A note from Stan Adelstein

Here's one that hit the e-mail boxes late last week
From: stanford adelstein [mailto:sma@rapidnet.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 7:51 PM
To: (list redacted)
Subject: Another campaign that we cannot let go by default

Dear Friends of Women, Progress and a future of equality,

While DIA is enjoying a well earned rest, our opposition is not. Sam Kooiker has a solid backing of the Extreme right that is planning another election assult. They are going to turn out their vote for Rapid City Mayor in less than three weeks. Those of us supporting Alan Hanks do not have a comparable number of volunteers to match them. Their zealots will do what it takes. Fortunately we enjoy a small majority, from our polling and information.

Why do they care about the Mayor? We beat them in November, and they know that they must rebuild - step by step - at every level of political office. How helpful do you think that a Mayor would be for an Elizabeth Kraus as she runs to replace our friend Mac? What kind of a candidate recruiting effort would the city hall in second largest city in the SD be able to mount? You all know the story -- they built a majority while honest, caring people worked for a future for all.

I would truly appreciate hearing from those of you who could give us some hours the next two and half weeks.

Stan Adelstein
So much for staying positive. What, did Stan even wait a day until going negative on behalf of his candidate?

Comments

Anonymous said…
PP -- Again, you ASS-U-ME Alan Hanks is involved in this e-mail, but you grant Kooiker the benefit of every doubt. Kooiker offers guarantees of open government, but why would he put on a guarantee? Let's think about that for a minute. He wants you to feel all warm a cozy with your guarantee, meanwhile the guarantee fairy is sneaking into your house, sniffing glue, saying let's build another model airplane, and your daughter's knocked up. But, you say, it's marked guaranteed. Why? Because he knows all he gave you was a guaranteed piece of s*&t. If you want me to take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed, I can, I have the time. But in the meantime, for Rapid City's sake, for South Dakota's sake, for your daughter's sake, think about electing a quality Mayor in Alan Hanks.

Life by Tommy Boy
Anonymous said…
Who's been sniffing glue?

If Hanks had an sense at all, and we know he doesn't, he'd be putting as much distance as he can between himself and the little egomaniac.

SAM FOR MAYOR!!!!!
Anonymous said…
That last post was nothing but garble and junk. I would like any facts that you can give me to back up your crazy statement. I would be happy to talk with you whenever, jabba the schumacher.
Anonymous said…
10:50, not 11:11, sorry
Anonymous said…
Goodness 11:12 -- A little testy. Nothing in that was meant as accusations of anything real, it was from "Tommy Boy," hence the sign-off. For some reason you have it out for Schumacher and are unwilling to see something for what it is meant to be, humorous, imdicative of nothing at all. Come down off your high horse and enjoy life for once.
Anonymous said…
I told you it was Stan.
Anonymous said…
PP,
I have enjoyed reading your blog. I understand that you have your favorites and your enemies. However, I don't view the e-mail as being negative. Is there anything untrue in the e-mail?
PP said…
I think someone was quoting Chris Farley's salesmanship monologue from "Tommy Boy."

Which is showing how this whole election is devolving.
PP said…
11:27 - Yes, I have people I admire, others who lie to me, those I disagree with, and yet others I think hurt the GOP.

Some might not view the e-mail as negatively as I do. That's ok. I'm not completely passing judgment on it as much as noting that it's out there being sent around by never-to-again-be-Senator Adelstein.

You might think it's ok, and at the same time, I also had a call today that viewed it as flat out crazy as in "what is Stan thinking?"

I just put it there and offer my cynical opinion. It's up to you to decide.
Anonymous said…
It's bad policy to make enemies with the next mayor of Rapid City, PP.
Anonymous said…
PP's obsession with Stan is nothing short of mind boggling. Stan A. has just as much right to his opinions as you do yours, PP. Maybe you need to get over yourself.
Anonymous said…
What is interesting to me is the DIA reference (Democracy in Action, a "progressive" women's political action group). They refuse to call themselves liberals...I wonder why. Ask them who they are, and they immediately say they are not just liberal Dems but they have Republican members as well (RINOs all). The assertion that they do not have resources is baloney. They have money, time and most important, access to a fawning media (RCJ in particular). In short, if DIA is for something, I'm against it.
Anonymous said…
12:17 How utterly inconsequential, especially since you don't say who you are.
Michael Sanborn said…
It might interest some to note that Kooiker is supported by many who would be seen as extreme liberals as well as extreme conservatives, in addition to a whole bunch of folks in the middle.

The note from Stan is disturbing. Kooiker may be getting Krause, Schweisow, etc. support because he is indeed a devout Christian.

But, he's also a populist, which is why he's supported by the left.

In the end, the next mayor needs more to be a manager than a representative of either the far right or far left or even the middle.
PP said…
and 12:15, he is very welcome to express them. But that doesn't mean I have to buy into his "all-for-me" attitude.
Anonymous said…
12:59 Nor he, yours.
Anonymous said…
There is a clear difference between filing a financial interest form late (something only 6 people in South Dakota even know or care about) and refusing to file a report on a $750K contribution to the biggest initiated measure in the country. Trying to equate the 2 of them is such a stretch as to be ridiculous. I enjoy your blog, PP, and have come to accept that sometimes you let your partisanship get in the way of your judgment but this is something I would expect to read on sibby’s site, not your’s.
Anonymous said…
Stan is a man full of revenge. This won't work with the voters of Rapid City. Stan should remove himself from the political arena. He is a looser and anyone following him will be a looser also.
Anonymous said…
And anyone who spells "loser" "looser" is a total loser.
Anonymous said…
He's a looser, he's a gooser, he's a midnight juicer, gets his luvvin on the run...
nonnie said…
DIA has a blog, but if you read it, you must be in the minority. It has few topics, even fewer posters, and as far as I can see is definitely liberal, pro-abortion, and oh yea, liberal again. Had one poster for awhile that made it interesting by disagreeing with the liberal opinions of the blog writers, but even that person has disappeared. I'm with the poster above. If DIA is for something, most likely it is a very liberal cause and not something a conservative would favor.
freeman said…
It does seem like you spend an inordinate amount of energy being critical of Stan Adelstein--borders on obsessive. But a more general observation is that the post, like many public statements today, takes all meaning out of the word "negative." When you use it, it is obvious that it means nothing more than something with which you disagree. "Negative campaigning has now, through over-usage, become thoroughly meaningless, like "judicial activism." In either case it is simply a matter of whose ox is being gored. It looks like you think your ox gets gored every time Stan Adelstein says anything, and the boy has cried wolf enough.
Anonymous said…
Well, so what! The bottom line is that the consequences for this type of infraction are just about nonexistent! Everyone knows that! You may get a slap on the hand or a reprimand, but so what! The outcome is worth the cost.

Everyone knows that politics is “win at all costs, but above all win”! Been that way for many years and will be that way for many years to come!

Have any of you ever heard of any type of consequence for political committees or politicians breaking campaign laws? I can’t seem to remember anything like that happening. Everything just seems to get pushed under the rug after the election. Just seems to happen that way.

So, do what you gotta do, as long as you win!

It is the American way!
Anonymous said…
Seriously... is this still about Hanks not sending you a note if he accepted campaign fincance from someone?

Why do you keep calling him on the carpet for it? Maybe he came to his senses and said to himself, "What the hell do I owe Pat Powers, anyway? The minute I take money, he'll rod me for it, and it won't matter that I told him early. I am damned if I do and poor if I don't. Screw this!"

Seriously, get over it.
Anonymous said…
It does look like an attack!
It does not mean Hanks had anything to do with it.
But you see if your read where it is to take the reader.
Which is imho an attack against Sam.

Seem plain and simple to me.
So these means this is how Stan feels which, could place a question in the minds of those about Hank's and Sam also. That is where those who will be voting need to examine and ask questions. It is there right and really a duty to do so or you get what you asked for.
Though we do need to trust and read between the lines of statements.
Anonymous said…
KOOIKER BY A MUDSLIDE !!
Anonymous said…
This is like deja vu. Reminds me of the time Lee Schoenbeck took after a teenager who he thought was driving too fast down the street and sucker punched the kid through his car window (or dragged him out of the car). In any event, Lee the former prosecutor assaulted the kid. This happened in Webster during Lee's first term in the senate.

Lee lost his re-election after that. But Shaw should borrow a page from Schoenbeck's book and move to a different place to run for office after people forget about this unseemly incident.
Anonymous said…
I love liberals who always resort to name calling and ad-hominem attacks when they can't seriously debate an issue.

It's show a real lack of intellectualy ability on the part of some on the left who continue to beleive that convicted murderers have more rights than inncoent unborn children.

The previous comment about due process is spot on. The key difference between the Right to Life crowd and the "save the vicuous axe murderer" crowd is that the murderer had due process of law the innoncent unborn child did not.
Anonymous said…
I'm a loyal Republican but am worried about the SDGOP -- these folks need to wake up. Howard Dean's money on the state and local level is a great idea and it's too bad the national GOP isn't doing that too. The SDDEMS website is good and their PR is 10 times more competent than the SDGOP. It has no effect on me because I am supporting Republican candidates for the most part (not Mr. Whalen though, campaign is too amateurish even for a first timer. Sorry). But how about those undecideds? Get moving, SDGOP. I for one don't want an unpleasant wake-up call in November.
Lynn said…
"Dear Friends of Women, Progress and a future of equality,...has a solid backing of the Extreme right,...(W)e beat them in November." Just to cite a few. This is a letter of a liberal democrat.
Anonymous said…
Oh please get off the persecuted Christian bandwagon. Rules are rules, and many churches have stepped over the line and are directly involved in the political aspect of this issue. Telling your congregation that your religion says YOU should not do "x". Is one thing. Telling them that they should do something related to a political activity or should go get involved in that political activity, letting that political group come to your church, handing out bumper stickers etc. are stepping over the line. Sadly some churches have become far too involved in politics. Some have seen the light and are now stepping out of politics. The crying about persecution is pathetic. Try living in South Dakota as a non-christian for a while. You will learn all about real harassment, discrimination and intimidation. This, done by the Christians now crying persecution.
Anonymous said…
Adelstein's remarks will just energize Kooiker's base, if anything. Bad move for Adelstein.
Anonymous said…
The purpose of Mr. Adelstein’s email is unclear. SD mayors seem to have limited political influence outside their own city. This is particularly true in West River.

A national debate over a hot flash issue like abortion, with its predictable effect on SD politics, is segued into a dire warning of the consequences attendant upon the possible election of a candidate with a wife, some kids and a job at a telecom company.

This logic path is truly bizarre and has all the “tells” of a person who has lost his philosophical bearings.

It will be interesting to see if Mr. Kooiker takes the bait. As for Mr. Hanks, apparently he learned nothing from the barely 20% result achieved by long time incumbent Mr. Shaw.

But I guess when you’re not in charge of your destiny, you go where the gold leads. Those with the gold make the rules.

Carnivore opinion
Anonymous said…
Kooiker should be called on the carpet. His campaign slogan should be: "I have no idea about that." I have no idea about who ran my campaign. I have no idea about any contract. I have no idea about bonuses. I have no idea about fake e-mails. I have no idea about leaks to the media. I have no idea about how to handle Prieksat. I have no idea when my daughter's birthday party is being held. I have no idea how I ended up at a meeting designed to help Napoli run for Governor against Rounds. I have no idea what I want to do if elected.

I do have an idea. Vote for Hanks and then vote out Kooiker next year.
Dan R said…
Anon 8:45 AM
Mike Schumacher, you are out of line. This is ridiculous. Why don't you step down from the council? You aren't even living in RC anymore.
Anonymous said…
Keep up the good work, Stan! If we're going to defeat Kooiker, we need to keep up this type of aggressive attack. If this doesn't help to mobilize our base, we'll have to strengthen our efforts by really attacking Sam on a more personal basis. Just remember, we need to continue this effort without allowing it to look like Alan is involved.
Anonymous said…
I agree with Anon 3:23. Direct personal attacks work well. It will guarantee you 19% of the vote.
blogzilla said…
Kooiker by a MUDSLIDE!!

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