Stan Adelstein: Still can't get the hint.

Sibby had a nice little story this AM that's usually the type of thing I'm right on top of. I think Sibby was focusing more on the abortion angle, but what caught my attention was the headline: Adelstein organizing four Democratic campaigns which he picked up in a story as written by Judy Peres of the Chicago Tribune:

"This is all the candidates are talking about, instead of worrying about education and other pressing problems," said state Sen. Stan Adelstein, a long-time legislator who — like three other moderate Republicans who voted against the ban — was beaten in the June primaries by a conservative Christian.

Adelstein, who co-chairs the Campaign for Healthy Families, is organizing four Democratic Senate campaigns.

"My party needs to get back to focusing on true Republican issues — keeping
government out of people's lives, economic growth, education of gifted children and diversity of lifestyle and faith," said Adelstein, who is Jewish. "The only way to get people like me back in power is to throw the scoundrels out."

Read it all here.

For someone who wants religion out of politics, he seems to be the one who brings it up quite often, and in a manner in which I could only term as bigoted. I don't ever recall his opponent saying a word about his religious beliefs. But he seems to have given himself free reign to say she's unfit for office because of her beliefs. If you inserted a racial epithet in place of "conservative Christian" the way he throws it around, I think you'd get my point.

"His party needs to get back to focusing on true Republican issues?" I can barely contain myself when I read this kind of malarkey coming from Stan the self-proclaimed Republican.

I think the telling thing in his statement is in the issues he thinks are important to his GOP: "keeping government out of people's lives, economic growth, education of gifted children and diversity of lifestyle and faith."

Wait a minute? The education of gifted children?

So what are the rest of the children? A bunch of unwashed beggars fit only to serve him?

You know, there's a reason his money became poison to many legislative campaigns in the past two cycles. His sense of elitist entitlement is anathema to the regular South Dakotans who go to and from work and want what most other people (who aren't Stan) in the country want. They want to have good jobs that allow them to be able to feed their families. They want to be safe in their homes. They want their kids to get a good education (not just the gifted ones) and they want their kids to go to college.

Why would we want to put a legislator like Stan back? At best, he was an ineffective fop. At worst, such as the time he introduced legislation to change the state's dinosaur to one he had just purchased a ridiculously expensive casted model of, he's concerned with little else but his self-interest. Think I'm blowing smoke? Go check his legislative record. It ranks among the worst.

I won't go into what I was told by one legislator about the parts of Rapid City he would and would not accept at redistricting.

I heard a story that he had to pay one candidate at the State GOP Convention to listen to him pontificate, after they intially had no time for him. It's oh-so-telling where his strength lies. The only reason he got elected a couple of times had nothing to do with the quality of his character or ideas. It had to do with the $100,000 plus he had to spend each election. And should that be the yardstick by which we measure candidates? I think not.

It would appear that Stan and his sherry sipping friends care little for making the state better and simply want to concentrate on making it better for themselves. As this entitled fool says, "The only way to get people like me back in power is to throw the scoundrels out...." I'd encourage you to elect those he considers scoundrels, and keep doing so for many years to come.

*update- I should add self-interested backstabber to my collection of Adelstein adjectives. From the Rapid City Weekly news:
“I’m not a Democrat,” Adelstein said. “I did exactly the right thing. I have to stay and get my party back.”

He feels extreme conservatives have taken over the state Republican Party and he is forced to collaborate with some Democrats to keep them from being elected to office. Adelstein said he wants a moderate majority to govern the state.

However, he said if Katus wins, the two allies might find themselves on opposite sides of the ballot in two years.

“I think I will run again,” Adelstein said. “But it wouldn’t be against Tom; it would be for my principles.”
Read it all here. That's right. Stan would be running on his principles. Which appear more and more to be "I'm for me."


Anonymous said…
Geez ... I'm convinced your dislike of Stan is only surpassed by my dislike of our junior U.S. Senator.
Anonymous said…
fantastic insight backed by facts! As a west river resident for many years you have summed up many of our thoughts exactly. It is time for Stan to change his voter registration. He is a democrat. He stays republican because that use to be the only way he got elected.
Anonymous said…
I wouldn't say that Elli's campaign made a direct issue out of Stan being Jewish, but their lit and their letters to the editor made a huge point of Elli's CHRISTIAN involvement in CHURCH and in SUNDAY SCHOOL.
Anonymous said…
It's amazing to watch you pile on Stan, and then all but ignore that fact that Elli sold her soul to win the primary.

Elli has taken tens of thousands of dollars from a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, atheist, who was fold guilty of exposing his employees to bestiality at work.

I guess it's alright not to report that to your audience. But if Stan gives money to anyone, they are bought and paid for.

How about a little fairness in your posts, I know that it's a blog site, not a news site, but come on.
Anonymous said…
Stan helping 4 Dems now is the least of PP's and GOP problems.

It's the tip of the iceberg.

As quickly as Thune flip-flopped on 1215, he might end up being a registered Dem by the time the '08 Election rolls around.

Obama/Thune for President & VP
Anonymous said…
The only reason Stan lost the primary is the same reason other "moderate" republicans lost: moderate and liberal Republicans (yes, there are some) disgracefully DIDN'T SHOW at the ballot box.

Considering that most Republicans think Rounds is a shoe-in, it remains an undecipherable dynamic in a mid-term election that depends heavily upon top-of-the-ballot fervor.

There is room for moderate Republicans. Progressive, even. Battles in the legislature are fought at the margin. It's what keeps The Forum a forum instead of a foregone conclusion.
Anonymous said…
Stan understands one thing that a lot of Republicans seem to have forgotten. Ronald Reagan said it best. "Government isn't the solution, government is the problem."

Far too many GOP candidates seem to think government is the answer to our problems.
Anonymous said…
Amen to poliglut and anon 3:59..Government shouldn't try to save our souls. I miss Reagan--strong defense, fiscal responsibility, less government. If that's moderate, then count me in.
Anonymous said…
Mimi, you'll love the cartoon in Today's AZ Daily Star on the legacy of Goldwater and Reagan.
Anonymous said…
Reagan a moderate? Come on! Stan sure makes a lot of sense doesn't he? We all remember the good old days, don't we, that Stan wants to take "his" party back to. When our State Party was run by a bunch of pro-abortion homosexual atheists and Jews. Calling pro-life Christians "scoundrels", where's the ACLU to defend them? Isn't that a "Hate Crime"? He must be the most arrogant man in SD.
Anonymous said…
Stan IS taking his party back....whatever party he can buy. :>
Anonymous said…
I am not in any way pro Stan. Basically his philosophy is how much political power can I buy?

But he did make one point I think about the gifted kids. What's the first program cut when funds run short in school? The gifted programs. And what is more and more of the limited funds focused on? The complete other end of the spectrum. No, I am NOT advocating lack of programs for those studenst. But it seems that an inordinate amount of limited funds are used,for example, for 1:1 pupil/teacher or aide programs for kids literally unable to learn hardly anything. And this isn't right either.
Anonymous said…
Place the Republican Party into historical context. Since its early inception in the 1850's as an anti-slavery movement, THE key concept has been "freedom".

Limited government, staying out of YOUR FACE. Inexpensive government. SOUND money policy.

Women's RIGHTS (amazing today, but true).

Personal responsibility. Freedom of speech. DUE PROCESS. Separation of powers.

Do you see any dischord with the past in today's party? If not, you're blinded by short-sighted partisan crap.

Wipe it out of your eyes. Let's get our party back from the wackos.
Anonymous said…
The difference between PP and Stan is that PP believes Republicans should be in power, and Stan believes Republicans should govern.

I'm an avid reader of this blog - mainly because its the only place to get news on campaigns across the state without having to read 50 different weekly newspapers.

If there's one thing I've noticed, PP is all about winning political races. He calls the blog War College, for crying out loud.

It's a win or lose thing for PP, and in my opinion, that's what's wrong with politics.

We don't have any, or very few, public servants anymore. It's very rare to find a statesman.

I think Stan cares about doing what's right for humanity. And, broadly speaking, he has it right. Government shouldn't make personal decisons for people. Government shouldn't set school curriculum. Government shouldn't force religious beliefs on people.

And, whether they are willing to admit it or not, South Dakota Republicans are fusing their moral, religious and political beliefs, and abusing their majority position to take this state places it doesn't belong.

PP doesn't see it, though. He's too close, too caught up in the power to care about what's best for people.

Our state leaders need to care less about abortion and more about embracing wind energy. Our state leaders need to stop worrying about sex education, and they need to start worrying about funding education.

We need a return to civil service. And, I'm upset that the Democrats see it, and the Republicans don't. I'm upset that their arrogance gets the best of them.
Anonymous said…

Is it impossible to care about abortions and wind energy in your reality?
Anonymous said…

Those with your insight should establish at the very LEAST an online personna.

"Anonymous" belittles your ideas.

Please grow a pair.

-Another anonymous.
Anonymous said…
Been there said: “Stan wants to take "his" party back to When our State Party was run by a bunch of pro-abortion homosexual atheists and Jews.”

Say there “Been there said”, it was smart of you not to sign your real name. I know a number of elder Republican Statesman in South Dakota that would like to have a little discussion with you about that comment you made about them.

I have heard many times before that the “new generation of Republicans” in South Dakota have no respect for past Republican leaders and what they accomplished. I guess now I have finally seen it in writing.

I would be careful there young fellow because there are still a lot of us old farts left in South Dakota. We may go South for the Winter, but we always vote! We are true Republicans and don’t you ever forget that!
Anonymous said…
Is "Thou shalt not murder" religious? If so, how & why is it legislated?
Anonymous said…
Been There says "When our State Party was run by a bunch of pro-abortion homosexual atheists and Jews."

That sort of name-calling and accusations speaks volumes about the South Dakota Republican party's present problems.

I don't know where Been There has been, but it might be White Supremist rallies.

Swastikas, skinheads and white sheets - is that where South Dakota is headed?

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race

A strategic move by Sutton. Good for him, bad for Dems.