Foxes in henhouses

For reasons that have never been satisfactorily explained to me, the Internet and its blogs have changed the rules that once governed the publication of information about people who are not public figures.  A result of that change has been the South Dakota traffic ticket wars.

There has also been a change in the way the legacy media treats stories about other people's infractions of the law.  Back in those older times of journalism, about 30 years ago, the court records of political candidates would not have been much of a campaign issue for the political parties.  The news media would have taken care of that.  As people announced their candidacies, the media automatically checked their backgrounds, including court records, if any.  The major focus, however, was to verify the accuracy of the biographical information candidates cited in support of their candidacy.  Candidates were very careful about the claims they made to the press because they knew the facts would be checked.  And at that time getting caught in a misrepresentation or a significant omission would be deadly for a candidate.  The news-consuming public tended to dismiss anyone who was not truthful, because the age of spin had not yet inured the public to playing loose with the truth.  The public generally despised any public figure who got caught in a lie.

When the news media presented the background of a candidate, it routinely filled in any omissions that were significant and presented factual information in full context and relevance. It methodically deflated inflated resumes.   However, possible libel was regarded quite differently than it is today.  If people had some demerits in their background, news editors would decided on whether to include it in news presentations of the candidates' backgrounds based upon whether it was relevant to the office the candidate was seeking and whether it reflected significantly on moral character.

Publishing factual and documented information about a person could be considered libelous if it was done maliciously, that is to  say for the purpose of damaging the  person's reputation in the eyes of the public beyond simply informing the public.   While public figures cannot sue for libel as private citizens can, the media applied the same standard when reporting on public figures.  If a person had made past mistakes and paid for them, their positive efforts would be emphasized over any lapses in the past.  On the few occasions when fact-checking turned up negative information, the editors and the legal counsel would deliberate very thoroughly on whether or not to present that negative information.  The occasions I recall involved matters such as gross negligence, shop lifting, embezzlement, assault and battery, and dishonorable discharge from the military service. 

I do not recall that traffic tickets came up.  An old colleague in the news business reminded me of why.  The states he and I worked in had point systems.  When you got arrested for speeding, running stop signs or red lights, careless driving, etc., so many points were charged against your driving record.  When you received so many demerits in a certain amount of time, your driver's license was automatically revoked.

I do remember one candidate for a county office who had lost her license and had to be driven everywhere, but she won the election and got into a bit of a flap over whether it was appropriate to have a car and driver from the county motor pool drive her around on county business.  I do not think we ever had occasion to consider candidates who had tickets in the 15 to 20 range.  I don't recall exactly how that point system worked, but my former colleague and I both think that the system would have required the revocation of the licenses of habitual offenders, depending on the severity of the offenses.

I am not sure just how the current checking into the court records of South Dakota candidates was initiated.  As I said, at one time this would have been a routine function of the news media.  Keloland officially broke the story, and the magnitude of the number of arrests involved among the candidates makes it news.  The circumstances of how the story broke is also important, because they reveal how malicious forces are influencing the dissemination of information.

Whether media representatives initiated the investigation into court driving records or were tipped off by someone doing opposition research in the election campaign, a friend of the SDGOP who works with the records tipped off party members that the media was nosing around the court records.  In an attempt to head off negative impact on scofflaw Noem, South Dakota War College published that such a story was imminent and tried to paint it as the nefarious work of the Herseth Sandlin campaign.  This is viciously ironic in that War College will rush into publication with any kind of rumor or scurrilous accusation against a Democrat, whether it is factual or not, and do so gleefully with the sole intent of maligning the person and the party.  South Dakota War College has obsessively made personal attacks against Herseth Sandlin to the point that they have a pathological aspect. 

In addition the inane personal attacks of War College and the state Republicans executive director, whose petty and ridiculous sallies against SHS are faithfully published by War College--the traditional media won't touch them--the masters of the petty and craven have launched anonymous blogs against her.  They obviously hope to replicate what the character assassin blogs did to Tom Daschle.  At least when the Democratic Party launches a satiric blog on scofflaw Noem's driving record, it has the courage and integrity to announce itself as sponsor. 


The real story in such campaigns is not that a few fringe moral deviants immerse themselves in malicious scurrility==they've always been among us; the true significance is how many people listen to and believe them.  When so many people obsess over allegations that are so easily, provably untrue, such as Obama's birth record, his Muslim beliefs, his racist motives, the pundits ignore the significance of how easily and successfully the weak minded have been manipulated.  The GOP has mastered the technique of forming the undereducated, the intellectually ungifted, and the hate-prone into its base.  The problem is that the tea party movement has out-manipulated the parent party and the official leadership has lost control. 

The kind of campaigning reflected in the making the driving records of congressional staff members and relatives an issue is a national phenomena.  In South Dakota, the petty puerility is more unrestrained and pronounced.  Those fifth grade bullies who cornered kids out by the playground swing set and abused and bullied them are reliving what they regard as their moments of true consequence in the traffic ticket wars.

During the past five years, I have seen many friends leave the state.  One former colleague is a prime example.  For years, I knew he had purchased a property in the Black Hills and developed it into the home to which he would retire.  He anticipated a beautiful and peaceful place where he could do the work he loved.  He retired a few years ago and celebrated the move to the place he created.  A few months ago, I was asked to write an article about people in South Dakota who were doing artistic and creative work and I had occasion to contact this former colleague to verify some information.  I had trouble finding him, and finally he answered an e-mail, stating that he no longer lived in South Dakota.

This puzzled me, so when I talked to him about the information, I said I thought he had made the Black Hills his headquarters.  He said he had, but after living there for about a year, he and his wife found it anything but pleasant.  The geography and the landscape was beautiful and inspiring, he said, but the social and political attitudes of the people were toxic.  He said while there were good and fine people in the community, the dominant attitude was prejudiced, anti-intellectual, and malicious.  He said he and his wife, and his children when they came to visit, found the social climate toxic and unhealthy.  The attitudes he encountered made it impossible for him to reconcile the fact that he was living on stolen land, he said, and so they put the house up for sale and moved to another state where prejudice and hatred did not make up the social climate. 

There is much speculation about how energized the Republican factions are and how less-than-enthusiastic Democrats are.  From the people I know, I don't think the would-be analysts grasp the political implications.   Like my former colleague who joined many of my acquaintances in leaving the state, Democrats have seen hope turn into a realization of hopelessness.  Racial battles, McCarthy-like witch hunts, and raging hostilities dominate what purports to be political discussion.  As my former colleague said, these are not the people I want for neighbors.  There are big problems to be solved and higher  purposes to pursue, and sometimes one has to move to where the solutions and the pursuit are possible.

Leave the small-minded twits to their petty retaliations for having a scofflaw exposed.  They are the worst demons, not the better angels, of our natures. The Republicans have brought us to the age of defamation.  Let them live in it and let the more high-minded people move on.  America was a good idea, but right now the geography and mental climate do not seem to suit it.  But it's a big universe.

And the list goes on.

From the court listings in today's Aberdeen American News:

Jason Henry Lutz, 28, of 1108 N. Second St., DUI, first offense, fined $505 and sentenced to 60 days in jail with 58 days suspended; stop sign violation, charge dismissed.

Mr. Lutz is a staff member in Sen. Thune's Aberdeen office.  

Dear God, please save me from your followers.

A Facebook post by a young man in Denver celebrating his birthday today.

Coming home from Iraq

When one enters the military, one loses most of the freedoms and rights that civilians enjoy.  On some occasions, one has the right to dissent, but needs to be damned careful about what is said and how it is said.  Officers do not have the right to criticize or express low opinions of Congress, the President, or any other member of their command.  Gen. McChrystal is a case in point.  Enlisted men can bitch on their own time, but anything that is insubordinate or disloyal can subject them to severe discipline.

In battle situations, effective commanders draw upon the experience and knowledge of veterans in the field, but most battle orders come from the top down and the grunts just follow orders.  When ordered, they simply carry out the jobs they were trained to do.  And any obstinacy or delay in carrying them out will be seen as a failure to obey orders or insubordination.  No matter what a soldier may think of the way a task is set up, he or she is obligated to do it.  This is a necessary fact of military life.

The reason for rigorous discipline in the American military is rooted deep in the experience with the militia.  The militia was anything but well regulated.  Lincoln, for example, was elected as commander of his company of Illinois militia during the so-called Black Hawk War.  That honor was more a testament to his political savvy than to his aptitude as a military leader.  He did not learn those latter skills until he was President facing the Civil War.  That militia created one of the most embarrassing episodes in military history during an occasion named Stillman's Run.  The men were encamped one night during their pursuit of Black Hawk and were enjoying their ration of whiskey.  Their commander was named Stillman.   Some of Black Hawk's scouts approached with a white flag to ask for a meeting.  When some of the militia saw Indians approaching, they panicked and opened fire on them.  The small party that had been sent to accompany the messengers opened fire in return to protect the messengers, and the militia ran in all directions, many of them not stopping until they reached some white enclave where they could hide in basements and fortified barns.  They said they had been besieged by thousands of Indians and put all of northwestern Illinois in a state of panic.   The place in Illinois where this mass demonstration of cowardice and incompetence took place was called Stillman's Run.  Now it as been benignly renamed to Stillman's Valley.  However, that bit of history provides the reason why military actions are assigned to a professionally trained and maintained military, not a militia. 

A soldier's primary task is to carry out orders, and no time or circumstance is allowed to debate the wisdom or appropriateness of those orders.  In America, the military must depend on the people who order them into action to have determined whether the wars declared are just and valid, whether the battle plans are competently drawn, and whether the necessary equipment and support for the actions is provided.

During and after Viet Nam, soldiers were vilified for the actions they carried out.  The civilians who so abused and castigated them did not grasp that whatever the soldiers did they did under orders and would have received severe punishment if they disobeyed them.  There are always cases in war where some soldiers go too far and commit war crimes, such as My Lai in Viet Nam.  But even then, the ultimate responsibility falls--or at least it should--on those who are commanding the troops.

The troops are coming home from Iraq.  Many of us protested this war as the country was preparing for it.  At the time, we thought it was not justified and, as it draws down, are more convinced that American lives and resources were needlessly wasted.  But the troops went there and carried out the mission set for them.  The problem is that when one criticizes the war on Iraq, some people say we are not supporting our troops.  We support our troops.  Even though we thought this war served no  purpose and would only worsen the situation in that area of the world, we provided them the equipment and support they needed, hoping that the battle would come to a quick conclusion.  It didn't.

The troops carried out their orders magnificently, for the most part.  Even though many of us think the war was irrational because Iraq was not a threat to us, the troops served under that pretext and deserve all the respect and honors we can bestow on them. 

Any anger and resentment should be reserved for those who propelled us into the war and so botched the whole affair. 

Try a little empathy

The Washington Post's Chris Cilizza has picked up on a Herseth Sandlin ad:

The Wisconsin truck bomb: forty years later, the same old thing

Monday, August 24, 1970,  3:42 a.m.

I was trying to sleep in my cabin in a pine forest along the Wisconsin River between Spring Green and Lone Rock.  This is where I went on most weekends to get away from weekday worries, devote attention to practicing forestry and enjoying nature, and try to find some peace in a very turbulent time to write and work.  We were spending an extended weekend in the forest before I returned to my home and got ready for college classes to start up.  At that time, college campuses were not peaceful places. Protests against the Viet Nam War made it hard to keep students and many faculty focused on course work.  In May of that year, four students were killed and another nine wounded by National Guard arms fire at Kent State.  The pine forest was where I  came to work, but the distractions were increasingly difficult to get away from. 

I heard a very distant rumble, like thunder that morning.  For some reason it was a disconcerting sound, because it seemed to break all the patterns of nature.  The pine lands are in Sauk County, the Sand County of Aldo Leopold's  Sand County Almanac.  Storms are fairly frequent and welcome because they were quickly absorbed by the sandy soil and helped the pine trees to thrive.  But this early morning, there  were no follow-up rumbles, and as the sun came up, it shined on a blue, clear day.

Sterling Hall where the bomb was planted.

During breakfast that morning, a radio newscast informed us that Sterling Hall at the University of Wisconsin, forty miles away, had been blown up by a Ford van packed with a fertilizer-diesel fuel bomb.  One man, a post- doctoral researcher, who was working in the physics lab had been killed.  I felt a kinship with the man because we were both in Wisconsin doing academic work, but I was able to do mine from a briefcase and a portable typewriter, while he was in the lab that morning trying to finish up some experiments before he left on a late summer vacation. I was doing what he was preparing to do.

Although I knew many people at the University of Wisconsin, I did not know this man, but I could relate to the all night work sessions as one tried to get caught up and arrange to spend time with one's family.  I also knew the kind of work he was doing.  At the University of Iowa, I knew many of the graduate students and researchers in physics.  When I stopped for a brew, it was usually at the place near the physics building where they hung out, and a man who commuted with me for a time was pursuing graduate work in physics.  I stopped by the physics building to pick him up and often chatted with the students and professors there.  I understood the intensity and nature of the work they were doing.  When this man was killed at the University of Wisconsin,  I felt a strong sense of loss to his profession and to his family.

But there is another aspect of the Viet Nam War protests that this incident reveals.  That is how obscenely stupid some of the protests were.  This was the most obscene and stupid.  I, like many people in the U.S., was uncertain about the Viet Nam, until the Gulf of Tonkin resolution that got us into the war was revealed as an utter fraud. Sen. Wayne Morse was opposed to the resolution saying that the incidents that were the basis for declaring war never happened, and that the reports from navy commanders whose ships were involved said as much.  As time went on, academics were conducting teach-ins and journalists were probing documents which indicated that the U.S. really had no military business in Viet Nam.  The opposition to the war caused Lyndon Johnson to withdraw as a candidate for president, and the turmoil mounted.  When Daniel Ellsberg leaked Pentagon papers to the New York Times in 1971, after the U. of Wisconsin bombing, the lying and deceit that got us and kept us in the war in Viet Nam was documented.

The outrage was justified. We had been deceived and betrayed.  And young men were being drafted and fed into the killing machine that eventually took more than 50,000 American lives for no valid reason.  What is worse is that returning veterans were despised and publicly abused for serving as required by law.  Eventually, the veterans were acknowledged and honored.  But Viet Nam left a stain on the country that is seldom acknowledged, except among veterans when they are with each other.  That stain is a distrust of the democratic processes driven by a civilian population that could be so duped and blithe about sending so many to their deaths. 

That was a big factor in making the war protests so stupid.  The protesters were abusing the wrong people.  And that is what made the U. of Wisconsin bombing so obscene.  The target was an Army laboratory in Sterling Hall.  The bombers made no distinction between the people who contrived the war and the people ordered under penalty of law to carry it out.  And they obviously gave no thought to the fact that totally innocent people could be in that building.

Of the four bombers, three were eventually caught, tried, and convicted.  One of those has died.  And a fourth has never been caught.  These people are of the same mentality as those who plant truck bombs in Iraq or crash airplanes into New York skyscrapers and Pentagon offices.  They do not bring peace.  They are a major part of the war.  They keep wars going. 

They were obscenely stupid.  And so here we are again in another war contrived on  false information and "supporting" those who die in it. 

In the past 40 years since that truck bomb ripped through an August morning at the University of Wisconsin, we have learned nothing.  And young people are being sent to die, not for our freedom, but to satisfy the need for blood of those who want war, no matter how unjustified. 

Elections decided on gams

Which set will you vote for?

That's Noem on the left and Herseth Sandlin on the right.  If you're really undecided this ought to help.  If you're into reading leg language.  I think.

This photo gives me some pangs.  It was shot by a Melini Mara on assignment with the Washington Post, and is part of the photo gallery from the Mama Grizzly-Palinesque story that is giving bloggers tizzies and twiddles.  An associate who knows I once edited news photos asked me what it was supposed to accomplish.. I said if a photographer turned this into me or any editors I know, we would have reprimanded him for wasting time and film on trying to get an ass shot, which we would not print.  I don't know if we would have printed a gam shot.     Beyond the leg language angle,  I don't know what the picture is demonstrating.

Another photo, however, was very telling.

Yep, say a couple of state legislators who have cloak room lockers near Noem's.  She never issues a good morning, but is always peering down her nasal apparatus in that manner. 

Now this shot might help.