I missed that one. Anyone have the Adelstein ad from the Pennington Co LDD?

I just caught one of the comments about the adelstein ad in the Pennington Co. Lincoln Day Dinner Program.

Aside from being surprised anyone read it, I was floored that this might be indicative of the content:



The ad states that he hopes the people in distrist 32 will have the priviledge
of letting him respresent them again. Shouldn't that be the other way around?
Nah. He couldn't be that arrogant, could he?

Let's figure out if the rumor is true. Does anyone have this? E-mail me a jpeg or .pdf of it here.

UPDATE - Here it is.

"Thank you... for choosing me to represent District 32 in six elections. I hope that you will have the opportunity to do so again."After reading this, there's only one thing that comes to mind: Hubris.

Hubris or hybris according to its modern usage, is exaggerated self pride or self-confidence (overbearing pride), often resulting in fatal retribution.

Lucky them that they might have the opportunity for Stan to represent them again. For the possibility of two more years of non-existant to abysmal legislative accomplishments.

Lucky them, indeed.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Don't do us any favors Stan. We're getting by fine without you, thanks.
nutjob conservative said…
If I had known that Reagan was connected to Adelstein back when he was alive, I would have called for him to be kicked out the party too.
Anonymous said…
First off, is this picture real? You can do anything with photoshop these days. Secondly, I think that Reagan's family should request funds for the use of his image.
scimitar said…
A humble man would say, "I hope you will give ME the opportunity to serve you again."

Only an egomaniac would turn that around and tell the voters that it's their opportunity for him to serve, and maybe-just maybe - he'll bestow upon them that opportunity once again.

PP is dead on with this one. Hubris. How can Adelstein and his head fit into the same room?
Anonymous said…
All he says is that he'd like the opportunity to serve again. It's not very artfully drafted, but there's nothing egomaniacal about this. You guys are nuts.
Anonymous said…
I say we crucify him!
True Grit said…
I think it's time someone compiles a list of "Folks we'd like to see get the boot out of the GOP" to get our enemies list in the public.

At the top of the list would be traitor Lib/Mod Senators Dave Knudson, Tom Dempster, Kenny Albers, Ed Olson and Orville Smidt. There's a sizeable list out of the House who should get the boot.

Wham!!!
COJones said…
You can add Ed McLaughlin and Mr. Gladhand, Mac McCracken from Dist. 34. I'd like them to leave the party voluntarily and be honest with the public about their philosophy. Unfortunately, they've gotten away with their charades for so long there's no reason to believe they'd suddenly be overwhelmed by a bout of conscience.
Anonymous said…
GET. OVER. IT.
Anonymous said…
Sounds like some of you need to read
American Facists" by Chris Hedges.

Your comments are right out of the textbook.
Anonymous said…
3:28..I just love it people start throwing the f-word (as in Fascist) around. I for one think that Adelstein, McLaughlin and the rest of RINOs can do whatever they want. It's a free country. They just need to be honest about it. I live in District 34 and it is not enough for somebody to have R beside their name if they aren't. As for District 34, get ready, guys (and that goes for Lust as well as the two Macs). Conservative Republicans are being recruited, as we speak, for the next time around.
Anonymous said…
3:28, I don't think many of the posters have a the ability to read.
Anonymous said…
4:39, Elizabeth Kraus or whatever her name is again? Give me a break.
Anonymous said…
Egad! Stan appears to still be wearing that same rug on his head.

I wonder why Stan didn't use this Reagan quote:

"Make no mistake, abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution. No serious scholar, including one disposed to agree with the Court's result, has argued that the framers of the Constitution intended to create such a right."

OR

"It is not for us to decide who is worthy to live and who is not."

There are endless quotes from Reagan which are direct contradictions with Stan's philosophy. I've got money that says if Reagan was still alive, he'd reject Stans' use of this photo, just the same as others have. No credible person I know nor Mike Rounds wants to be associated with him.
Anonymous said…
5:13, no, smarty-pants. That is all I am going to say.
Anonymous said…
4:39 Just read it.
Please.
Thanks.
Anonymous said…
Add Lee Schoenbeck to 2:14's list.
been there said…
"six elections"? Did he actually win 3 primaries and 3 generals? Whatever happened to the conservative west-river balance that RC used to give to the legislature. You've got more liberals and kooks out there now than they do in SF!
Anonymous said…
Sound off time.

Listen. I've had about enough of these "who we should kick out" conversations. They're absolutely counterproductive.

Here's the problem, as I see it.

The arrogant and brash few who have enough ego to believe that a political party is some exclusive club and not a fundamental right are the same ones who are splitting the Republican party and making our platform less effective.

People disagree with you. They might disagree with particular issues - an particularly social issues. But the very idea of calling someone a "Republican In Name Only" suggests that you have a better understanding and more passion for the core republican ideals than someone else.

What you're doing is confusing the term Republican with the word "conservative". You've forced people who have different ideas to label themselves as "moderate" or "mainstream" because you attack them and their politics so profusely.

If you want division in the Republican party, continue on your same course.

If you want the Republican party to be an exclusive group of people that think exactly like you do, then I suggest you need to take a hard look at what that will accomplish long-term.

You talk about good "conservatives" that are being recruited to run against seated Republicans, and then seem shocked that some, like Stan, use their political and financial base to tell you where to stick it.

And all the while, common sense seems to be abscent from your thinking. Did it work, for example, when - in balanced districts - you fought so hard to unseat a Republican? No. You tried, you failed. The Dems picked up those seats.

Some will look at Albers and Schmidt and say those were wins, but, anyone who knows something about how those districts are stacked knows that ANY republican you put to the electorate will win.

That's not the case in other districts where you are working to defeat seated Republicans. This plan could backfire, and the dems may pick up even more seats.

It's counter productive. It's vicious. It's very very very anti-big tent. You can either make a small philophical shift now, or come back begging later.

There's more at stake than the in-front-of-your-face view.

Stop it.
Al said…
That ad is really sick. Ron Reagan was a friend of mine. I knew Reagan. Stan, you are no Reagan.
feasant said…
NO Such thing as TRUTH in adveritising in the political world,
Anonymous said…
Anon. 12:21 Exactly right. It's a party, not a cult.
Anonymous said…
12:21 - is that you Stan? Or just another RINO?
Anonymous said…
It's time to kick Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, George H.W. Bush, W's mom, W's wife, Richard Nixon, Everett Dirksen, and a long list of other moderates out of the Republican Party!
Anonymous said…
12:21 said: "You can either make a small philophical shift now, or come back begging later."
Hmmmm...sounds like a threat to me! Thought you RINOs and libs were into being nicey-nice. Guess not.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said...
4:39, Elizabeth Kraus or whatever her name is again? Give me a break.

5:13 PM


Actually I believe Mrs. Kraus has moved and is no longer in District 34. I want to say she is in 33 now.
Anonymous said…
somebody in the photo looks like pepe le pew.

Stan, why don't you invest in some hair color? The skunk stripe doesn't work for you.
Anonymous said…
Here is a synopsis of the book by Chris Hedges, you realy should read it.

From Publishers Weekly:
"As a Harvard Divinity School graduate, [Hedges'] investigation of the Christian Right agenda is even more alarming given its lucidity. Citing the psychology and sociology of fascism and cults, including the work of German historian Fritz Stern, Hedges draws striking parallels between 20th-century totalitarian movements and the highly organized, well-funded "dominionist movement," an influential theocratic sect within the country's huge evangelical population. Rooted in a radical Calvinism, and wrapping its apocalyptic, vehemently militant, sexist and homophobic vision in patriotic and religious rhetoric, dominionism seeks absolute power in a Christian state."
Anonymous said…
3:54: and the lefty blogs love this guy. The liberal media fawn all over him because he is one of them. Yes, he has his view of things. Some of us think he is wrong.
Anonymous said…
"Some of us think he is wrong."

Why? In what way?

Have you read the book, or do you just parrot what your leaders have to say about it?

If it's the latter, Hedges is not wrong at all.
Anonymous said…
9:31 -- "or do you just parrot what your leaders have to say about it?"
That's precisely what you are doing. You read things that prop up the beliefs of the Moveon.org crowd. That's fine. Go for it.
Anonymous said…
PP: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I wonder if that is why Stan is recruiting Alan Hanks to run for mayor of RC? So, a seat will open up for him. Or is he going to pull a "Schumacher" and take on his fast old friend Katus?

What a joke that Stan tries to associate himself with Reagan! These two have so little in common it isn't even funny. Stan should distribute a photo of himself and his equally greedy friend and convicted felon Bill Janklow--the man who should have not gotten his law license back until at least he was off probation. This is instructive of our legal system.
Anonymous said…
Stan is recruiting Hanks?? Thanks for the info. Here's one vote Hanks ain't gonna get.
Anonymous said…
So Mr. Hanks...does 11:03 speak the truth? Inquiring minds -- and voters -- want to know.
Anonymous said…
It's time to kick God out of the Republican Party!!!!
Anonymous said…
10:09.

On the contrary. I read the book and am prepared to discuss the key points in detail.

Are you?

In debate, it's not enough to simply say you disagree.

You have to be prepared to argue why.

Are you?
Anonymous said…
2:50, I have read some of his columns, but not the book. I didn't criticize the book. I just said I don't agree with him. And no, I am not going to read it. I have read enough of his writings to know what he thinks and don't need to waste my time.
Anonymous said…
2:50 Fine. Then don't debate the book.
Because by your own admission,
you're not qualified and don't intend
to become so.
Anonymous said…
4:57, yeah, that was the idea.
Anonymous said…
HA! Would you look at that picture! It's Dutch shaking hands with Douche!
Anonymous said…
Katus hasn't made any big mistakes, and he is a very nice guy. Since his ideology is the same as Stan's, there is no need to throw out Katus in a Katus v Adelstein race.
kerry said…
Katus has represented district 32 just fine. Even Napoli has said he's been able to work with him well. I'm sure that has Stan muttering to himself "That's not what I paid for!!!"

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th