I don’t get Lee Schoenbeck’s mid-Session resignation from the South Dakota House of Representatives.
The Watertown Republican crafts an amendment (based on his early forward thinking back in July 2015) and leads the reconsideration push that save the Governor’s sales-tax-for-teacher-pay bill. In the process, he forges a two-thirds majority, including a simple majority of his own tax-averse and teacher-neglecting (for 30 years, at least) Republican caucus who may now owe their survival of the 2016 election to Schoenbeck (Bob Mercer uses the word hero). The only downside of Schoenbeck’s week is Majority “Leader” Brian Gosch sending two of his fellow naysaying goons, Rep. Kris Langer and Rep. Don Haggar, to physically block the door (backed up by
a Highway Patrol trooper a sergeant at arms*) to prevent Schoenbeck from entering yesterday’s GOP caucus meeting.
Gosch won with 20 rump Republicans and Gordon Howie’s anarcho-theocrats. Schoenbeck won with the majority of his party, the Governor, the education lobby, and a majority of South Dakota. Maybe I’m missing something, but Schoenbeck appears to have all the marbles. I can’t help but think that the logical course of action for a legislator in this position is to press his advantage, get more of what he wants, and crush some nuts.
Why Schoenbeck steps away from the game now, before the game is done (the Senate still has to debate the sales tax; the House still has to wrestle with the new school funding formula and salary targets, and good grief, there could be conference committee on either bill), before he can drive home the historic victory he is winning for the Governor and for South Dakota’s schools, defies my understanding.
An early autumn lion in South Dakota’s winter is stepping down, making way for one more of the Governor’s suckling cubs.
I don’t get it.
Correction 16:07 CST: The Pierre Capital Journal corrects the story from which I took the HP detail. A participant in the incident erroneously reported to Bob Mercer that a Highway Patrol officer was involved.
Shorter Cory: Lee Takes His Balls and Goes Home.
HMMM….given the threats that were directed at the legislators who voted against the bill you gotta wonder??!!
he doesn’t want to end up in a corn field all alone during hunting season…
I picked the wrong week to stay away from Pierre!
It was one of the Sergeant at Arms that was there, not a highway patrol officer.
He walks away a traitor. Money was more important to him than conservative principles. Typical of liberal tax and spend bullies.
Lee Schoenbeck is a liberal like Stace Nelson is transgender.
A lot of people have mentioned “threats”, Ann. I’d like to see some proof. Who said what to whom, in what format? No hearsay, please. I want direct testimony from legislators, e-mails, posts from other social media. Folks have been eager with vague accusations as deflections of blame from the naysaying legislators; let’s see these threats for real.
And if there were threats against those who have been fighting HB 1182, why would those threats affect yes-voting Schoenbeck’s decision to resign?
Ken is right: Cap Journal issued this correction to his story this afternoon:
I’ll add that correction in the original post.
Sesame Street could have shown these hapless children the correct to resolve conflicts. OTOH,the NRA could, too and would prolly volunteer to demonstrate on human targets.
Lee’s ego didn’t need the title and could walk away without regret.
Gosch lost the battle wins the war. He is still speaker Lee is gone. Does not say much for Leed to quit after he wins a vote.
There is more to this we will never know. Does not say much for Lee’s character.
I’m sure he has reasons for stepping down. They may be political; they may be personal. I doubt he took this step without considerable soul searching. If he has designs on higher office at some point, this might not be the best move. Maybe he’s just fed up with the B.S. and doesn’t want to deal with it anymore.
Nothing is completely done until sine die, so his resignation does pose some risk for people who support, or at least accept the need for additional revenue to bolster education and teacher salaries.
Mr. Gosch is not speaker? What happened to Mr. Wink? He seemed a classy old common sense rancher. I am sorry to hear of him being usurped as well.
I feel bad that he broke his promise to represent his constituents. I think he needs to fulfill his commitment to them. Besides the drama between he and Gosch is just getting good.
Not so fast my friends! Lee is re-considering and will talk to his family.
He could become a Democrat. He might be a little more conservative than I like but Democrats welcome all to our party.
Unlike the far right Republicans. Right Steve?
So Schoenbeck did one arguably good thing. That does not rate sainthood or martyrdom. I remember some pretty awful stuff he did.
Mr. Newland is righter than right. But he should not stomp out in Sibbyesque fashion. I say he should stay, do his caucusing alone and romp like a frozen cocklebur through Mr. Gosch’s digestive system.
I imagine it’s pretty ugly on the “dark side of the force”.
Could be Lee just didn’t want to share quitting days with Lucas Lentsch using his political patronage for personal profit.
Mike Henriksen is right: SDPB’s Charles Michael Ray breaks the story:
“He could become a Democrat.”
Party doesn’t matter Owen. You are either a populist Democrat or a conservative Repubitian, vs being a tax and spend liberal bully for either party. Lee would fit in well with the Democrat’s “tax the needy to fund the greedy” mentality.
Schoenbeck is blowing more deceptive smoke. Two weeks left in his term does not require much of a family commitment. He lost his cool, and now he regrets it. Soon he will regret leading the tax and spend liberal bully caucus, if he hasn’t already. Perhaps that explains his knee-jerk decision to resign.
Mr. Schoenbeck, I salute you for irking Mr. Sibby as I know that was one of your big motivations.
Mr. Sibson, you should be thanking Lee Schoenbeck. He has saved the Republican party from a general citizen revolt in SD. Only a tea-party extremist like yourself would brand as liberal Governor Daugaard and thirty six Republicans who voted for 1182.
You seem to love to eat your own young (and old) in the Tea Party. It seems to be a contest to see who can be the most extreme and if someone isn’t quite extreme enough for you they are branded a liberal. Democrats talk about having a big tent. The Tea Party I see has a small boat philosophy for people and ideas, i.e. if someone votes against your ideology you throw them out of the boat without a life preserver.
Forget the fact we are 43rd or 44th on education spending per capita which is even effectively lower when you take into account our sparse population and large geography. Compared to all other states, South Dakota state government pays the smallest share of education funding when comparing federal, state and local sources. Our state government has been letting education get by on a barebones approach for some time now.
I heard from some legislators that test scores were fine so we must be funding education adequately. Well, the test scores over the last ten years have gone from middle of the pack for our region to last in the seven state region. Everyone in the state, save for a select small percentage of Republican extremists, recognizes we are driving our educational system into the ditch. Lee Schoenbeck is helping to steer us away from the ditch and you are saying just back off on the throttle and everything will be ok.
I would say threatening is a common way many west river Republicans do business. It is their cowardly way of reacting when people stand up to them.
Perhaps we should also use this moment to step back, look at the big picture, and ask ourselves, “What in the hell is going on with our legislature? I’ve lived in South Dakota my entire life, and Stace back in 2012 and now Lee this year are the only times I can recall Republicans banning fellow party members from their own caucus. How do these yahoos keep such a death grip on South Dakota policy making? Why do we citizens keep re-electing people with the maturity of 3-year-olds (and a strange obsession with guns, daylight savings time, bathrooms, girl parts and boys parts, abortion, transphobia, and homophobia) to office?
Mr. H, I suspect that Sibby thinks you are not very smart or you are part of the tax and spend liberal capitalist agenda. I, for one, think you are smart enough and not really part of any agenda except your own. Probably not very capitalist. But that’s just me.
Cory, if you want the real story call Wooster.
“He has saved the Republican party from a general citizen revolt in SD.”
Darin, you must have forgotten the voters rejecting a sales tax increase by 57% in 2012. Now set down the liberal tax and spend talking points. They are designed to deceive.
Steve, on the topic of setting down old talking points, the “penny for Denny” vote is not a fair indication of where public support is for the 1/2 cent for education now. Polling has public support for this now at 70%. Listening sessions for the BRTF was overwhelmingly supportive of taking “Bold” action to fix this crisis (of opportunity for students). Leaders of not only education but also the business community support action from both inside and outside the BERTF.
Let’s be honest, the IM vote you reference is not on point, and as such, I would call use of that data, “designed to deceive.”
Sibby is right. There are alternatives to taxing those least able to pay.
O’s right: both the proposal before us and the political landscape differ from those in 2012. We have reached a critical mass of agreement that the teacher shortage has reached crisis mode. We are focusing strictly on that problem (still maddening to me that we can’t find the political will to solve multiple problems at once).
And Larry is right that Steve is right: there are multiple alternatives to more regressive tax: corporate income tax, personal income tax, more progressive bank franchise tax, tax on bank assets and trusts and other assets parked in our state… others?
If the discussion is really about regressive taxation, why only hold the 1/2 cent accountable to that critique? Why have a 67 million dollar argument (that provides fodder to ignore a real crisis in education opportunity) when a 4.3 billion dollar argument is really what you want to have?
Why is “hurts the poor” or “regressive” only an argument to ignore funding the education of our state? Why wasn’t HB 001 a bill to make taxation in SD fair – if this were the TRUE motive? Does anyone really believe that SD will (or should) create new tax code and regulations to bring in any of the above suggestions ONLY for $67 million? Instead, this is being used as an excuse by too many to do nothing (while providing cover for true motives).
O & Cory are right on this being different than the 2012 vote. Much has changed since that time and it was a different proposal.
People have become engaged and educated on this issue. Heck, even a late to the party, governor, and almost 2/3 of Republicans in the House recognize that education needed this infusion of funding. 70% of people agreed in polling on the issue.
O expresses my thoughts exactly on the issue of regressive taxation. It is real hard for me to stomach the legislators who vote to keep our regressive tax system in place for everything else, but then become the defender of the poor over a half penny for education and property tax relief. If we don’t maintain our educational system to be competitive in the region, the cycle of poverty will continue and that is a lot more detrimental to those folks struggling to lift themselves up the socioeconomic ladder.
As Cory said, this year education funding, next year progressive taxation. How do you eat a whole elephant? One bite at a time.
“Put ’em up, put ’em up! Which one of you first? I’ll fight you both together if you want. I’ll fight you with one paw tied behind my back. I’ll fight you standing on one foot. I’ll fight you with my eyes closed… ohh, pullin’ an axe on me, eh? Sneaking up on me, eh? ”
“Read what my medal says: ‘Courage’. Ain’t it the truth? Ain’t it the truth? ”
To Rep Shoenbeck: Mercer mentions ‘hero’, I think I’ll choose ‘lion’.
“O & Cory are right on this being different than the 2012 vote. Much has changed since that time and it was a different proposal.”
Like the general fund budget has grown $359 million (over 30%)!!!! Where is that money going. Daugaard told the Chamber of Commerce cronies last week that he has had a budget surplus every year. He said that in order promise continued sales tax breaks for crony capitalists who want to come to this state and make the so-called workforce crisis worse. Sales tax increase for the working poor and sales tax breaks for big business, justified by saying there is not enough of that $359 million increase to raise teacher pay. Now you know why I wasn’t invited to participate in the staged Blue Ribbon propaganda machine.
Steve, looking at the list of people on the BRTF, I have to laugh at your “stages propaganda machine.” Certainly there were representatives, well spoken, who did not enter that process with a pro-tax agenda. I dare say (given the House vote) even some stayed there. The majority did have their opinion changed when faced with REAL data. Isn’t that the critical thinking skill we ask for in our schools – to mold thinking according to data? Or do you prefer the stringent adherence to dogma in the face of opposing fact?
Jon, I look forward to standing up to West River GOP Senators in Pierre next Session.
Mr. Sibson, where is your plan to fund education? Where is anyone else’s alternative plan? You talk about the growth of government in SD. A tiny percentage of that has gone to education. Tell us what you are cutting to fund education. Lead, follow or get out of the way!
Larry K, Sam@, Steve Sibsen,
Lee stood up for the citizens of SD. He is an old time Republican and maybe he is sick and tired of what the new SD Republicans are doing. They aren’t helping SD, they are hurting it. They say they want small government but yet regulate potty places and small businesses with ridiculous rules and such that make SD look bad. Maybe he wants just say shut-up and help people and children.
“Mr. Sibson, where is your plan to fund education?”
HB1130, take $75 million (which is $20 million more than Daugaard’s plan) out of Video Lottery and put it in a trust fund so the crony capitalists don’t get their fingers on it.
Daugaard’s budget is $128 million higher than what we spent last year, so that $75 million is not a cut but instead a priority above giving crony capitalists subsidies and tax cuts.
“Lee stood up for the citizens of SD.”
No Lee stood up to tax the citizens of South Dakota in order to fund his cronies’ special interests in Watertown.
“The majority did have their opinion changed when faced with REAL data.”
BS, you do what the governor wants or get a primary handed against you. Josh Klumb was promised Vehle’s vacated Senate seat, and voting for HB1182 was what that costed. Now he has to deal with being associated with tax and spend liberals who take from the needy and give to the greedy.
Good luck with your “plan”, since every lobbyist in Pierre would be working against it since you would be cutting every other program not mandated by law about 7.5%.
The $128 million you talk about, doesn’t that include federal funds that we cannot just redirect to education? They have to be used for the purpose designated by the Feds, ie, Medicare, Medicaid, roads, etc.
“Good luck with your “plan”, since every lobbyist in Pierre would be working against it”
Yes, the crony capitalists and the executive branch.
The $128 million is general fund, not federal funds. So where is this money going and why is it more important than teacher pay? The teachers need to know that before they insist on taxing their poor working neighbors.
So you want to take the money from video lottery for teachers salaries Steve. Here are a couple of stories talking about just that.
My question is what do you want to cut Steve?
The part where you say that liberals take from the needy and give to the greedy? Well it does rhyme however its BS. Proof.
The Democrats had a bill in the senate, SB151, which would increase the sales tax by 1% and take the tax off of food. Who does that help Steve. Yup the needy. Maybe they could buy a few more groceries to feed their kids. Funny though the Republicans just laughed at it and then tabled it to the 41st day. Who’s taking from the needy Steve? Yup your Republican Party. Nice
Mr. Sibby, I suspect you are using French Math. You should go to the Legislative Budget Office and get your information.
Mr. reitzel, I think when Mr. H is in the legislatures he will defer bills he does not like to the 41st day, but tabling is tabling and infers just slamming the bill down onto the table and stapling in there with nails regardless of the day you slam it down. I guess my point is you can’t do both at least under those rules I read that Mr. H knows too.
Ok grudz I stand corrected. I thought the grammar Nazi’s were tough.
Sorry, Mr. reitzel. But Mr. H made me read those rules last week because he was saying things that didn’t seem right so now I have legislatures rules drizzling out my ears. I’m sure by Sunday breakfast I will have forgotten it all.
The Democratic 1% increase in the sales tax rate (actually a 25%) increase in state sales tax revenue just gives cover to the “moderate” Republicans. School boards are ego-maniacal in their intent to squander money on athletic facilities. That lunacy can be stopped by setting up a building account which can only have funds added voters approve a specific project. No money for new building or new acquisition of facilities can come out of any other account. Rapid City is considering a half Billion of demolition and building. It is insanity on stilts.
Our Tripp County real estate taxes increased school revenue by 15%. The school system has $6 million in reserves. Our Ag property taxes are $1500 more this year than last. Taxes in Winner apparently decreased however. Farmers and ranchers are already screwed enough. The limits being discussed in the legislature aren’t going to limit much of anything.
And as several legislators in both parties have indicated there is nothing guaranteeing that increasing teacher salaries will actually improve education and performance of children.
The Republican snake pit in Pierre often sounds more like a mental institution or a propaganda ministry that assumes all regular voters are complete idiots than any kind of a rational government institution which will improve anything.
Boy I have to hand it to some of the legislators that argued against 1182; they make some interesting arguments. Rep. Westra cited the list of earnings by profession in which SD was at the bottom. In other words, if our cashiers are the lowest paid cashiers in the country, then our teachers should not expect any better. If plumbers are the lowest paid plumbers in America, then teachers should expect no better.
I don’t understand this lowest common denominator mentality. Shouldn’t we be striving to lift the economic status of cashiers and plumbers as well as teachers. Shouldn’t we be using the fact that SD has so many low paying professions as motivation to change our economy? Shouldn’t we be investing more in education, not less, to develop the skills in our children to have high paying jobs? Shouldn’t we be investing more in education that prepares kids for jobs in the new information economy? Shouldn’t we be investing in our kids to help develop entrepreneurs here in SD that will be the small business owners of tomorrow? Might we have more success educating our own kids with a top-notch skillset to stay here in SD and develop businesses rather than spending millions upon millions to beg out of state businesses to come here?
Education should be the first funding priority in Pierre instead of the last.
The Republicans have dominated state government policy in SD for at least the last forty years, so the failings of our currently low-wage economy in this state are on them. How about we try investing in education in SD rather than starving it?
Can you document that promise to Klumb, Steve? I’d love to see that on the record.
Yes, Darin, we should be working on raising everyone’s wages, not just talking about the need to do so when we need an excuse not to act on one portion of the wage problem in the public sector over which Legislators have a direct effect. Yes, Darin, we should be investing in growing our own entrepreneurs and genii instead of (or at least in addition to and far more eagerly than) advertising for someplace else’s talent to move here.
I would like to hear more about westra, gosch’s friend.
STEVE? I actually watched this very closely. I was very surprised that Klumb changed his mind. Given the way that some of those legislators were acting I wondered if he he wasn’t bullied into that decision. Klumb and I were emailing back and forth before that last vote and I got no inclination at that time that he was going to change his vote. So strange. And you guys have to admit, the people that stayed strong against this bill, stood with their promise to not raise taxes. So proud of those that stood strong.
You can wonder if he was “bullied,” but still no one has provided proof of any bullying. I invite Rep. Klumb and any other legislator who feels “bullied” to step forward and explain just what form that “bullying” takes. But frankly, these allegations that legislators have been “bullied” sounds like a cheap way to dismiss the validity of the arguments and popular sentiment that convinced a supermajority to vote for this policy.
And come on! This isn’t middle school. Every legislator is an adult. Arguing hard for a bill is not bullying. If folks in District 20 are electing a legislator who can be “bullied,” maybe they should elect a tougher legislator.
Cory, I have received information about a wife of a legislator who was bullied because of her husband’s nay vote. And Klumb admitted to the Mitchell paper that the governor contacted him, but Klumb claims that had no impact on his reversal. I am not buying that.
“If folks in District 20 are electing a legislator who can be “bullied,” maybe they should elect a tougher legislator.”
I agree with that statement 100%. Sad that so many legislators can be bought off. Is that bullying?
Ann, thanks for the insight. Now we know who are the real chickens.
And Cory, would you agree that most of those who cower to bullying will not admit it?
Cory if you don’t think calling people names is bullying then I don’t know how to help ya there. And you call these people adults?? Seriously? I know in my adult life, that if I disagree with someone, that I do not need to resort to name calling to get my point across. And I have heard the same information as Steve as well. So sad that these people act like children when things do not go their way.
Well they got their way now and it comes at the expense of the taxpayers. There are a couple of other bills out there better than that one but no one will even hear about those.
Wait. Back up, Ann. Who called Rep. Klumb names? What names? When? You still have presented no evidence of bullying.
Steve—ditto: who? When? What content? You assert but you prove nothing. Get it on the record.
And “contacted by the Governor” ≠ “bullying”.
I never said anyone called Klumb names….I am talking about the other name calling by Lee. You are going to believe what you want to believe Cory. I actually thought this comment board was for those readers to give their opinion but obviously I was wrong. Do not worry Cory I won’t be coming back to read any articles here. I know now your views are one sided and you cannot be open to the fact that maybe other people have more information than you.
Thanks Steve also for your insight as well. Good luck. Agree with you 100 percent. Have a blessed day!!
Then you’re not even talking about the issue, are you, Ann? You mentioned Klumb, speculating that he must have been bullied, as if that reinforced your point, Now you’re saying no name-calling happened with Klumb and that your comment doesn’t reinforce your point. Forgive me if I’m confused, but your pattern of dodging comments here makes it hard to follow what point you’re trying to establish.
If you have other information to present, please do so. But understand that my standard for “information” is higher than commenters simply making assertions that suit their one-sided worldview or political agenda.
Ann, “I actually thought this comment board was for those readers to give their opinion but obviously I was wrong.” Cory is drawing a distinction between “opinion” and accusation. If I write that the legislators who voted in any given way do so because they have been replaced by alien pods in the first salvo of an upcoming invasion, that oversteps “opinion” into accusation and as such (as Cory has asked for) requires some level of substantiation.
Gov. Daugaard is milktoast compared to what used to go on with Governor Janklow not so long ago. I’m sure Ann and Steve are still outraged by Janklow’s bullying ways. eyeroll
Governor Daugaard couldn’t even strong-arm Rep. Langer, who he appointed to her seat in the House, to vote for 1182.
Thanks for that explanation, O!
And Darin, I agree with your comparison of Janklow and Daugaard. Legislators need to be tough enough to stand up to a Governor like Janklow.
Democrats defending Governor Daugaard. All it took was paying teachers off. How many of those teachers took to bullying for the love of that money?
Steve, I think you have again confused “lobbying” with “bullying.” When constituents let their representatives know how they wish to be represented on issues, that is not bullying. In fact, bullying must include unequal power – only one with more power may “bully” a person with less.
“One essential prerequisite is the perception, by the bully or by others, of an imbalance of social or physical power, which distinguishes bullying from conflict” (Juvonen, J., Graham, S. (2014). “Bullying in Schools: The Power of Bullies and the Plight of Victims”. Annual Review of Psychology (Annual Reviews) 65: 159–85. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115030).
At least get your victimization claims clear.
As for defending the Governor, It didn’t take “paying teachers off” it took funding schools so that a teacher shortage crisis can be reversed – so that opportunity does not have to be lost for the students of SD. You continually misrepresent the causes and desired effects of this policy action. Pro-education policies certainly get pro-education advocates’ support.
Steve, you seem to think that we should oppose Gov. Daugaard because of ideology and not policy. You seem to be projecting your ideological crusade on to people who just want to do what is right for South Dakota. That is hard for you to understand, apparently. It is ideas not ideology that have made our state and country great.
I am telling it like it is. Sugar coating the deception the governor used to get others to do his bullying for him in order to justify the bullying is further deception. Sad that the Democrats went along with the tax the needy in order to give to the greedy liberal agenda orchestrated by the crony capitalists.
I’m one who has not dug into the details of this bill, Darin. Tell me how it will affect teacher pay?
My suspicions are complicity and deception as usual in politics.
Btw, Cory, our state has multiple suspicious deaths. It’s not hard to understand why some want to carry in Pierre.
Dick Butler would be a great go to guy on Janklow and baby Janklow Rounds and the bully lengths they would go. Bodies strewn should not surprise anyone. Dennis has the same handlers though he appears to have a few morals.
Speaking about Janklow and deception:
If Daschle’s positions on abortion or gun control differ from those of his constituents, if he lives a high-celebrity life in Washington while posing as a populist at home, what’s that compared with a federal-pork power that John Thune will need 10 or 20 years in the Senate to match?
During his many years as governor, Bill Janklow was always good at this game, too, culling fiscal conservatives from the Republican party and remaining close friends with Daschle. Janklow never got along with Thune, and persistent rumors suggest Janklow may announce in October that he’s voting for Daschle–an unlikely scenario for Daschle to want, given that his manslaughter conviction left Janklow one of the most unpopular men in the state, and Daschle’s boast of Janklow’s friendship produced titters in the audience at the Dakotafest debate. More, Daschle’s appearance as a character witness at Janklow’s trial would make the endorsement seem a cold-blooded repayment.
Still, Janklow’s associates and friends–particularly Kris Graham, who recently appeared in an anti-Thune ad–are said to be playing key roles in the Democrats’ “Republicans for Daschle” campaign, which aims to convince voters that it’s all right to split their ticket and vote for both President Bush and Senator Daschle.
Yes there are liberals in both parties, and they came together on HB1182 to tax the needy and give it to the greedy.
Only in South Dakota would a person with 4 or 5 years of college, a bachelors or masters degree and 10 or more years of experience teaching be called greedy for wanting to make more than $39,000 a year.
a person with 4 or 5 years of college, a bachelors or masters degree and 10 or more years of experience teaching be called greedy for wanting to make more than $39,000 ********* Is that true, Darin? 10 or more years and a masters at 39K?
I’d like to know, if you would take the time, how you figure you can hold anyone to an increase in pay with this bill and how that increase would play out?
You can do some digging here:
40K is the average SD teacher pay. The average teacher in SD I guessed has 10 years of experience. Some teachers, not all, have masters degrees.
What is interesting to me is that SD average income per capita is over 45K which is 19th in the US. So we are 19th in income per capita, but we are 51st in teacher pay per teacher.
You can’t take 1182 in isolation. 1182 is the tax piece. There are two other bills which handle the new formula to fund education. As a practical matter, some schools will be able to pay their teachers more than others, but I would guess that most schools will be able to pay their teachers 5k-7k more than without 1182.
The average South Dakotan with a bachelor’s degree makes about $54,000 and the average South Dakotan with a masters degree makes about $62,000.
What are the numbers to put SD teachers at 19th in their field?
“Liar! Your the liar!…I’m relaxed.
You’re the basket case.”
— Trump, after Senator Ted Cruz told him to relax.
gosch, schoenbeck, trump, cruz. all republicans, right?
republicans are gonna lose the senate, the presidency and the supreme court.
Ms. Leslie, I only tell you the truth and your biggest fear is that your children are listening to me and believe.
schoenbeck: “reconciliation was an afterthought”
35 minutes into HB1060 Sen Affairs hearing yesterday.
your party has no credibility
init yer ass, troll
I am sleeping very well tonight. My belly is fat. They bring me food. Life is good here in South Dakota, Ms. leslie
Rep. Langer is one of the bad ones, Darin. Just sayin’…
It is obvious that the young Ms. Langer woman is cuddling up to that Mr. Gosch fellow, hitching her caboose to his political train so to speak. She is a very pretty young lady for a thicker gal but must not have a lot going on in the head. Thick skull I mean.
Copy that Rorschach!
(90: suspicious deaths? Sure… but none of those suspicious deaths happened in the Capitol, during Session, or even during election years. A gun certainly wouldn’t have helped Schoenbeck get into caucus. I don’t need a gun to go to Pierre and make my case for raising teacher pay or fighting the corruption that led to Benda’s and the Westerhuises’ deaths.)
It will be less caustic for you in Pierre with your high profile and direct connection through Free Press. Or, maybe not. Make that phone call to Dick Butler and spend an hour with him.
BTW, my comment on the guns was sarcasm directed at those subverting caucus.
We know what you mean grudz. Your perceptive powers are well honed, and your filter has worn down to its nub at your advanced age.