Senate Democratic Leader Garry Moore versus CCK
It's a large article, so read it all here. I'm going to take Chad's side on this, not because I agree with his views in the least, but because I think the notion of one person bullying a political party comprised of thousands of people is silly. And I'll certainly defend his right to his opinion.
The Democratic leader in the South Dakota Senate says a Sioux Falls consultant under contract with the party is advancing a pro-choice philosophy on abortion at the expense of Democratic candidates for the state Legislature who oppose abortion.Sen. Garry Moore of Yankton said consultant Steve Hildebrand, a former executive director for the state Democratic Party and past campaign manager for Tom Daschle, is working to defeat Democratic legislators who voted for HB1215, the controversial near-total ban on abortion approved by the Legislature this year.
Moore said Hildebrand has made it clear that electing pro-choice candidates is more important than electing Democratic candidates. Hildebrand and his employee Chad Schuldt have also issued critical and — in Shuldt’s case — profane statements about Democrats who supported HB1215.
During the past legislative session, Schuldt referred to some Democrats who voted for HB1215 as “(expletive) idiots” and “sickos” on an Internet political blog he maintains. Schuldt also called Moore “a joke” as a legislative leader and encouraged his defeat, along with others who voted for the abortion bill.
Moore said such behavior is unprofessional and inappropriate and cause for the Democratic Party to pull its contract with HildebrandTewes Consulting.
“But nobody in the state party has the courage to stand up to him,” Moore said of Hildebrand. “They haven’t been able to muzzle him. He owes each and everyone in the Democratic caucus an apology, not that we’ll get one.”
Do I hear a few similar comments myself? Sure I do. Maybe not to the extent where it becomes a large story in the newspaper, but I hear them. The profile of the party members who air their gumbles of "what is he thinking, why is he doing that" are typically members who are "establishment" and almost without exception are less computer savvy. In other words, they don't get it.
Why are political blogs shaking up some of the traditional party foundations and making people uncomfortable? Because we're talking about the things that people at the grassroots care about. It would be as if the people at the basic level of politics had their own newsletter, and subscribers wrote in and talked about what made them mad, or what their hopes and aspirations are. Many readers feel like someone is out there speaking for them, and if they want to chime in, there's a comment section for that too.
So, here's to the readers, Republican, Democrat, Independent, or other. Through your patronage and your commenting, you're shaking up the establishment and helping to forge a sea-change in how political parties respond to the grassroots. You're changing media coverage. You're changing political "business as usual."
And that's ok.