Never-to-be-Senator-again Adelstein decides to go toe to toe with Moi

The person who spent so much time and effort trying to pull the Republican Party apart like a child fighting over a prized doll over the past couple of elections just made a fatal mistake. Under a prior post, Stan Adelstein actually is trying to intimate that I might be spreading falsehoods about him.

He's actually accusing me of being "full of beans." The man termed by reporter Bob Mercer as the Republican Frank Kloucek is actually challenging my documentation of his activities? Heh.

Heh heh.

Here we go. First, what Stan challenged me with:

PP - you are full of beans.

First of all Schoenbeck - not known for his honest recall lies.

The only conversation that I had with him about appointments was held with Majority Leader Bogue present - to avoid just this kind of thing.

I do not remember exactly what I said, but the gist was "how can you so deliberately insult someone old enough to be your father by my appointments." He replied that he resented my primary support of my house colleague who was term limited (Republican) Claire Konold. Claire and I had tried to turn around the reduction of funds for "Technical Education," and I had hoped we could be more successful in the Senate - since Schoenbeck did not give much of a damn about education - if it was not for Law.

The one thing I do remember is my closing remark to him "sometime in the quiet of the night, ask yourself what _______ (his foster mother when had been sent to Rapid City) would say about your insults."

Obviously and logically there was no "Lee campaign," to which I could "throw funds" -- the election was over, and he had just become President Pro-tem - so the suggestion of "thrown funds" is a calendar impossibility.

Since he was not the PPT in the campaign, I could not have asked for an appointment - no one knew he would ever have such authority - and most were sorry when he did.

Funny, how PP can repeat an obvious falsehood.

I NEVER said what you claim "during session - called his fellow Republicans extremists who needed to be defeated in the next election." After the session, long after, at a rally in Rapid City for the referendum on 1215 I said "if you are angry about how some voted on this bill - do not send them back" I NEVER referred to "Republicans" and never would have. Whatever I said, as quoted above was on camera and NOT during the session. Once again there was no referendum until AFTER the session.

"tens of thousands" show me the record. That again is baloney. Except for Napoli and Klaudt I did not oppose seated Republcans -- I did not repeat -- DID NOT.

I like and enjoy honest discussion disagreement of principle - but you PeePee - have chose to put into print at least three obvious falsehood. Do you have sense of integrity as Blog Author - any sense at all?

Stan Adelstein

Stan, are you ready to rumble?

1. The only conversation that I had with him about appointments was held with Majority Leader Bogue present - to avoid just this kind of thing.

My evidence? From the e-mail sent to the entire Republican Caucus April 22, 2006, and to my knowledge never refuted.

From: Lee Schoenbeck
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 10:14 PM

To: (List redacted by PP)

Subject: FW: Adelstein

Just saw Stan's message that he left me off of --- he of course didn't tell you the whole story. When I ran in 2002 Stan sent a check and I accepted it. I had supported him for national committeeman many years before and viewed him as a friend. The only thing that changed after that was the pro-life legislation that I supported and he opposed. He then supported my opponent.

After you all elected my pres pro temp - he immediately called and started threatening that he thought I planned to run for state wide office one day and I needed his support - he spelled out certain committees he expected to be on and that he expected to be a chairman (that would be taking positions some of you occupied). As you can tell by the appointments he received, I don't cow-toe to anybody's threats and I particularly am offended by anybody trying to play me off against the interests of the caucus. Stan is a bad thing to have in any caucus - a cancer. I am proud that Jerry spelled it out - it is too bad we didn't use our rules to expel him when he behaved so unprofessionally at last summer's meetings.

Sure, there might be a "he said" situation here. But I feel pretty good quoting one side. Especially when the person refuting it (Stan) is a bit fuzzy on the details, and the other one still remembers it as if it was yesterday.

2. I NEVER said what you claim "during session - called his fellow Republicans extremists who needed to be defeated in the next election."

My response? I don't have one personally. I'll just let the newspaper do the talking.

Rapid City Journal 3/3/2006 (that would be during session)

"A former Appropriations Committee member, he labeled Greenfield as “an ultra-conservative extremist” who helped organize the “last-minute ambush of public radio by extremists.”

and....

“We need to know who voted and how they voted. And we need to not only refer this bill and kill it, we need to vote them out,” he said. “I’m convinced that we have the majority of South Dakotans behind us.”
- Rapid City Journal 3/10/2006 again, before the last day of session

Even more clear than my first point, Stan's refutation was utterly without merit. In fact I would liken it to a male bovine waste product.

Thirdly, and oh, so more sweetly here's the doozy:

3. "tens of thousands" show me the record. That again is baloney. Except for Napoli and Klaudt I did not oppose seated Republcans -- I did not repeat -- DID NOT.

Here's his mistake. Because I know his PAC donations probably better than he does.

$10,000 to the Democratic Majority Project from one of PACaStan's many PACs (All South Dakota). And who got the money?

I can pick out at least two or three running against incumbent Republican legislators. Hmm. $10,000 is pretty close to tens of thousands of dollars. But let's keep adding to it to beat my point into the ground.

Here's $25,000 to Focus SD, a Democratic organization that's attacked John Thune and the Governor as coming from Stan's business Northwest Engineering. I suspect Stan funneled that money towards them for Finch, Spry and his buddy Tom Katus.

Oops. Here's another load of cash for them from Stan - directly out of pocket this time.

$31, 469.67. I think that brings the total past $65,000 spent to elect Democrats this past election. But am I done yet? OF COURSE NOT.

The Nix on Six PAC was fronted by Don Frankenfeld and surprise, surprise, solely funded by Stan Adelstein. The amount Stan put into it? $15,000. This PAC was supposedly set up to oppose abortion (ooops - correction here - to oppose the abortion ban. Thanks "Mom"), but how much of that money went towards that?


Of course none of it did. It went to Democratic candidates. $5000 to Katus. $5000 to Spry, and $5000 to Finch.I'm at $81,469.67 for my Stan PAC money to Democrats this past election.

And lest I forget, let's go back to your All South Dakota PAC which gave SO MUCH to the Democratic Majority Project...


Here's a nice little $836 dollar donation to Scott Heidepreim the reigning Democratic Minority Leader. If memory serves me, I think he might have been running against a sitting Republican legislator (Sitting Senator Dick Kelly if you forgot about that one).

So, that would seem to place Stan's rather pronounced statement that "I did not oppose seated Republcans -- I did not repeat -- DID NOT" somewhat into question. And with over $80,000 PLUS spent on his Democratic efforts, I think I'm on pretty safe ground saying that he spent tens of thousands to defeat Republicans.

So Stan thinks he's going to come into my house (or blog) and he's going to call me out on what I'm writing? Stan, your measure has been taken. And you have been found wanting.