How is the Argus trying to twist Economic Development into something more sinister?

In today's Argus Leader, an article by Johnathan Ellis is attempting to twist the development of a distillery by two of the Governor's brothers into something darker. And it couldn't be more obvious:
What was unusual in this case was that Jamie Rounds, the governor's younger brother and a former state official, was at the center of the effort.

Haley said he heard during the session that Jamie Rounds might be trying to open a distillery. That didn't bother him. But the way the legislation was created did.

"It's obvious now that there were plans in place," Haley said. "During the session, it was a rumor. I wasn't too concerned about the rumor. I just didn't like that they used this bill to accomplish that."
Bwaaaa ha hah! Read it all here in shock and horror as *heaven forbid* someone changes state law to allow the production of a product legal to consume in South Dakota.

Please. This is a stretch even for the Argus.

We should be more suprised that it was illegal in the first place. We should be ashamed that we had to change the law to allow small scale breweries and wineries. And now a third time for distilleries. Why wouldn't we encourage economic development in this fashion?

So what if they want to make money off of 'tater sqeezings? Although in this case, I'm sure it will be grain produced vodka.

So, a couple of the Gov's brothers want to produce liquor in South Dakota? I say "Laissez les bon temps rouller!"


Anonymous said…
There was no secrecy.

Legislators were told that Jamie Rounds was planning to open a distillery.
Anonymous said…
Yes, to bad Tim can't work for the company. Hear he still needs a job.
Anonymous said…
Why the need to attack Representative Rounds on a personal level?

My best guess is that you are unable to engage Representative Rounds or Governor Rounds successfully in the battle of ideas on the field of politics.

Liberal Playbook - If unable to lead, if unable to win elections, if unable to win debates, if unable to have positive, innovative ideas then just attack the person.
Anonymous said…
This is my favorite part:

"We are out to encourage people to drink less, but enjoy more," he said. "This is not a get-drunk product."

How ridiculous.

One brother lobbies, one brother legislates, and one brother signs into law...

And the Rounds Cabal marches on...
Ike said…
At least they are working on building a business in Pierre - and will employ a number of people. There is nothing underhanded about this. The wineries had to get legislation passed before they went into business, as did a 1/2 dozen other business startups. C'est la vie! Good for them.

And if they need a taste taster, which I'm sure they will, I'll be applying as well as many others I know. I might not get the job, but at least I'll have fun prepping for the interview.
Anonymous said…
And they are going to rent tents? What a combo, sure to be a success.
Jake Mortenson said…
anonymous 9:12 am,

First of all, I would encourage yourself and all other commenters to put your name behind your comments. It says a lot about your comment when you do not even have the guts to put your own name behind it.

Next, you have no idea what kind of product Mr. Rounds is going to produce. Do not act like you do.

Finally, if your family is involved in government to the degree that the Rounds family is, should you be forced to fully remove yourself from the political process? And how are you, or anyone else for that matter, worse off with the passage of this legislation?
Anonymous said…
I thought Jake was getting there but he didn't quite make it. The point to follow his is this:
Clearly, that bill, passed and signed, applies to everyone

Anyone who meets the requisite criteria, who has the know-how, and the desire, and the means, can go and do likewise. It benefits the people who passed it and everybody else who wishes to do likewise. How is this bill different from any other bill that gets passed up here? It isn't.

The Argus MisLeader, through Ellis, took pains to make it seem otherwise. Sad, isn't it? It should have been a story on the business page: "Governor's Brothers Economic Development Project" and instead it gets played like this.

Does anyone doubt it would have been reported that way if it was about a legislator or Gov from south of I90 and east of I29?

Anonymous said…
Tired of Jake.

Sorry Jake, some of us have jobs where placing our names on a comment sometimes appears that our business or organization has the same opinion. Not all of us have rich parents to look after us.

Until PP decides to reduce his traffic by making all of us put a name down you'll just have to deal with anons.

Proudly signed,

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long