Anti - DM&E Advertising

By -
It's not on the ballot anywhere else but Brookings this election. But here's a commerical, courtesy of YouTube where the anti-DM&E forces are trying to scare the bejeezus out of Brookings residents:

Comments

Anonymous said…
I was in Brookings today and saw very little anti-DM&E advertising.

But when all those DM&E trains start rolling through the middle of Brookings I can sure see where it's just going to be a mess!

Well, I guess that's what you get when you build on each side of the tracks! You roll the dice that the tracks just aren't going to get used much. And if they do, well then I guess you just live with it.
10:26 PM
Anonymous said…
Wow. This is so wrong on so many levels that I'm not sure where to begin. It is a rehash of video that Rochester/Mayo opponents of the DM&E project put together. It has nothing to do with the issue for the voters buried on the ballot in Brookings. Bottom line for Brookings residents is the fact that the agreement negotiated with the railroad is a better deal that what the government would ever force the railroad to pay or install. See http://cityofbrookings.org/council/minutes/pdfs/2005Sep20Minutes.pdf. But when you don't have either the facts or the law on your side, apparently you just try to scare people. Brookings city leaders got it right - or if they didn't, why not address the facts of the agreement?
10:30 PM
Anonymous said…
Who is the second guy in the video taking about ?? It doesn't say, does it! They're trying to imply DM&E, but is it? Lots of people live next to highways, too, and have no doubt been subject to accidents and spills. This ad seems very sensational and dishonest.
10:57 PM
Anonymous said…
Great ad. Very effective, makes you think and watch the entire piece. A "fight to the end".
2:04 PM
Anonymous said…
Sensationalism, misrepresentation of the facts of the 90% funding, no mention of the much lower safety requirements if the agreement is voted down - this group isn't concerned about safety for people in Brookings at all - only their pride in losing their battle against getting a bypass.
11:37 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on
Read more