Drinking Liberally sums up District 15 State Senate Primary Race…. and the state of their party.

Sioux Falls Democrat Blog Drinking Liberally has a post that sums up the state of the Democrat party, as well as the District 15 race:

Closer to home, the Democratic State Senate primary in District 15 continues to intensifies. As near as I can tell, Democrats from outside District 15, unable to elect Democrats in their home Districts, continue to the battle for control of the Democratic Party’s direction in District 15. Former State Senator Sandy Jerstad from District 12 sent a letter into District 15 in support of Reynold Nesiba, who, you may remember. just recently moved into District 15 from District 13 to run against long-time District 15 incumbent Democrat State Representative, Pat Kirschman. The whole thing reminds me of four years ago when the same people sponsored Mitch Fargen, a District 8 Democrat and romantic interest of Erin McCarrick, the former Democratic Party Executive Director, to move into District 15 and challenge the sitting Democratic Representatives too. Mitch lost and Erin and he moved to San Francisco.

I do not agree with Mr. Kirschmann on a number of issues but I support him because he is grounded in his District. I want to make the Democratic Party larger, not smaller, and I think the elitism and arrogance (You don’t find Kirschmann and his supporters calling his opponents stupid) which rests at the core of this constant bickering is not healthy for the Party and in large part is responsible for its continued spiral into irrelevance.

As evidence, look no further than last month’s voter registration report: statewide the Republican voter registration advantage over Democrats increased by another 1015 voters. Democrats once equaled Republican registration in the State but he Republican advantage over Democrats now stands at more than 70000 voters. This Republican advantage has increased almost every month since 2009. The South Dakota Democratic Party is ill and it appears it is getting worse. It is sad and, I think, it is very unhealthy for our State.

Read it all here.

“The Republican advantage over Democrats now stands at more than 70000 voters.”  Somehow, I’m ok with that.

South Dakota Gun Owners attacking Hoffman for supporting their position on bill.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. I had a former legislator who served with Charlie Hoffman point this out. If you recall the South Dakota Gun Owners postcard that was just kicked out in the mail, it had this passage at the bottom, referencing 2009’s HB 1278, a measure to “clarify certain statutes prohibiting political subdivisions from restricting firearms.”

gun_ban_SDGOattack

The South Dakota Gun Owners testified as a proponent for the measure:

crazy_SDGO

And who voted for it?  Why, Charlie Hoffman:

lying_SDGO

When South Dakota Gun Owners attacked him in the postcard using this point, not only did they lie, they attacked him for supporting their position on the bill.

And that goes to show you why South Dakota Gun Owners continues to be one of the least trustworthy organizations in South Dakota.

Paul Dean Jensen Resentenced to 200 Years

Paul Dean Jensen Resentenced to 200 Years

PIERRE, S.D.- Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today that Circuit Court Judge John Brown has resentenced Paul Dean Jensen to 200 years. Jensen will be eligible for parole in 2021 in accordance with the old law.
Jensen argued that his sentence was illegal under the U.S. Supreme Court decision banning mandatory life sentences for juveniles.

Jensen was convicted in 1996 by a jury of first degree murder for the death of Michael Hare, a Pierre, South Dakota taxicab driver. Jensen kidnapped, robbed, and murdered Hare for his cab fare, a total of $36.48. Jensen was 14 at the time of the murder.
This case was handled by the Stanley County States Attorney and the Attorney General’s Office.

Wall Street Journal editorial confirms what I told you. It’s about culture warriors, and killing competition.

A while back, I noted the Community Financial Services Association, who is affiliated with the group behind South Dakota’s payday lending ballot measure, the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL), has been making moves towards creating their own taxpayer backed payday lending product. Which explains greatly why the CRL is trying to eliminate payday loans:

And just yesterday, the very government agency they were documented as working directly with announces they’re introducing payday loan regulations, while another agency announces they’re pushing an alternative for payday loans, backed by the government to cover potential losses incurred for banks and credit unions. Credit Unions such as the “Self Help Credit Union” operating under Center for Responsible Lending’s umbrella.

Read that here.

Sound conspiratorial? You might dismiss it that way. But the Wall Street Journal didn’t think so in yesterday’s editorial:

So why does the CFPB want to nationalize payday regulation? Pressure from interest groups, particularly the Center For Responsible Lending, which has been lobbying the bureau about payday evils since at least 2013.

Emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the trade group the Community Financial Services Association show that the CFPB sought regular input from the Center to “focus these efforts,” to quote one. The Center’s President Mike Calhoun passed along a draft report to a CFPB director, who was invited to “Feel free to improve it!”

But even moralists gotta make a buck. The Center has an affiliate, the Self-Help Credit Union, with $600 million in assets that would love the CFPB’s blessing to compete with payday shops on short-term loans. The Center’s influence spans far: Mark Pearce ran the place for a decade before jumping to the FDIC to help with Operation Chokepoint, a coordinated government effort to investigate banks that conduct legal transactions with payday lenders.

Read that here.

The larger issue with all these do-gooders wanting to introduce more government into our lives? No one is really asking for it, except the community organizers themselves:

CFPB officials are swanning around as protectors of the proletariat, claiming the new rules will end a “cycle of debt” in which borrowers are conned into taking out one exorbitant loan after another. Yet customers—most of whom earn between $25,000 and $50,000—tend to know what they’re doing. One recent survey by Harris Interactive suggested that more than 90% of customers “weighed the risks” carefully and agreed the lender “clearly explained the terms.” A Columbia Law study found borrowers could predict accurately when they’d be able to pay back the loan.

A minority of borrowers roll over loans and end up paying more in fees. Yet a New York Federal Reserve Bank analysis in October noted that the evidence these customers were hoodwinked is “limited and mixed” and too scant to justify obliterating the industry. The report dispensed with other critiques that “don’t hold up under scrutiny,” including that payday lenders target minorities, who are no more likely to take out a payday loan than a white person in similar circumstances.

Read that here as well.

“Critiques that “don’t hold up under scrutiny” concisely sums up what American citizens face as liberal culture warriors try to impose their values and socialism on the rest of us. And their latest tactic is to destroy a financial sector “because they just know,” despite a mountain of evidence that proves them wrong.

I just hope people start to care before we find ourselves all standing in line in the new Soviet Union.