«

»

Jul 12

I thought we gave up report cards in college.

Here we go again.

Self-appointed South Dakota conservative savior Gordon Howie is at it once again with yet another report card of dubious value.  This time, he’s ranking legislative leadership on ideological purity, in an attempt to change South Dakota’s House GOP leadership to one that might contain one at least nominally deferential to his special brand of “burn the heretics” conservatism:

I’m not sure what he’s trying to accomplish other than to set himself up for another fundraising push.

3 comments

  1. Don

    Where in the South Dakota constitution or codified law is it written that the people don’t have every right to praise (or condemn) their legislators based on their voting records ?

    Whether you agree with it or not is beside the point.

    If these criticisms are as wrong-headed as you claim, then why don’t you go ahead and make the counter-argument for the alleged “conservatism” of the current leadership team instead of mindlessly attacking those who call it into question ?

  2. Bob Ellis

    We should be able to give up report cards in school. Unfortunately, when some “Republicans” can’t seem to bring themselves to be loyal to the well-documented values and principles of the part to which they have declared allegiance, apparently they are still needed.

    While ideological purity would be nice, (why else do we publish a platform, if we don’t care if some among us give it the middle finger), Reagan’s standard of 80% is more than reasonable. Unfortunately, even many “Republicans” in leadership can’t even come close to that figure.

    It shouldn’t be too much to ask that someone who calls themselves a Republican should act like a Republican–especially if they are going to function as an elected representative, and even more so as a leader within government.

    If you’re going to defend “Republicans” who have this level of contempt for published Republican values and principles, you should change your banner to say:

    “A movement devoted to supporting candidates who adhere to the liberal ideals of fiscal irresponsibility, big government, and the trampling of individual rights to make way for the power of the state…and the occasional conservative value when it isn’t too inconvenient.”

    Truth in advertising is very important to most people.

  3. Stace Nelson

    This site claims to support conservative candidates which in itself would require it to make judgment calls (grading) of people’s conservatism before doing so. What standing does Sen. Lederman have to do the very thing via secret deliberation that you denounce Mr. Howie for doing via a WELCOMED public disclosure of incidents/bills/ and exhibited principles that he cites for proper consideration?

    If Mr. Howie’s public disclosure and invitation of consideration of specific cited criteria is wrong, what does that make this site’s unpublished criteria & secretive efforts?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>