RCJ Wants Johnson to Act Like Bjorkman, But Wholeheartedly Endorses Seiler
By Cory Allen Heidelberger on 2018-10-14
The Rapid City Journal‘s endorsement of Republican Dusty Johnson for Congress last week was somewhat equivocal. The RCJ editorial board praised both Johnson and his Democratic opponent, Tim Bjorkman, for “focus[ing] mostly on consequential problems and opportunities” and “appeal[ing] mainly to our hopes rather than our fears. Strangely, the endorsement urged Johnson to be more like Bjorkman:
It would serve Johnson well if he develops some of his opponent’s compassion and understanding of human contradictions. The Journal hopes Johnson will work toward health care solutions that serve rich and poor, reducing overall costs while fairly treating old and young. To ensure the continued long-term success of our republic, Johnson should also carry Bjorkman’s banner of working to achieve a consensus on immigration. Compromise, reason and facts must be the guide. Lastly, while we applaud Johnson’s conviction to reduce the national debt, we fear solutions that will fall heavily on the poor, unfortunate and elderly. The load must be broadly shared [editorial, “Journal Endorses Johnson for US House,” Rapid City Journal, 2018.10.09].
Randy Seiler, likely to be more experienced at smiling, too, come November.
In the race for South Dakota attorney general, the impressive resume of former U.S. Attorney Randy Seiler towers over that of Yankton attorney Jason Ravnsborg. Except for the “D” behind his name, Seiler should be assured victory on Nov. 6. He should be elected anyway.
The most critical role of the state attorney general is to set the tone for prosecutions, making tough calls based on real, broad experience.
The Journal endorses Democrat Randy Seiler for attorney general because of his demonstrated ability to lead prosecutors [editorial, “Journal Endorses Seiler for AG,” Rapid City Journal, 2018.10.14].
As former U.S. attorney for the District of South Dakota, Seiler essentially performed the role of attorney general for the federal courts. He resigned after changes in the White House foreshadowed his inevitable departure. Seiler has no plans to seek another elected office after becoming attorney general. He won’t spend the next four years leaning on experienced staff while campaigning for governor. He has no reason to waste taxpayer dollars by playing politics with the rule of law [RCJ editorial, 2018.10.14].
As RCJ recognizes, the only reason to vote for Ravnsborg is slavish loyalty to party labels. In a state where almost every voter I talk to says, “I vote for the person, not the party,” the Seiler/Ravnsborg contest is the perfect race to ignore party and vote on experience.
A reply to the RCJs endorsement of “Dusty:” RCJ 13 Oct
Bjorkman deserved endorsement —
Your recent endorsement succinctly enumerated Tim Bjorkman’s qualities, experience and willingness to fight for the people of South Dakota and represent us in Washington. I am puzzled as to just why you kept saying that you “hoped” Dusty Johnson would be as successful in representing us and that he “might” be successful in promoting the policies upon which Judge Tim is campaigning. Of course, you invoked the memory of Ronald Reagan and used the phrase “conservative values” (whatever that may mean) in saying something positive about Dusty.
Dusty hopes to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. … With what? Dusty hopes to cut the deficit. How? Dusty has experience as Gov Daugaard’s chief of staff in implementing policy. So what? Dusty “knows all aspects of the political game.” This isn’t a game folks, it’s serious. I think a mistake was made in last Sunday’s paper. Shouldn’t the endorsement of a candidate be based on his beliefs rather than the editorial staff’s hopes? In order for voters to insist that Dusty “remain true to his word,” (whatever that is) they should not vote for him.
Tim Bjorkman has earned our respect, our trust and our vote, and, incidentally, your endorsement.
Debbo
2018-10-14 23:01
That struck me as very odd too, Buckobear. The Journal basically endorsed everything about Tim Bjorkman, his plans, his experience, his heart, his knowledge, on and on. They listed several concerns about Johnson and “hopes,” as Buckobear described, for Johnson to change and improve.
So you read that. You think, okay, they’ve got good reasons for endorsing Bjorkman and we can see that maybe the RCJ is as strictly right wing as we thought.
But then they endorse Johnson? What? Did they listen to themselves? Bizarre, just bizarre.
Cully
2018-10-15 10:25
I know its kinda “If you give a mouse a cookie” -esque of me, but if we’re talking about obvious reasons Randy is the better candidate, mentioning the SDPB debate would be a big one too. Hell, I felt qualified to run against Ravnsborg after that.
Not to mention the Rotary debate today…that Ravnsborg isn’t able to attend, so the Rotary is just using it as a Q&A with Seiler, pending a surprise visit by Ravnsborg.
Charlene Lund
2018-10-15 10:51
I suspect that the RCJ has the same dilemma as the Argus Leader – the Democrats have three very strong contenders and due to SD being a red state, neither paper is able to support all three of the Demcratic candidates so someone has to be the casualty. The very weak endorsement of Dusty Johnson over Tim Bjorkman is ludicrous. Dusty Johnson is an avowed Trumpist and will be extremely partisan. He has no health care plan and to say that he will fight for decreased deficit is laughable. He has no plans for that other than to reduce the benefits from Social Security and Medicare. He has already touted the insane idea of turning Medicaid into a block grant to the states. Like having a developmental disability is somehow a temporary condition. Plus he has been unable to clearly understand the financial pain inflicted on our farmers and ranchers through the tariffs. Dusty Johnson does not deserve to be given a chance, we only have to look at Noem and the waste of her last eight years in Congress of getting nothing done.
leslie
2018-10-15 15:17
What else is new? Right wing Rupert Murdoch, RCJ and KOTA’s Rush Limbaugh propaganda machines have been turning truth on its head for several decades. Republicans wouldn’t know truth if it was kindly explained to them.
“400 fat guy on his bed in his mother’s basement” –not Putin! “Rogue killers, not Saudi Arabian Billionaire King, murdered WaPo contributing journalist!” jfc. Then Republicans steal SCOTUS seats and pack Fed, state cts and prosecutors to protect “free speech rights” of criminals like the lies of Trump.
When election evening 2016 results became clear WE WERE HORRIFIED.
Now journalists know.
Francis
2018-10-15 20:36
I don’t need anyone seeking my vote to act like someone else. I need Dusty to be Dusty, I will decide if that is good enough for me to not. Oh who am I kidding I am voting for Tim and encouraging anyone with whom I visit to do the same.
Important to note, Cully, that Ravnsborg also missed two appointments with the RCJ editors. If he had just shown up, the RCJ editors might have made wishful excuses for him the way they did for Dusty.
To Buckobear’s solid point:
I wish Jason has worked as hard putting bad guys away over the last four years as Seiler did, but he didn’t, so I’m voting for Seiler.
I wish Jason hadn’t spent the last four years campaigning full-time for an AG nomination he didn’t deserve, but he did, so I’m voting for Seiler.
Expanding the theme, I wish Kristi Noem gave a darn about other people the way Billie Sutton does, but she doesn’t, so I’m voting for Sutton.
Vote for reality, not the party line.
jerry
2018-10-16 12:00
Republicans are after Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid folks. Dirty Johnson will deliver that to them if we let him. The Rapid City Journal must have a hint on this as it is the elephant in the room.
““Every Republican Senate candidate is on the hook for Mitch McConnell’s plan to cut Medicare and Social Security. First it was jeopardizing pre-existing conditions coverage, then it was pursuing an age tax that would charge older Americans more for care, and now it’s targeting the benefits Americans have paid into. This platform is disqualifying, and just like taking away coverage for pre-existing conditions, it’s exactly what GOP candidates don’t want to be talking about weeks before the election.” Bad enough to have NOem’s lying about the ACA and all of this, we don’t need her Russian lover to be doing that and taking away entitlements of the money we have already invested.
Cully
2018-10-16 15:54
Fair point, Cory. He’s apparently not good with time management if he’s missing this many important events. Seems like something an AG should be able to do.
Another less-subtle poke at you re: SDPB forum and your lack of discussion here on it… DWC wrote it up and (somehow) had good discussion.
A reply to the RCJs endorsement of “Dusty:” RCJ 13 Oct
Bjorkman deserved endorsement —
Your recent endorsement succinctly enumerated Tim Bjorkman’s qualities, experience and willingness to fight for the people of South Dakota and represent us in Washington. I am puzzled as to just why you kept saying that you “hoped” Dusty Johnson would be as successful in representing us and that he “might” be successful in promoting the policies upon which Judge Tim is campaigning. Of course, you invoked the memory of Ronald Reagan and used the phrase “conservative values” (whatever that may mean) in saying something positive about Dusty.
Dusty hopes to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. … With what? Dusty hopes to cut the deficit. How? Dusty has experience as Gov Daugaard’s chief of staff in implementing policy. So what? Dusty “knows all aspects of the political game.” This isn’t a game folks, it’s serious. I think a mistake was made in last Sunday’s paper. Shouldn’t the endorsement of a candidate be based on his beliefs rather than the editorial staff’s hopes? In order for voters to insist that Dusty “remain true to his word,” (whatever that is) they should not vote for him.
Tim Bjorkman has earned our respect, our trust and our vote, and, incidentally, your endorsement.
That struck me as very odd too, Buckobear. The Journal basically endorsed everything about Tim Bjorkman, his plans, his experience, his heart, his knowledge, on and on. They listed several concerns about Johnson and “hopes,” as Buckobear described, for Johnson to change and improve.
So you read that. You think, okay, they’ve got good reasons for endorsing Bjorkman and we can see that maybe the RCJ is as strictly right wing as we thought.
But then they endorse Johnson? What? Did they listen to themselves? Bizarre, just bizarre.
I know its kinda “If you give a mouse a cookie” -esque of me, but if we’re talking about obvious reasons Randy is the better candidate, mentioning the SDPB debate would be a big one too. Hell, I felt qualified to run against Ravnsborg after that.
Not to mention the Rotary debate today…that Ravnsborg isn’t able to attend, so the Rotary is just using it as a Q&A with Seiler, pending a surprise visit by Ravnsborg.
I suspect that the RCJ has the same dilemma as the Argus Leader – the Democrats have three very strong contenders and due to SD being a red state, neither paper is able to support all three of the Demcratic candidates so someone has to be the casualty. The very weak endorsement of Dusty Johnson over Tim Bjorkman is ludicrous. Dusty Johnson is an avowed Trumpist and will be extremely partisan. He has no health care plan and to say that he will fight for decreased deficit is laughable. He has no plans for that other than to reduce the benefits from Social Security and Medicare. He has already touted the insane idea of turning Medicaid into a block grant to the states. Like having a developmental disability is somehow a temporary condition. Plus he has been unable to clearly understand the financial pain inflicted on our farmers and ranchers through the tariffs. Dusty Johnson does not deserve to be given a chance, we only have to look at Noem and the waste of her last eight years in Congress of getting nothing done.
What else is new? Right wing Rupert Murdoch, RCJ and KOTA’s Rush Limbaugh propaganda machines have been turning truth on its head for several decades. Republicans wouldn’t know truth if it was kindly explained to them.
“400 fat guy on his bed in his mother’s basement” –not Putin! “Rogue killers, not Saudi Arabian Billionaire King, murdered WaPo contributing journalist!” jfc. Then Republicans steal SCOTUS seats and pack Fed, state cts and prosecutors to protect “free speech rights” of criminals like the lies of Trump.
When election evening 2016 results became clear WE WERE HORRIFIED.
Now journalists know.
I don’t need anyone seeking my vote to act like someone else. I need Dusty to be Dusty, I will decide if that is good enough for me to not. Oh who am I kidding I am voting for Tim and encouraging anyone with whom I visit to do the same.
Important to note, Cully, that Ravnsborg also missed two appointments with the RCJ editors. If he had just shown up, the RCJ editors might have made wishful excuses for him the way they did for Dusty.
To Buckobear’s solid point:
I wish Jason has worked as hard putting bad guys away over the last four years as Seiler did, but he didn’t, so I’m voting for Seiler.
I wish Jason hadn’t spent the last four years campaigning full-time for an AG nomination he didn’t deserve, but he did, so I’m voting for Seiler.
Expanding the theme, I wish Kristi Noem gave a darn about other people the way Billie Sutton does, but she doesn’t, so I’m voting for Sutton.
Vote for reality, not the party line.
Republicans are after Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid folks. Dirty Johnson will deliver that to them if we let him. The Rapid City Journal must have a hint on this as it is the elephant in the room.
““Every Republican Senate candidate is on the hook for Mitch McConnell’s plan to cut Medicare and Social Security. First it was jeopardizing pre-existing conditions coverage, then it was pursuing an age tax that would charge older Americans more for care, and now it’s targeting the benefits Americans have paid into. This platform is disqualifying, and just like taking away coverage for pre-existing conditions, it’s exactly what GOP candidates don’t want to be talking about weeks before the election.” Bad enough to have NOem’s lying about the ACA and all of this, we don’t need her Russian lover to be doing that and taking away entitlements of the money we have already invested.
Fair point, Cory. He’s apparently not good with time management if he’s missing this many important events. Seems like something an AG should be able to do.
Another less-subtle poke at you re: SDPB forum and your lack of discussion here on it… DWC wrote it up and (somehow) had good discussion.