Reps. Nelson & Russell form conservative caucus

I recieved word earlier that Lance Russell and Stace Nelson, who are now banned from the House Republican Caucus have decided to form a caucus of their own. They are calling it “The Conservative Republican Caucus of Convenience.” 

Apparently they had a good turnout with around 10-12 legislators attending the first meeting. They’re gathering in room 464 of the Capitol at 12:30pm every afternoon of session.

59 Replies to “Reps. Nelson & Russell form conservative caucus”

    1. Anonymous

      I think it was Lust who booted them from caucus, but probably after consulting with Rausch, as leadership usually does.

  1. troy jones

    I would be very interested to see names of people who chose to forego the GOP caucus and go to this one. Until I see names, I will doubt there was 10-12 legislators. Maybe 10-12 people with more than half non-legislators.

    1. Anonymous

      I’ve heard Tornow, Greenfield, Hubbel etc were there and that the caucus ended in time to go to the regular caucus.

      Nothing wrong with members attending multiple caucuses. I’d attend both if I was a legislator.

      1. Anonymous

        A minimum of ten legislators were there. Sibby was also there so ask him who was there. Sibby rocks!

  2. Les

    Primaries and fall elections will be affected if leadership does not clear the fog. R/C does not forget.

    1. Anonymous

      What exactly did Lust feel he was accomplishing by pushing Republicans out of the caucus?

      This is what Romney and his goons are doing in Florida to Allen West. Time for Rino’s to stop running wild. It’s time for everyone to come together.

      1. springer

        It’s more like grade school revenge tactics. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer is a better tactic. It would be better overall if everyone was privy to the same caucus information at the general Rep caucus. If there were arguments, good; that’s how this great country came to be. It wasn’t all sunshine and light to get this nation up and going, and it won’t be all sunshine and light to keep it going. I’d tell those who kicked out certain legislators to get over it and do their job! Instead of engaging in petty political games.

  3. Anonymous

    Ugh, this happened a few years back in the Alaska State Senate, the “Republican Coalition” wound up joining up with the Democrats to oust the Senate President and install a Democrat, just because they were mad at the “RINO’S” when in fact they were mostly just jerks trying to play a stupid game of “who’s more conservative” This is the kind of thing that happens when the other party becomes irrelevant, they start trying to break apart their own. Human nature I suppose.

  4. another anonymous

    I thought Rausch bragged to the press he was punishing Nelson by not allowing him his 1st Amend rights on the floor? Nelson lambasted them on term limits today! Guess Rausch isn’t the king he thought he was?

    Did these attacks work on Kookier?

  5. mhs

    Maybe they can get Paul and Santorum to join. I hear they’re looking for a voter base this morning.

    1. Les

      If this becomes anything at all like a Paul, Santorum issue in SD, the odds of a legislator who doesn’t stand up and demand open hearings, being re elected, are slim to none.

  6. Anonymous

    Looking at the marginalization of the Tea Party in Congress, the GOP primary with the establishment demonizing anybody but Romney and what is happening here in SD with Stace…is it time for a 3rd party?

    1. Anonymous

      A third party would be nice but we don’t even have two parties. How about we first work on forming a 2nd party.

      Other states have this party called the Democratic party. Do you think SD should attempt to get it also?

    1. Anonymous

      For those that shriek RINO and say we don’t have two parties…what are you waiting for? Someone to hold your hand?

      Have the guts enough to raise your own funds and build your own party infrastructure.

      But quit your bitching when the majority of the party doesn’t think that the extreme is in the best interest of the state.

      For crying out loud, you’d think the Democrats were paying half of you whiners.

      1. grudznick

        I, young sir, do not like you telling me whether or not I am qualified to be a member of a party that I’ve been a member of for probably twice as long as you’ve been alive. Nay, three times, as you are young and nayeve (or whatever that fancy pinky-lifting word you highbrows like to use is.)

        1. Bill Fleming

          “Naive,” grudz.

          n.a.i.v.e.

          It means “ignorant.”

          But what does it mean when someone tries to use it and misspells it?

          Hint: “ignernt” and “stoopid” don’t mean the same thang. ;^)

          1. grudznick

            You can’t hurt my feelings much, Bill. You’ve heard some of the insults that get hurled at me during the weekly breakfast. You’ve just never typed them until now.

            1. BF

              Yes. I know. Grudznicks are impervious to insult… verbal or otherwise. I was just practicing my vernacular with that last part.

          2. troy jones

            Bill,

            A person who is ignorant makes an active decision to ignore reality. A person who is naive doen’t have the life experience to recognize reality. There is a difference.

            1. BF

              Troy, I would draw the distinction a bit differently. Ignorance is the absence (or lack of) sufficient knowledge, much as you suggest, whereas stupidity is the absence (or lack of) sufficient intelligence.

              Naivete is related more to the former than the latter, although not exclusively so, and is far more tolerable in youth than in those of more advanced age.

              1. troy jones

                The root of ignorant is “ignore” which is a verb. This is an act.

                Naive is an attribute which doesn’t require an act.

                1. BF

                  Good point, Troy.

                  (…makes minor filing correction in memory acthive…)

                  So, what’s the root of he word “stupid?” ;^)

                2. BF

                  Sidenote, Troy:

                  If Mr. Nelson tries to smoke his tabled immigration bill out of committee, would you call that a) ignorant
                  b) stupid
                  c) Republican
                  d) none of the above or
                  e) all of the above?

                  1. troy jones

                    Obtuse.

                    While the sponsors and supporters of this bill might think this is the most pressing law enforcement issue warranting extra-ordinary actions by the legal system and exposure to employers in South Dakota, I don’t think this is seen as that critical.

                    South Dakota isn’t Arizona.

                    1. anon

                      because real leadership is waiting till a problem becomes critical to address it?

                      yeah, let’s wait till SD is AZ.

                      What do you call that big bird with the long neck and legs with the head stuck in the sand?

        2. Anonymous

          Good for you grudznick.

          But you got the gender wrong…and who knew you were 129 years old! You certainly have your wits about you for one so seasoned.

      2. grudznick

        oh wait. I may have misunderstood you. I had just been trying to call my friend Steve to give him a good rant.

    1. MC Post author

      Hmmm….Political social networking? with like and dislikes? I kind of like that Idea, and at the same time not. Let us stew on for a while…

  7. troy jones

    One of the many Anon’s on SDWC said in response to my comment “South Dakota isn’t Arizona” the following:

    “because real leadership is waiting till a problem becomes critical to address it?” and then asserted to not pass this bill is like being an ostrich.

    Arizona has nearly 5% of the people in the state who are illegal. This places it 2nd in the nation.

    The median of all states is 1.15%. South Dakota is one of seven states that has less than .1% (or estimated to be less than 700). For us to be like Arizona, we would need to have over 32,000 move into the state.

    To put this in perspective, we need an Aberdeen of illegal immigrants and not an Onida.

    Prudence and discretion requires proper allocation of law enforcement resources where there are real problems. How about we concentrate law enforcement in areas where we are above the national median like meth use, domestic abuse, etc?

    Or concentrate on items like burglary and violent crime where we had a 20% increase, or aggravated assault up 50% from 2009 to 2010.

    About a year ago, I happened to be having a beer with a police supervisor and asked him if he could have one thing to make SFalls safer. He said another drug dog. I asked him for the second and he said more awareness of the tip line.

    When I read this bill FORCING (as the word is shall) law enforcement to investigate every complaint of illegal immigration when the number in our state isn’t even measurable (that is why we are listed as just less than .1%, and not given an actual number, more than 17 times less than the national average) and we don’t even have enough resources to actually solve known problems, my mind goes crazy.

    SOUTH DAKOTA ISN’T ARIZONA AND UNTIL WE BECOME MEASURABLE, LET’S WORK ON REAL PROBLEMS.

      1. troy jones

        There is a saying good politics is good government. Making an issue relevant in AZ and applying where the problem is nearly non-existent is not good government.

        Concentrate on solving real problems that exist.

        1. Anonymous

          Oh sure Troy. Next you’ll be telling us that Sharia law is not a problem in South Dakota…wait? What?

          In the immortal words of Gilda Radner…”never mind”

          Troy, I think you are missing the point of the proposed legislation. This is not about solving a problem it’s about creating a problem for legislators that don’t bite on the red meat being thrown out as so much chum.

          I take that back, Troy and every other thinking person gets that point.

    1. Billy Jo Bob

      Well heck, we shouldn’t do anything until it’s a certeefiable regular emergencee. Cuz Troy said it aint one of them there problems because by golly he said so!

      But hay! If the other states are shooooing them out of them thar states, wont them thar ileegals come over here where we taint smart enough to do anything whilest it aint a huuge problem?

      you un south deekotans just dont you worry none now ya here? uncle troy gots it all coverd.

      1. Les

        While I don’t have a big dog in this illegal fight, I can tell you non English speaking workers are here, and as Bakken grows there will be problems for local governments.

        At least I’m guessing that could be a reason ND communities are teaching adult English??

  8. Anonymous

    Things like that are used to create controversy to hide the real problems like roads, education, healthcare, senior citizens, judicial system (to include wages for workers in dangerous locations), disabled people care (workers). If the money people were to go work in these conditions for one week they might think of ways to address these problems because not a one of them would be willing to work under these conditions. It is supported by the retention level of these working people.

    1. fly on the wall

      They have 12 Conservative legislators that regularly attend, today they had 8 guests from conservative groups AND donuts that were donated.

      They go over bills, discuss issues, and seem to have a good time.

  9. Blind RINO

    It is common knowledge that Representatives Kopp, Venner, Olson, Liss, Hubbel, Russell, Nelson, Kloucek, Tornow, Greenfield, Steele, and several interns meet regularly. There are several others that attend occasionally and the routinely have voters that sit in.