<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Saturday, May 31, 2003

The David Kranz Story Part Four
We are now in 1978. The Mitchell Daily Republic ran an editorial (remember Dave Kranz is the Managing Editor) on 2/8/78 with included this regarding the upcoming Democratic primary:

"In the first district, Democrats are content to let Tom Daschle, the popular young door-to-door campaigner go virtually unchallenged. He has been held up by some in the party to be the Democrats’ best hope for ’78.”

By 5/23/78, the Mitchell Paper admitted that Daschle did have a stiff challenge by a former Congressman, Frank Denholm. They reported a poll that showed Daschle ahead 53 to 42 and commented:

“Daschle has gone to the people personally to prove his worth in a race against a more prominent name in Denholm, a former Congressman. Daschle’s hard work is paying dividends for him because he had demonstrated an effort to listen to the people and provide Democrats with a new effective voice in the party.”

Then in his 5/27/78 column Dave Kranz couldn’t help to dig up dirt on Daschle’s opponent:

“Incidentally, Daschle's congressional opponent Frank Denholm has a bit of explaining to do after his statement about running only against Leo Thorsness got him in hot water this week.

Some Democrats reacted sharply to the Denholm insinuation especially after the Sioux Falls Argus Leader carried the story a bit further. The Argus explained that Denholm has been putting down Daschle on the campaign trail by calling his opponent ‘young Tom’, ‘Tommy’, or saying Tom ‘is a fine boy.’ Asked by the media if he was being condescending of Daschle. Denholm replied, ‘I think Tom’s a fine boy.’ The remark has done little to help Denholm prove he is worthy of restoration to the seat he once held in the U.S. Congress.”


After Daschle defeated Denholm a Mitchell Daily Republic editorial on 6/8/78 provided a 1978 primary assessment that included:

“Tom Daschle was the ‘David’ who slew the ‘Goliath’ in the primary. The Aberdeen native provided the voters with a clear demonstration of desire to work for the victory by knocking on doors. Frank Denholm carried the overwhelming name recognition in the race, but the Daschle campaign spirit was probably the most lively in any of the campaigns. His staff was one of the best organized staffs in the campaign that ‘money could not buy’. He ran a positive race and projected the advantage of a new face in Democratic politics, a factor that caused him to gain votes from Denholm. Daschle was able to prove positive to the electorate that he was a viable candidate that could cause voters to overlook the advantages of Denholm as a former congressman.”

Dave Kranz obviously has gotten polished at glorifying his college buddy.

Friday, May 30, 2003

What a little spark of truth can do
My "The David Kranz Story Part Three" post created a new revelation on South Dakota Politics.(See the "BOMBSHELL" post). Things will never be the same Inside South Dakota. Somebody at that web site took the seed of truth I planted and grew a huge tree. Time for reflection. More posts tomorrow.

Thursday, May 29, 2003

The bias at the Argus Leader
When Randell Beck, the Executive Editor of the Argus Leader, appeared on yesterday’s (5/28/03) Greg Belfrage's Straight Talk show, the issue of Argus Leader bias came up. During that discussion, Randell Beck claimed there was a “fire wall” between the opinion page and the news section. This prevents their candidate endorsements from affecting the political news coverage.

I contend that in regard to Tom Daschle, the bias is blazing so strongly on both sides of the "fire wall”, the “fire wall” is immaterial.

First my argument is about the opinion page. During the first week of March, 2000, I came home at noon to find my first Argus Leader letter to the editor returned rejected due to violating the Argus Leader exclusive policy. I immediately called Shirley Ragsdale, the Editor at the time, and asked how she made her decision on a letter that was in response to one of her own columns. She told me that Daschle’s office informed her that my letter was similar to letters in other papers. I almost dropped the phone. I started to make a rebuttal, but she said I could rewrite it so that it was exclusive and wanted to get back to her chicken salad. I apologized for interrupting her lunch and said good bye.

Instead of rewriting the letter, I wrote another that truly was exclusive. The first paragraph said,

Recently you rejected my letter regarding Tom Daschle’s effort to give money to special interest of Mitchell, SD instead of paying down the National debt because it was not exclusive to the Argus Leader. Soon after you informed me that it was Tom Daschle’s office who blew the whistle on me, I wondered why our representative to the Federal government would aid the Argus Leader in restricting my First Amendment right to free speech"

That did not see Argus Leader ink neither.

Second, my argument for the Daschle bias in the news section can be stated in two words, David Kranz. I will rely on my “The David Kranz Story Part 3” post as just one reason. This is just one piece of evidence. There is much more. So much more that I am afraid I might fill up the cyberspace if I posted it all.

Please don’t get me wrong, I have meant David Kranz on several occasions, and I find him to be a pleasure to be around. I also see the passion he has for what he does and I believe him to be a talented writer. But the problem for Randell Beck is that Kranz can only fairly cover the side he feels passionate about. That side would be the left.

I have recommended to Randell Beck to find a conservative writer as passionate and talented as Kranz. That should not be difficult. But then let Kranz to continue writing, but with full disclosure of his Democratic background. Let both writers do their thing.

If Randell Beck doesn’t do something, the Argus Leader may be viewed as the New York Times of South Dakota.
The David Kranz Story Part Three
In a 9/4/1976 column in the Mitchell Daily Republic, Dave Kranz announced:


More familiar faces are returning from other parts of the country to South Dakota. Tom and Laurie Daschle, aides to Sen. James Abourezk in Washington have been reassigned to Abourezk’s Sioux Falls office.

Daschle is formerly of Aberdeen and his wife is the daughter of PUC commissioner Mrs. Norma Klinkel. We went to college with Daschle at South Dakota State University and worked together on a mock political convention.

Daschle masterminded one of the most successful participation events by students of an unrequired nature when he headed the political science department’s convention project. Well over 650 students got involved in the event which was patterned after the Democratic convention that year because of the general interest.

I remember our tireless search to find a renowned public speaker to address the convention such as McGovern, McCarthy, Humphrey or some other prominent Democrat. With no takers, we finally found a popular young state senator from Salem to address the group. His name was Richard Kneip.


With his long time college buddy running for Senate in 2004, should David Kranz really be considered objective enough to be the main political reporter for the Argus Leader?

My answer to this in my next post.

Wednesday, May 28, 2003

The David Kranz Story Part Two
In Part One I mention Dave Kranz’s 7/24/76 column, a comparison of the 1976 National Democratic Convention to the Oscar Awards. He gave McGovern the Elmers Glue Award for the speech he gave asking for the Democrats to unite. Kranz blamed the 1972 McGovern loss on the lack of unity in the Democrat Party.

But today Donald Lambro reported in the Washington Times that McGovern may have been the dividing force in the Democrat Party in 1972. In part Lambro said:


"A party divided
But the Democrats' internal debate over the role and influence of its left-wing special-interest constituencies — labor, environmentalists, feminists and social-welfare activists — shows no sign of ending any time soon. In fact, it has all the earmarks of turning into a civil war that threatens party unity.
In a memo to Democratic leaders last week, Mr. From and DLC President Bruce Reed attacked the party's liberal, activist base, which they said was "defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist, interest-group liberalism at home."
"That's the wing that lost 49 states in two elections [in 1972 and 1984], and transformed Democrats from a strong national party into a much weaker regional one," they said.

…But the DLC leveled its fiercest attack against Mr. Dean, whom the Almanac of American Politics said was one of the most liberal governors in the country. He is right out of "the McGovern-Mondale wing" of the party that has led Democrats down the road to defeat too many times, the memo said."

Perhaps Kranz partisan Democrat slant clouded his view of things in 1976.

By August 1976, Kranz was giving awards for the GOP National Convention in Kansas City. Instead of Oscar type awards he gave the Democrat Convention, these were much more negative. For example, the Rudeness Award went to Betty Ford and Nancy Reagon.

Remember in Part One when Kranz refers to Carter’s potential running mate as a “good liberal”? In a 8/7/76 column his comment regarded the possible Ford running mate, Gov. Connally was:


“No wonder the Democrats recently labeled Ford ‘not so intelligent’.”

On 8/18/76, after the GOP nominated Ford, Kranz said Ford was, “lacking the glittering image people seek in their presidential candidate”. We also mentioned Ford’s pardon of Nixon and the “sagging economy”. Just below this edtorial was a Jack Anderson column titled:

“Did Ford woo GOP delegates illegally?”

Stay tuned, this is only August 1976.

Tuesday, May 27, 2003

The David Kranz Story Part One
On 7/2/76, The Mitchell Daily Republic began showing Dave Kranz as the Managing Editor. Then on the front page of the 7/6/76 issue, there was a picture of a 30 year old Dave Kranz with a full head of hair that went past the bottom of his ears. He was the City Editor of the Austin (Minn.) Daily Herald since April, 1972 where he wrote weekly columns. He began as a city government reporter in October, 1968. The story also mentioned being from Watertown, SD and graduating from South Dakota State University with as BS in Journalism. (No pun intended)

On 7/10/76 he wrote his first Mitchell column thanking friends for helping with his move, including “old friend” Steve Hemingson of KELOLAND. They worked together in Austin.

His 7/24/76 column was a comparison of the 1976 National Democratic Convention to the Oscar Awards. He gave McGovern the Elmers Glue Award for the speech he gave asking for the Democrats to unite. Kranz blamed the 1972 McGovern loss on the lack of unity in the Democrat Party. On 7/7/76 he correctly predicted Mondale, who Kranz described as a “good liberal”, to be Carter’s running mate.

It was obvious that Kranz’s Mitchell beginnings were not as a political reporter, but as a political activist for the left.

I will continue to post my research on history through the eyes of Dave Kranz. When I finish, I wonder if the Argus Leader will let me have as much ink on David Kranz as they gave David Kranz on Paul Erickson.
The Daschles' Dirty Little Secrets
On 12/23/02 Judicial Watch released the Dirty Dozen, The 12 Most Corrupt Politicians, Lobbyists and Business Leaders of 2002.

Guess who came in at number 10? Answer:

#10 Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD): Judicial Watch has filed FOIA requests to uncover Sen. Daschle and his wife Linda’s role in the selection of faulty bomb detecting equipment for the airline industry.

Here is more about Linda on this scandel:

Not only have reporters revealed Daschle's role in the airline bailout negotiations, but they have brought to light a provision in the 2000 transportation budget that required the FAA to buy baggage-scanners from one of Daschle's clients, L-3 International. The DOT's inspector general has found the L-3 equipment to be substandard, yet the FAA now has no choice but to purchase one of L-3's scanners for every one it buys from an L-3 competitor. The L-3 machines have been so bad that the one at the Dallas-Ft. Worth airport leaked radiation, and most others purchased by the FAA have not been installed. The inspector general told Congress that the FAA's requirement to buy L-3's machines is one reason that DOT will not be able to meet the new mandate to screen all luggage for bombs for many years.

It maybe sad but true that the Daschles have been corrupted by number one and number two of the dirty dozen:

1 Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY): Like a modern-day Gollum, Mrs. Clinton’s quest for political brass rings frequently descends into evil, from Whitewater to FBI Filegate to Travelgate to taking over 2 million dollars in illegal contributions for her Senate campaign from Judicial Watch client Peter Paul. Judicial Watch’s quest is to throw her ring into the judicial “Cracks of Doom.”

#2 Bill Clinton (D): The “King of Corruption” for eight tawdry years, Judicial Watch looks forward to taking Mr. Clinton’s testimony under oath in the Dolly Kyle Browning vs. Clinton case and many others.
Argus Leader Update
On 5/25/03 I posted the observation that two pro-Daschle letters ran back to back in the Saturday and Sunday issues of the Argus Leader. This is a clear violation of the Argus Leader policy. I remember at least three of my letters rejected because they were too soon (only one letter per per month) (30 day period). In fact this happened to a letter I sent in early May.

As promised, I emailed Randell Beck and Chuck Baldwin about this issue on Monday. Early Tuesday morning the Chuck Baldwin email was opened, but no response. I also got no response from Randell Beck, who said the readers will hold the Argus Leader to a high standard in this column.

How can we hold the Argus Leader to a high standard if the editors don't respond to emails? How can Randell Beck respond when he deletes emails without even opening them? Did he mean what he said in the above mentioned column? I don't think so!

This paper has earned my distrust. Searchers for for the truth must beware what they read in the Argus Leader.

Sunday, May 25, 2003

Today’s (5/25/03) front page of the Argus Leader has a David Kranz report on Paul Erickson. Kranz has been pounding Erickson lately for the humorous so-called anti-Daschle ads that have yet to appear.

Just yesterday Kranz deleted an email (without opening it) I sent on 5/12/02 titled ‘Humorous anti-Bush Campaign”. It was about Disney’s sponsorship of Michael Moore’s next film that explains how Osama bin Laden was enriched by the Bush family. Michael Moore has gained a reputation for turning so-called documentaries into fictional left-wing propaganda. These would be humorous if they were classified correctly by the Hollywood left-wing elitists. Randell Beck also deleted this email without opening it on 5/16/03. So why the big deal on Erickson. Answer, the truth will hurt Daschle, whereas lies about Bush will help Daschle.

Ironically, the Argus Leader charged Erickson on 5/5/03 for “…steps along a decidedly low row.” They also said, “… Erickson appears eager to enter the fray with a low and negative message.” They claimed the 2004 campaign should be “With attention to records, not name-calling.

I remember on 9/23/02, the day the NRA came to Sioux Falls to endorse John Thune. An endorsement that was based primarily on 2nd Amendment voting ‘records’. Instead of presenting that record, David Kranz instead reported Tony Dean’s and Clark Butler’s accusations that the NRA were liars. Since the end of the November election, Kranz twice has credited Tony Dean for neutralizing the NRA. If this was true, then it was accomplished with 'name-calling' and not discussion on the voting 'record' of Tim Johnson. This could not have been done without the help of David Kranz. The Argus Leader has not practiced what it preaches.

In today’s report on Erickson, David Kranz, again, did not present the issues that answered “Why is this man after Daschle?”, Instead he presented has much dirt (although there wasn’t all that much) as he could on Erickson’s personal past, so that the left had as much mud to sling as possible. I wonder if Kranz lives in a glass house?

In conclusion it should be pointed out that the above mentioned 5/5/03 Argus Leader editorial was a typical left-wing piece of hypocrisy. Instead of Erickson setting a negative tone to the 2004 campaign, as the Argus Leader charged, it is the Argus Leader and specifically David Kranz who is setting that standard.



Two pro-Daschle letters from Megan Dahle and Roger Andal that appeared in today's Argus Leader also appeared in yesterday's Argus (but with different titles). This irregularity will be pointed out to editor Chuck Baldwin and Executive Editor Randell Beck. You see, the policy of the Aruges Leader is only one letter per 30 days. Their response, if any, will be posted.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?