Note to Libs — when attacking check your facts first

The libs are salivating to attack Kristi Noem (not to be unexpected)   But it’s particularly pathetic when the attack is easily verifiable as a bunch of hooey.   The big target right now is the new Chief of Staff Jordan Stoick.  The liberal narrative is that he’s a big money lobbyist…..but here’s the part where the libs stub their toe and lose all their remaining credibility.  Lobbyists and firms that lobby have to register and it is an easily accessible public  document.  Guess what …..Jordan Stoick is not a lobbyist nor is the PR firm (Direct Impact) that he used to work for…..

Pesky things those facts.

42 Replies to “Note to Libs — when attacking check your facts first”

  1. thc

    Note to Cons (thanks for the softball straight line opening):
    Tom Daschle isn’t registered either. He, too has a seven-figure house. no boat tho.
    Fact is, both are influence peddlers. Whether registered as a legally-entitled bribe-maker or not, they are part of the Beltway inner circle which your girl attacked her opponent for incessantly. It didn’t stop the right from attacking Daschle. Turnabout at playing fast and loose with facts is fair play in this country’s increasingly vomit-inducing politics.
    Oh and your girl attacked her incessantly while vigorously pandering to the Tea Party types in this state and around the country. That’s something your more rabid cheerleaders would like us all to forget as she makes a comfy bed with Washington lobbyists and passionately pursues more welfare for the South Dakota families that control a failed energy industry that still can’t stand on its own two feet without government mandates and handouts.
    Work harder at consistency in your position statements.

  2. Anon

    Hmm, I had another link in that last post, but it didnt make it in for some reason.

    Alston & Bird still hosts a webpage for Commy Tommy, though they have scrubbed the data from it. Luckliy is it still visible here.

  3. caheidelberger

    Dakota War College tells me to check my facts?

    HA ha ha ha ha ha ha HA ha ha ha ha ha!

    Whew, let me catch my breath.

    O.K. Stoick worked for Direct Impact, even though DI has already scrubbed his staff page.

    Elsewhere we find: “Dave took a position with the Direct Impact Company, a premier grassroots lobbying firm in Washington, which specializes in strategic planning, analysis, implementation and troubleshooting for legislative campaigns.” http://www.mwcapitol.com/bios/index.cfm

    Macrae’s Blue Book lists lobbying as one of Direct Impact’s services. http://www.macraesbluebook.com/search/company.cfm?company=576433

    Direct Impact does astroturf lobbying for Botox: “Lowry thought she was taking part in a grass-roots campaign. Instead, she was taken in by a company’s lobbying ruse. The kind guy on the other end of the line had been hired by a marketing company contracted out by Botox maker Allergan Inc.

    “The Direct Impact Co., a Virginia-based affiliate of global public relations giant Burston-Marsteller Inc., specializes in developing what its Web site calls “grassroots communication marketing campaigns.”

    “The company had signed on with Irvine-based Allergan to quarterback a $400,000 lobbying effort aimed at convincing California consumers and state officials that Botox cosmetic products should not be hit by a state Board of Equalization sales tax.” –http://www.botoxabroad.co.uk/botox_news_Botox_makers_lobbying_assailed_id_2368.php

    Gee, Direct helped make Pelosi’s face cheaper. How generous.

    Had enough?

  4. MikeH

    I was just going to ask Cory that, too.

    A company that “lobbies” the public is known as a PR firm or a marketing firm. You can say the words “lobbying firm” all you want, Cory, but it doesn’t make it true. Direct Impact is a PR firm. If you still believe differently, please show me the record for them in any of the publicly available lobbyist databases. As Cory would say – I am waiting…

    1. BurningBrule

      Message

      This is the kind of snarkiness that one, evidently, descends into when one’s political party has been reduced to the 21st century version of the Whigs.

  5. Arrowhead

    Stoick and Shields are still two people who’s lives consist of graduating college, moving to DC and never coming back to their homestate for anything other than campaigning. They are DC insiders and that’s fine but it’s what they are.

      1. duggersd

        ip is an it. In the past it has claimed to be a woman. “Her” name is Larry. So my guess is ip is a man who is in the process of a sex change operation. In any case, ip’s post of the finger should just be deleted. Rarely does ip actually have anything of value to add.

  6. anon

    Here is what Direct Impact says on its Web site regarding its efforts on trade issues: “We have worked on trade-related issues ranging from online tax equality to supporting passage of DR-CAFTA in order to liberalize trade between the United States and Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, as well as an associated agreement with the Dominican Republic. We worked with our client to provide direct communications with Members of Congress and organize a D.C. Fly-In to create a strong presence on the Hill to drum up additional support for DR-CAFTA.”

    “…direct communications with members of congress…? Sure sounds like lobbying to me. So maybe the real deception isn’t “libs” calling Stoick a lobbyist as it is Stoick’s former employer not registering as a lobbying organization.

      1. anon

        When a paid influence peddler, be he/she employed by a PR firm or a lobbying firm, has direct communications with (talks to) a member of congress in an effort to sway them to support a given position, it is lobbying. There is no rhetorical slight of hand that can change that simple fact.

  7. anon

    Just to be clear regarding my original post, here is how the Washington Post defines lobbyist: “A person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest.”

    But to be fair to Troy, requirements forcing registration as a lobbyist are a bit more stringent. Key among them is that an organization make a “lobbying contact” which is defined as follows by the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995: DEFINITION.-The term “lobbying contact” means any oral or written communication (including an electronic communication) to a covered executive branch official or a covered legislative branch official that is made on behalf of a client with regard to-

    (i) the formulation, modification, or adoption of Federal legislation (including legislative proposals);…and the list goes on.

    So just in case someone thinks what Direct Contact says it did regarding trade was not lobbying, think again. What the organization did is a rose by another name, they crossed the murky PR/Lobbying firm line. And since the firm says if lobbied, it would seem its employees could fairly be called lobbyists whether they appear on some registration list or not.

    1. MikeH

      I guess I am a lobbyist then, too.
      Since I wrote SHS an email asking her to vote against the health care debacle. And after he did, I thanked her both in written and in personal communication. I meet your defintion of a lobbyist. Sweet, wonder when my Washington paycheck will be arriving?

      1. MikeH

        “she” not “he” – cant type today as I am home with a splitting headache from a sinus infection.
        Wasn’t trying to be offensive.

  8. Bill Fleming

    Gotta love this language: “The libs are salivating to attack Kristi Noem (not to be unexpected)”

    You see, a normal writer of the English language would word that parenthetical thus: “(to be expected).”

    But when you’re from the party of “NO” (as in NOem) you use a double negative to say the same thing.

    Hilarious.

    (…and, I guess, to be expected. I mean, why state something clearly when you can twist it all up instead?)

    Only on SDWC.

    1. BurningBrule

      Message

      If this site is so pathetic, ridiculous, loose with facts, etc. then why, pray tell, to the leftists such as heidelbergerandfries flock here? Because they get as much traffic at their sites/fellow traveler sites as downtown Pukwana on a Monday morning.

      1. Haggs

        Because this is one of the few places on the internet to discuss South Dakota politics with other South Dakotans, even if it is a conservative blog. There are other blogs out there, but they usually don’t have as much discussion going on as SDWC does.

      2. Bill Fleming

        Simple marketing, Brulé. If you want to sell hats, go where the heads are. By the way, is your moniker in reference to the Si?há??u Oyáte, or to the creamy desert with the burnt sugar on top?

        1. BurningBrule

          Neither. It is a reference to my home county of Brule. And as you may know “Brule” in the French means “burn” or the past tense of that. (And the somewhat redundant nature is deliberate – it’s like saying “Burning Burnt” – and the redundancy is akin to a geographic feature in Boulder, Colorado called “Table mesa.”)

          The French traders gave this name to a branch tribe of the Teton Dakota as you so noted. See http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/tribes/siouan/brulehist.htm I seem to remember that it was because the French observed this branch literally burning themselves (their legs) from setting a prairie fire (which was a deliberate act to nourish the soil).

          “Burning Brule” was a generally referred place name to an area off the Missouri River near Oacama that I remember as a kid whilst fishing for walleye. I also remember that there was a planned resort that was going to carry that name, but I don’t ever believe it was built. My memory is that a well-known local named Lee Schoenhard was either behind it or a princiipal in the proposal.

          There you go. Thanks for asking!

  9. caheidelberger

    Lobbying and astroturf — yup, that’s the Tea Party all right.

    But I guess the desperate Noem narrative is now, “Lobbying is bad… when it’s done by Democrats… who officially lobby Congress… and who marry Stephanie Herseth.”

    Kristi’s going to have a long two years trying to speak in something longer than bumper stickers. I guess that’s why she needs to hire lobbyists and Washington insiders to keep her in line and in the limelight. I am still laughing. Hard.

    1. Anonymous

      Hey ip, how about you read your own damn article before you post… the discussion about Crossroads GPS and Thune are two completely different things. Oh wait, you’re an ignorant little troll who doesn’t know any better…

  10. anon

    ip go away. you are ruining this site. If you were ever a part of the conversation I wouldn’t mind. You often contribute to the conversation but most of the time you are just make stupid comments.

  11. Name

    SHS ran the worst campaign ever. Kristi road a wave and Josh Shields ran a terrible campaign for a great candidate. Basically what I’m saying is Shields sucked as a manager but Kristi was so great as a candidate that she could overcome his “Curd” Grade short comings.

    1. BurningBrule

      “Worst campaign ever?” That’s beyond hyperbole. She ran a decent campaign given the political climate. You want to see a bad campaign? You should have been in Colorado and watched the absolute implosion of the GOP Gubernatorial nominee, Dan Maes. His nomination as an outsider candidate was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and he ran the single worst campaign I’ve ever seen.

  12. Tea Time

    One thing we can say about Kristi is that she loves Joshua Shields. He took her across the finnish line and without him she wouldn’t have been even close. Kristi owes Joshua Shields a debt of gratitude for his service to her and being willing to come on board. Kristi obviously has absolute respect for Shields as a human being and it shows in the fact that she hired him to be her communications director. Josh is the man and without him Kristi knows she wouldn’t be anywhere near the top like she is now. There’s a reason Josh is around to help her influence her policy decisions.

  13. Anonymous

    Is there any chance we will see any interviews with the constitutional canididates so we can see how Gant and Barnett are making out their staffing decisions?

    I’m very curious to know what Gant will be doing compared with Chris Nelson and Barnett as opposed to Sattgast. Also what is Sattgast’s Treasurer’s office going to look like?

  14. Name

    This is what is wrong with hiring DC insiders. They don’t get what’s wrong with politics as usual.

    By Dana Milbank ? The Washington Post ?
    December 16, 2010

    Dear tea party voter: You’ve been had.

    When the good people of South Dakota voted
    last month to send Republican Kristi Noem to
    Congress, they probably believed that she would
    give no quarter to the lobbyists and special
    interest groups who enjoyed, as she put it,
    ?throwing money at the feet of a member of
    Congress.?

    But since she defeated Democratic Rep.
    Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (in part by making an
    issue of Herseth Sandlin’s marriage to a lobbyist),
    Noem has hired her new chief of staff from . . . a
    lobbying firm! And on Tuesday afternoon, she
    was the guest of honor at a ?Meet & Greet? with
    Washington high-rollers at the powerhouse
    lobbying firm Barbour Griffiths Rogers. Once
    these boys start throwing money at Noem’s feet,
    she’ll soon be chin deep in lobbyist greenbacks.

  15. caheidelberger

    [If this site is being ruined, it’s not ip’s fault. Dno’t psychologists call that projection, ro trasnference, or something like that?]

    Hey, guys, you don’t have to work this hard. Instead of contorting yourselves into some insupportable lie about Sotick, why not just admit that lobbying isn’t a dirty word? Stoick’s former employer’s parent company, Burson-Marsteller, can help you out there. B-M lobbies (excuse me—educates) worldwide.