Friday, June 13, 2003

The following is the text of an email sent by Tom Daschle to NARAL supporters on 10/29/02. I sent this to Dave Kranz on 10/31/02. He did not respond to it, nor have I seen him report on this, even though he had the opportunity to do so in his 6/12/03 report on the Dr. Bottum speech that I covered in a post yesterday. Here is the text of the Daschle email:

Date:October 29, 2002
To: NARAL Supporter
From: Tom Daschle, U.S. Senate Majority Leader

Rarely has so much been at stake for a woman’s right to choose in a U.S. Senate Election. If you and thousands of other pro-choice Americans like you don’t act today by giving to NARAL’s Save the Senate Campaign, the U.S. Senate could fall into anti-choice hands on November 6th - the first day after the election.

Anti-choice forces are organizing and mobilizing right now to defeat champions of reproductive rights, champions like Missouri Senator Jean Carnahan. The U.S. Senate’s pro-choice leadership cannot afford to lose an ally like Senator Carnahan. Please help now by making a donation to NARAL. Click here.

Right now, this - and several other key elections for pro-choice candidates – is too close to call, and pollsters say there is a strong chance we won’t know who will retain Senate leadership until late on Election Night. I’ve seen the difference NARAL can make, and I believe you and countless others can help Senator Carnahan and other pro-choice candidates facing tough races. If you make an urgent donation to NARAL’s Save the Senate Campaign today, it will make an important difference for these candidates. Just click here to make an immediate impact.

The Republican leadership in the U.S. Senate has said they plan to call for the immediate swearing-in of staunchly anti-choice Jim Talent (R) if he defeats Senator Carnahan (D) - even if Democrats maintain their majority after the election. So, we must succeed in getting out the pro-choice vote in this and other key states where pro-choice leadership could be lost.

Because Jean Carnahan is serving as an appointed Senator in place of her late husband, Mel Carnahan, Missouri’s current governor could be forced to immediately swear in Jim Talent, a strongly anti-choice conservative. This blatantly political maneuver would end our ability to protect a woman’s right to choose from harmful legislation.

As the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate, I’ve stood up for a woman’s right to choose, and the pro-choice leadership of the Senate has made a difference by safeguarding women’s rights from the anti-choice agenda of the Bush administration. Please give to NARAL today, so NARAL can mobilize the resources to get out the pro-choice vote on Election Day.

In 2000, NARAL helped defeat John Ashcroft in his bid for re-election to the U.S. Senate thus putting Jean Carnahan in the Senate, and NARAL is even more committed to maintaining pro-choice leadership of the Senate this year. But none of us can do it without your help. Please click here now to give to NARAL.

And, if you haven't already, please tell your friends and colleagues how they can help keep pro-choice leadership in the Senate - click here.


Senator Tom Daschle
Majority Leader
U.S. Senate

Don't forget to vote on Tuesday, November 5th!

If you would like to unsubscribe from NARAL's Choice Action Network, or update your account settings, please click here.

Thursday, June 12, 2003

Daschle and the abortion issue
Last night I attended a South Dakota College Republicans event that hosted speaker Dr. Joseph Bottum in Sioux Falls. He wrote the Weekly Standard column on 4/17/2003 titled “Tom Daschle’s Duty to Be Morally Coherent”.

I saw David Kranz there, and his report was in today’s Argus Leader. In that report, Kranz included this point from Dan Pfeiffer:

But Pfeiffer said it is unfortunate the Republicans are using the subject of religious beliefs for political gain.

I was wondering why Kranz didn’t ask the next obvious question. If Democrats believe abortion is a religious and not a political issue, then why did Daschle participate in NARAL fundraising (Bottum referred to this as a public scandal), why did Daschle send an email in late October 2002 to NARAL supporters asking them to vote for Democrats (I sent a copy of that email to Kranz back then), and why did nine Democratic Presidential candidates attend a recent NARAL event?

What would Pfieffer’s spin been on that question?

Kranz also didn’t cover Bottum’s mention of a document concerning nuns that was distributed during Daschle’s 1978 Congressional Campaign. I found that interesting because I went through all of the 1978 Mitchell Daily Republic back issues, when David Kranz was the Managing Editor, and did not find any reports on the nun document. But I did find this in a 11/4/78 Kranz column:

It is clearly evident when a campaign changes tactics as quickly as Thorsness’ did a month ago, it was a demonstration of desperation. They dumped their tax cut strategy and went to the right to work and abortion issues that have caused the campaign to be painted bright negative.

If I find anything more on the nun document and the abortion issue back in 1978, I will bring it forward. I doubt David Kranz wants to talk about it, at least he didn’t in today’s Argus Leader report that was centered around the abortion issue.

Wednesday, June 11, 2003

Sibby Online started something
The post yesterday regarding Tom Daschle releasing his tax returns in 1982 caught the attention of South Dakota Politics who tied it to a NY Post story where Daschle is currently not in favor of releasing his tax return. This created another bombshell.

Also Jeff Gannon of Talon News including this item his his report today.
I have alot to say about all this, but I have a previous engagement this evening and have to run. Will be back tomorrow with more.

Tuesday, June 10, 2003

Daschle released his income tax return in 1982
In 1982, South Dakota lost a congressional seat, so there was a showdown for the one remaining between incumbents Tom Daschle and Clint Roberts. On 10/1/1982, while David Kranz was the managing editor of the Mitchell Daily Republic, an opinion piece (Show us your taxes) was published that included this:

A few weeks ago income tax returns for Tom Daschle were released.
It was accorded a couple of paragraphs in most newspapers.
But when Clint Roberts was asked about his, he responded that it was nobody's business.
We understand the concerns of public figures when it comes to releasing financial status, but we believe it is the obligation of a candidate to produce the financial health as represented in his federal income tax returns.

We should expect the Senator to do the same now. Daschle, show us the money!
She's back!!!
No, I don't mean Hillary. I am talking about Linda Daschle. As the Argus Leader prints more anti-Thune letters regarding his lobbying position, I have found elsewhere reports on Linda Daschle's lobbying efforts. This was pointed out in a Jeff Gannon report, of Talon News, today:

The Argus Leader has rarely, if ever, written an article about the senator's lobbyist spouse. Her firm's client list boasts American Airlines and Boeing, both of whom have been recipients of billions in loan guarantees and government contracts. Decisions regarding these government actions are influenced by her husband, but any suggestion of the obvious conflict of interest has never appeared in the Argus Leader. Neither has it mentioned the pair's refusal to release their income tax returns.

Speaking of Boeing, the New York Times also reports today on a lease agreement by the Air Force on 100 Boeing 767's:

Boeing has hired the lobbyist Linda Daschle, the wife of the Senate minority leader, Tom Daschle, a Democrat, to represent the company.

In letters being sent today to the chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and Armed Services Committees, the Boeing lease arrangement is decried as "gold plated" and as a "profligate waste of taxpayer dollars" that was awarded on a noncompetitive basis.

Imagine if the lobbyist was John Thune, instead of Linda Daschle. Then this would be a Argus Leader front-page above the fold story with David Kranz adding some quotes from Steve Hildebrand.

Instead Randell Beck uses every excuse in the book to avoid reporting on Linda Daschle ... as his paper is being out done by the scandel plagued New York Times.

Monday, June 09, 2003

Time for Truth in South Dakota Politics
On 5/5/03, the Argus Leader ran an editorial criticizing the negative tone of the 2004 campaign by singling out Paul Erickson for name-calling. Now that the Washington Post has reported on Steve Hildebrand’s plan to personally attack Tom Daschle opponents, will the Argus Leader editorial board give the same treatment to Hildebrand?

The editorial made this demand:

“Nothing could stop this runaway train of a campaign from starting too early. But we must start it off right. With attention to issues, not personal attacks. With attention to records, not name-calling.”

I say what?!!! On 9/24/02, David Kranz covered the NRA endorsement by including name-calling in the form of claims by Tony Dean and Clark Butler that the NRA members were lying about Tim Johnson's lack of second amendment support. I know I have made this point before, but I can’t get this off my mind. The NRA endorsement was largely based on voting records, including the two Johnson made on 5/17/2000. Not only did he vote against the 2nd Amendment with vote 104, but just minutes earlier, he voted in support of the Million Mom March and its organizers and supporters. The organizer was Handgun Control Inc. The emcee was Rosie O’Donnell. Why didn’t Kranz bring up these details?

The answer is … it would have discredited Tony Dean. Tony Dean was a major part of the strategy of the Tim Johnson campaign. He was co-chairman of the turncoat Republicans. He was also charged with shutting down those who would bring up the aforementioned voting record. He did this by calling the NRA liars and then turned the gun issue into an environmental issue.

With Thune losing by only 524 votes, the bias of Kranz may have cost Thune the election. Kranz even admitted the importance of Tony Dean on 12/29/02(see Democrat future?) and 2/2/03. What he did not mention was for a guy who hunts and owns alot of guns, he doesn't know much about the second amendment. For him to neutralize the NRA, he needed help from ... David Kranz. Will the Argus Leader allow this conduct to continue in the 2004 Senate race?

Kranz had to know that Johnson losing the 2002 Senate race would mean that his long time college friend, Tom Daschle probably would lose his Senate Majority Leader position. Randell Beck failed to enforce his campaign pledge by not making his reporter clear up the accusations of lies by bringing forward to the people of South Dakota ... the voting records. At the first of this year, I confronted Randell Beck with this issue and he treated me the same way Jeff Gannon of Talon News is now being treated … by little to no response.

Noel Hamiel, the Publisher of the Mitchell Daily Republic, made a point in his latest column that what’s relevant is whether Kranz is doing a good job today. If Mr. Hamiel will take the time to understand this post, he should see David Kranz was riding shotgun on the stagecoach that was rolling to a Tim Johnson 2002 Senate race victory with Tony Dean on board. If he looks hard enough, he should see Kranz’s gun is still smoking.

It is now time for those of us inside South Dakota to disarm this guy. He must not get away with implementing the Washington DC Democrats' strategies of destruction of those who voice their dissent to the leftward policies of Tom Daschle. We must do so for the sake of a healthy South Dakota Politics in 2004.

Sunday, June 08, 2003

Bias on Bias
Finally, the Argus Leader published a letter I wrote on 5/4/03. The original text sent was:

Shame on David Kranz for spinning the efforts of the Daschle Accountability Project in presenting the truth of Daschle’s record into a “anti-Daschle media blitz” with his 4/28/03 report. The Associated Press picked up Kranz’s report and spread his propaganda to the Mitchell paper as an AP news report. This is the power of the left-wing press in action.

Back on 4/6/03 this paper censored letters on a topic, which just happens to be embarrassing to Democrat Daschle.

In the mean time the anti-Thune campaign is running hot and heavy in the Argus editorial page. Example was the 4/22/02 letter of Democrat operative Geoff C. Wetrosky, who may be on Argus reporter Jon Walker’s speed dial. His anti-capitalism spin attacked Thune for lobbying for drug companies.

Shouldn’t South Dakotans know that Tom Daschles’s wife, Linda, lobbied for Schering-Plough? How about Linda’s lobby efforts for big airlines, with Northwest Airlines being Tom Daschles 2nd biggest campaign donor in 1998? Why can’t Daschle be held accountable? Because the truth about Daschle is labeled negative attacks by the left?

On 4/29/03 the Daschle campaign sent out an email to initiate a full-scale attack on Paul Erickson and Robert Regier, the leaders of the Daschle Accountability Project. David Kranz joined the attack with his 5/4/03 column.

Note the line,who may be on Argus reporter Jon Walker’s speed dial, was omitted. Walker reported on the David Horowitz speech at Augustana College in April 2003. Walker called Wetrosky after the speech for comments intended to refute Horowitz's point that there was a left bias at institutes of higher education.

Left bias of a newspaper protecting the left bias at schools?

Kranz background should be disclosed
Sorry for the lack of posts lately, but I was out of town spending some quality time with my wife. Today was catch-up day, including reading about me in the Mitchell Daily Republic. On Saturday Noel Hamiel, the publisher, ran a column regarding the recent reports on the background of Argus Leader reporter David Kranz. The column included this comment:

“At the same time, newspapers should have no reservations about their reporters’ backgrounds being made public. Newspapers need to be accountable. It’s about watching the watchdog.”

Hamiel also pointed out the role of the reader:

“Readers are the best judge of a newspaper’s fairness and a reporter’s ability to tell a story in a balanced way. Over time, if readers discern that a reporter slants a story, plays fast and loose with the facts, or always seems to approach issues from a certain political perspective, they should complain to the editor, stop reading that reporter’s stories, or cancel their subscription.”

I have heard numerous complaints about David Kranz’s bias, and I witnessed it first hand when I participated in the NRA endorsement of John Thune that was held in Sioux Falls on 9/23/02. David Kranz even included me in his 9/24/02 Argus Leader story. I was sandwiched in between accusation of being a liar at the front-end by Tony Dean and backed up with more accusations of lies at the end of the report by Clark Butler.

My efforts of defending those accusations with the voting record of Tim Johnson was ignored by David Kranz. This happened despite Randell Beck’s campaign pledge that voting records will rule the Argus Leader reporting, not just what people claimed. David Kranz failed to meet that standard.

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