|South Dakota Politics
A University of South Dakota law student's blog dedicated primarily to shining light (either a harsh, unyielding spotlight or a soft, warm glow) on figures and institutions in South Dakota.
Friday, February 21, 2003
The Sioux Falls protest against Tom Daschle's filibuster of the Estrada nomination gets a write-up in today's Argus Leader by Democratic-coddler David Kranz. Dan Pfeiffer, a Daschle staffer, says there's "more to the story" and, in true communications director form proceeds to subtract from clarity:
David Kranz, in his usual balanced form, fails to report the Republican response to the Pfeiffer/Daschle canard that background information on Miguel Estrada has not been forthcoming and is being "concealed." The "background information" Daschle is requesting is confidential Department of Justice memoranda in which Estrada provided appeal, certiorari, and amicus recommendations while he was a career attorney in the Office of Solicitor General. All living former Solicitors General (four Democrats and three Republicans) have strongly opposed Daschle's request for Solicitor General memoranda and stated that it would sacrifice and compromise the ability of the Justice Department to effectively represent the United States in court. It would be akin to a lawyer violating the attorney-client privilege by revealing confidential information, which is the unforgivable sin in the legal world. Also, according to the White House letter linked below, the Senate has not requested memos such as these for any of the 67 appeals court nominees since 1977 who had previously worked in the Justice Department (including the seven nominees who had previously worked in the Solicitor General's office). Of course, Dave Kranz fails to report these pesky facts, and lets Pfeiffer get away with a throw-away quote. And it's not as if Dave Kranz is unaware of the Republican response. Since Dave knows and reports about the letter sent to the White House by Senator Leahy, he knows about and fails to report White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales' letter in response. Why does Dave Kranz omit this important part of the story? Is he just a bad reporter who simply cannot round up all of the relevant facts? That may be part of it, but mainly, the problem is that it's devastating to Daschle's case, and in the Kranz world, that is something that cannot be allowed to happen.
posted by Jason | 6:51 PM
Thursday, February 20, 2003
Here's an interesting feature on the demographics of the Indian reservations in South Dakota.posted by Jason | 9:14 AM
Wednesday, February 19, 2003
Here's a study that John Thune will need to digest if he decides to take on Tom Daschle in 2004.posted by Jason | 10:21 AM
The voter fraud investigation has brought the issue of tribal sovereignty and the Supreme Court opinion in Nevada v. Hicks into focus. Here's the view of Nevada v. Hicks by the eminent Indian Law scholar at the University of South Dakota Law School. Excerpt:
posted by Jason | 10:01 AM
Which headline is misleading?
When I saw the latter headline, I was immediately confused. I thought the judge had refused the injunction because the tribe had backed down, making the issue moot. The former headline is much more clear, and states the bottom line. While both headlines are true, the latter headline is extremely misleading. You get the immediate impression in the latter headline that the state didn't get what it wanted. The Argus gets its spin in again. posted by Jason | 9:23 AM
Tuesday, February 18, 2003
While I've been distrustful of Senator John McCain on core Republican issues since the South Carolina primary in 2000, he's just redeemed himself:
posted by Jason | 10:04 PM
There are new developments in the voter fraud investigation. Suddenly, in front of a federal judge, the tribe realized it made a mistake in kicking investigators off the rez. I'm actually surprised the tribe caved this quickly. But maybe they came to their senses. Like I said in an earlier post, if this case were to go to court, it would only further erode tribal sovereignty. I wonder if Maka Duta is as giddy now as she was a few weeks ago?posted by Jason | 7:33 PM
Here's an asinine letter to the editor. You may recall that the writer of this letter was parading down 41st Street in Sioux Falls with an upside-down American flag at a recent pro-Saddam rally. And he has the temerity to say what patriotic Americans should do. In contrast to this vapid asininity, read what an Iraqi expatriate recently wrote, despite some misgivings about America's foreign policy, to Prime Minister Tony Blair:
posted by Jason | 1:31 PM
Here's a delightful editorial in today's Washington Post castigating the Democrats for their tactics with the nomination of Miguel Estrada.posted by Jason | 9:39 AM
The protest in front of Daschle's office in Sioux Falls today has been postponed. The Rally for America in Vermillion is still on.posted by Jason | 9:06 AM
Monday, February 17, 2003
Majority Leader Frist is wussing out on the Estrada nomination, the first true test of his leadership. Apparently he was ready to give up on the nomination and scurry home with his tail between his legs. I'm seeing shades of Trent Lott and Bob Dole here. Republicans can't seem to find congressional leadership as hard-nosed as Tom Daschle. Fortunately, the administration has the balls to take Daschle on, and they've already defeated him on numerous occasions, the most recent being the last election. As I said here before, if Tom Daschle wins this battle, he might as well be the majority leader.posted by Jason | 3:03 PM
Tom Daschle was in Arkansas recently (Arkansas?), and here's how he responded to a local reporter's questions regarding Iraq.posted by Jason | 2:42 PM
It looks like tomorrow (Tuesday, February 18) is a big protest day for Republicans. Here in Vermillion, there will be a rally at noon to support the troops and the liberation of Iraq. In Sioux Falls, there will be a protest at noon for judicial nominee Miguel Estrada in front of Tom Daschle's office. Be at one of these if you can.posted by Jason | 2:29 PM
Now that he's been reelected, will Tim Johnson support the new Bush tax cut, as he supported the first Bush tax cut two years ago? Not on your life. As seen here, he's already trotted out the tried-and-true Democratic theme:
posted by Jason | 2:22 PM
Sunday, February 16, 2003
My good friend, law school colleague, and fellow SDP blogger, Joel Arends, has sent a wink-and-nod message indicating that he and his Guard unit are en route to the Middle East. I think it's safe to say that Iraq will soon be free.posted by Jason | 8:26 PM
This photo says all that need be said about the peace creeps.
David Kranz scribbles another inadequte column today. An obvious shortcoming of the article is its discussion of the presence of Jew-hater Jim Abourezk in four recently published books. The next logical step would be to list the books. But Dave doesn't give us a list of the books! I for one would like to know what books they are. Oh well, my expectations were low anyway. As for Abourezk, his 1990 interview with Brian Lamb of C-Span aired this morning. Here is a transcript of the interview. For background on Jim Abourezk and his protege, Senator Tom Daschle, read this piece. Excerpt:
posted by Jason | 3:03 PM