No 2,855 0.42 13/13
Yes 3,932 0.58 13/13
Well, this wasn’t even close — in the end. Certainly looks like those in the Dakota Dunes precinct came through for the proponents of the refinery. The big question for all interested in the refinery … What’s next?
Yes 2,915 0.53 12/13
No 2,618 0.47 12/13
This is as good as over. 298 votes will be too much to overcome with just one precinct remaining. All that is left now are the more than a handful of other ordinances which include environmental and water issues that need to be squared away before Hyperion is still a reality. This vote only puts the refinery one more small step closer. As they say, the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.
Obama will be the presumptive nominee for the Democratic Party. Hillary Clinton just wrapped up a speech in NYC and alluded to the fact that her involvement in the presidential election is not yet over. She urged her supporters to comment on her website about what she should do, essentially trying to measure the some 17 million plus individuals who voted for her. All the talking heads are saying their sources have Hillary wanting the VP consideration. If you’re Obama, selecting Clinton would be a disaster. If I’m an Obama supporter (which I’m not), their air would be sucked out of my energy for his campaign — forget about what she can offer in terms of gaining votes in the south.
DAVID WHITESOCKOff the top, with one precinct reporting, those in Union county are voting NO (76-24 percent) on Hyperion.
With 84 of 762 precinct reporting, Hillary Clinton leads in votes against Barack Obama (56-44 percent). But, he will get enough delegates through South Dakota, and including super delegates, to become the presumptive Democratic nominee.
And, Joel Dykstra is wiping the floor with his primary opponents for the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate.
DAVID WHITESOCK — I sat conflicted along side my mother and father, both who served in the military — my mother for just a few years in the Air Force (still a civil service employee, though) and my father for 26 years, also in the Air Force. My conflicts were with what was being memorialized and why.
The holiday dates back to 1868 and a proclamation by General Logan as a means to recognize and honor the already tens of thousands of dead from the Civil War (more than 400,000 would eventually perish). At the time, and at the time of any conflict, the people rose to the challenge and poured into their city squares and cemeteries to pay tribute to their fallen. The ceremonies were solemn but celebratory, and always regal. Nothing much has changed today, besides the fact that those who orchestrate and (mostly) attend the events are elderly and each year less appear.
The youth today have less ties to war — however, that is changing with each passing week the United States remains embroiled in the Middle East. Another factor that contributes to the lack of younger Americans attending Memorial Day events is that the politics of the wars are different. The Civil War was, for the most part, pretty clear cut — you were on one side or the other. With WWII, there was much of the same. The entire country was involved in that effort. As much as we did not like the nationalistic tendencies of the communistic Hitler and the fascist Mussolini, the U.S. rallied around the flag just as ardently — only, our cause was better.
Tis be the precipice of my inner struggle.
War by nation-states is always fueled by the nationalistic fire of the people. The Government lights a spark by way of a political exigency, relying on the people to kindle the flame. In the case of the U.S., the Government has at its fingertips the principles of freedom and liberty which they deem as fragile, as protected by the Government for the people. If the Government does not fight against political ideals which are contrary to ours, then the very freedom which we enjoy is at jeopardy. The Government always portends that THEY are the guarantors of liberty — how sorely wrong they are.
So, it is on this, Memorial Day, when WE THE PEOPLE gather to “honor” those who sacrificed their lives, not for our freedom, but for the attempt of giving “freedom” to another country which has never known, and will never know the type of liberty which was not only envisioned by our Founding Fathers, but was secured by way of the Constitution. A system of government was set up in this country which relied on the notion of consent. WE THE PEOPLE, consented amongst ourselves that we would govern ourselves through a representative democracy. The system is not perfect, but in terms of establishing a truly free political society, the Founders hit the mark.
Every country for which we have entered to help spread the fruits of democracy, has chosen not take our lead. Throughout all of Europe, following WWII, each and every country chose a system of government, despite its reliance on democratically elected representatives, which more resembles communism and socialism than that of true freedom and liberty for which our system is based.
Obviously, the course which our federal government has taken since 1789 has veered dramatically from that which was created by Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, Franklin, et al. The federalist system which was so passionately fought over and set forth no longer resembles what once was.
It is not MY freedom that those of WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, or Iraq fought and died and continue to die for. My freedom, despite the Government’s every attempt to strip it from me, is rightfully secured in the Constitution. Implementing “freedom” through coercion is not freedom. The incredible tragedy which exists is that men and women, who, with all the goodness of individual intentions, submitted themselves as pawns for the Government’s political desires. They gave their life for the Government, not us; and certainly not freedom for the people of the United States.
DAVID WHITESOCK — While on a campaign visit in South Dakota today, Sen. Hillary Clinton invoked the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968 as a justification for staying in the race. Her comments came while being interviewed by the Argus Leader editorial board. Video below the jump.
This reference is unfathomable. Obviously, this is an unique campaign with the most viable female candidate for president, ever; and the first ever viable African American candidate for the office. There are some, even Obama’s chief strategist David Axelrod, who suggest her intention was not to invoke the idea that if Sen. Obama were assasinated (in June), that she would be ‘available’ to take over the party’s nomination, were not necessarily intentional.
Okay, so this is how the Obama campaign has played things all along. They play nice. I like that about the Obama campaign.
However, Sen. Clinton is a smart woman. When speaking off the cuff, she does have a strong sense of historical context, I’ll grant her that, but this inference is historically and politically unforgivable (at least until after the Nov. election).
Her comments are insane to say the least. The problem I have with the current state of political campaigning, is with the impact the media has on the behavior of the candidates. Obviously, the candidates want to get out and speak to, or “reach,” as many potential voters as possible. Their most efficient method for attaining this goal is to “invite” the media (local and national) to every single event they have planned — even if that means a walk-trough of a local diner or (Brandon, SD) grocery store. What is happening more frequently because of this “media strategy,” is that candidates find themselves having every utterance they speak recorded and distributed to the masses in some way, shape, or form (Can you say “Macaca?”)
It’s clear that we are all human make mistakes, especially speaking mistakes — their a dime-a-dozen. The mistakes are more so when cameras and microphones are picking up everything the candidates say. They are also amplified. It makes me wonder, why is it that political strategists who work for these candidates have not yet told their clients to shut the hell up? The media isn’t going anywhere. They will cover what you have to say when you step before the microphones. And you you say something, it will get distributed throughout the country is such a fashion that if what you said was of some substance and importance, those that want to hear it, will.
Obama played the Rev. Wright issue perfectly. He didn’t step in front of a microphone for days. He took a deep breath, wrote a speech, and told the country in fell swoop what he thought. End of story. He’s not even really bothered much by that whole incident (amplified by the media, or not).
Some have suggested that Sen. Clinton’s remarkes today in Sioux Falls were possible the result of an exhausted campaigner, that she should be given the benefit of the doubt. Sorry. No benefit here. Once these candidates realize that they don’t need to make sure that every camera in the country captures every word they say, and went back to less words mean more, then politicians may get some of their credibility back, at least as campaigners.
Worthy of viewing, Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment on HRC’s remarks.
Saturday at USD’s graduation ceremony (121st Spring Commencement Exercises), former Senator, and hot-in-the-news, George McGovern was on hand to receive an honorary doctorate. On the program it listed that President Abbott was to give McGovern the accolade, but he didn’t, Acting Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs Matthew Moen did the honor.
Given the recent big news that McGovern switched his support from Clinton to Obama, did Abbott snub McGovern because he’s in Clinton’s camp?
DAVID WHITESOCK — I find it interesting that when the issue of of abortion is ever discussed in the media, especially newspapers, the paper is oftentimes put at fault for bringing it up. Mostly this angst comes from people who don’t feel the overall tone or direction of the conversation is in their favor, but that is neither here nor there.
If you are looking at pointing fingers for why this issue is “back in the news” look at the groups of people who continue to bring up referendums in South Dakota to either ban abortion outright, or to revise the current law on the books. Within the last week a new referendum was introduced and will most likely be on the ballot in November for the people to vote on — again!
Don’t blame the opinion section of The Volante for discussing the issue, it is certainly relevant. Come next semester, you’re likely to see more of it.
Lastly, in defense of all opinion editors before me, and those to follow, the opinion section is at the mercy of which writers show up. This year, the majority of writers tended to lean a little more to the right and the ones that did lean to the left chose not to write partisan political columns. From day one, and I told Angie this when I took over for her, I would not dictate to any of the writers what they could and could not write about. I urged them to consider that what they chose to opine on was first to be relevant to this community, then to move regionally, then nationally, and finally internationally, if they wanted. For the most part we lived up to that billing and I commend all the opinion writers this semester for that.
The First Amendment is a wonderful thing, and if The Volante Opinion section did anything this last semester it was to fully use that right. This time it’s abortion. Next it will be the death penalty, as South Dakota is going to kill someone again this summer. I will be in Verm and doing work for The Volante over the summer, and you bet your Bill of Rights that I will be giving my opinion on that topic.
For the most part I have enjoyed my U. experience, but if there is one thing that has disconcerted me the most about this campus, it is the sheer lack of individuals willing to join the conversation, any conversation. There will be an Iraq War protest tomorrow outside I.D. Weeks — WOW, on the last regular day of classes. Nice timing. Pardon my French, but where the fuck were you people all semester long? Or even those who favor the war? Where were you? Where’s the lively debate that is supposed to exist on college campuses? I know this is not the 1960’s, but if you take a look around, we have a disastrous war (as if there is any other kind), rising gas prices, and an increasing food demand in the world — not to mention Hyperion in our back yard — looks familiar if you know anything about 60’s and 70’s history.
I’ll say it again, if you don’t like the opinions in The Volante, then join the staff. The opinion section does strive very hard to be “the student’s voice,” but we cannot satisfy everyone all the time.
MATT HITTLE — This is in response to the first two commenters on my most recent column.
TO Dumb!-
-Martin Luther King Day is in remembrance of Dr. King’s birthday.
-Veterans’ Day was originally in remembrance of Armistice Day, the day WWI ended.
-Presidents’ Day is in remembrance of two presidents. It’s located around their birthdays.
What do these have in common? They’re all remembrances of a specific time or person. Earth Day is ridiculous because it “celebrates” THE EARTH in general. C’mon. Seriously.
Also, capitalism HAS trumped environmentalism. Why do you think we need environmental legislation? Because most capitalist pigs could care less about the environment. It’s all about the Benjamins, baby.
——-
TO MIKE-
“Pish Posh, those evil “free market” lovers need to have eyes rolled at them! THAT will show them!”
Please step down from that throne and grace us with your presence on Earth for a moment. I’ve got a request:
Please tell me, Mike, what countries around the world have ever functioned well without a largely free market? Name them. In alphabetical order. Please. You’re not smarter than Milton Friedman. Not even close.
Next, if you couldn’t tell- and apparently you couldn’t- I was making a joke about ANWR. While I still definitely would kill a caribou for $1 gas, I don’t think gas prices will go down. Ever. No matter what. We need to drill in the ANWR not because it will make oil cheaper but so that we can buy more time in our transition to a better fuel source.
Also, Mike, read THIS article from today’s RealClearPolitics. Here is a pertinent excerpt:
—
“What keeps these areas [like ANWR] closed are exaggerated environmental fears, strong prejudice against oil companies and sheer stupidity.”
—
I certainly hope your reasons aren’t the latter, but I’m not convinced they aren’t.
I certainly hope this has cleared up the confusion from my column. I’m still waiting on that list, Mike.
