Sibbian length. Short is go...CAH--This post was of Sibbian length. Short is good. Shorter is better. I'm just sayin'Tell Toddhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16500891722896294455noreply@blogger.com