I found this image of Christine Erickson interesting. A sitting Sioux Falls city councilor essentially endorsing a Senatorial candidate. While I don’t have a problem with her endorsing a candidate (even if he is a crooked snake) I question why she would want to emcee the event and put herself in that spotlight?

The one thing I have learned about following SF city government, whether you are Republican or Democrat it is always best to portray yourself as a non-partisan in the capacity of your service to the city.

It will be interesting to see how residents portray Erickson now and the decisions she makes as a councilor, no matter if Rounds wins or loses. Some will ask,

“Is Christine a puppet for the SD GOP? Will she treat Sioux Falls Democratic business owners the same as Republican business owners? Will her decisions be based on ‘Big Republican Government’ or common sense. Does she approve of how Rounds has handled EB-5?”

These are important things to think about when you are serving on a non-partisan body of government while out publicly endorsing party members. There is NO fine line. Endorse away, but stay out of the spotlight.

Not sure about you. But it has changed my opinion about her.

SCREENSHOT: Dakotawarcollege.com

erickon-emcee

32 Thoughts on “What are your thoughts?

  1. SF Resident on October 19, 2014 at 1:18 pm said:

    She was elected to be a NON-PARTISAN City Councilor……..AND, she seems clueless that acting as emcee at a major SD GOP Mike Rounds event would even be a problem!!!!!!

    I think this speaks to her political naivety…….

  2. matt johnson on October 19, 2014 at 4:56 pm said:

    I believe two things can be said that are pertinent to this post scott Mayor Mike was an obama delegate- can he (mmm) be fair to republicans it appears that only one business has really benefited from the Main ave road diet Parkers Resteraunt owned by Rick Weiland

  3. True. But as far as I can tell Huether has not made ANY public appearances endorsing ANY democrat in the race.

  4. She wants to be seen .She may just feel she doesn;t care about Cronism at its best With Duck Mike Rounds

  5. speaking of the road diet, it makes it pretty hard to back out of one of those spots, when you can’t tell if a car is coming until it is right on your ass.

  6. southern exposure on October 19, 2014 at 9:42 pm said:

    As far as his lack of public appearances… Can you blame him ?

  7. Yup… DL keeps saying he’s an indy. You calling someone else a political hack,crony,partisan is the pot calling the kettle black.

    How’s that partisan mentality working out for you?

  8. matt johnson on October 20, 2014 at 7:11 am said:

    Isn’t the democratic natl convention a public appearance? or can we only talk about the current election cycle?

  9. Did I miss something here? Erickson was the emcee. I would be surprised if she didn’t support Rounds, given her known party affiliation, but when was the endorsement made?

  10. Mark, I think agreeing to share a stage and Emcee the event pretty much tells us who she is endorsing. Were you being sarcastic?

    Matt, yes Huether attended that event, but he never publicly endorsed Obama. He also hasn’t endorsed one single candidate publicly or even attended the Democratic Convention. Besides, I don’t think there is anything wrong with that, just like I said about Erickson, if she wants to help the Rounds campaign and SD GOP out, that is wonderful. But I question Emceeing this event. I seems our councilors are constantly testing the waters. Like Dean Karsky being elected to the Chamber Board.

    LJL, I support candidates in both parties. I voted for several Republicans when I absentee voted. Besides, I don’t serve on the city council, I can be as partisan as I like.

  11. matt johnson on October 20, 2014 at 12:39 pm said:

    how can serving as a delegate for a candidate not be considered an endorsement of that candidate?

  12. I guess you are misunderstanding me. Sorry. In no way would I want you to think I am defending Huether 🙂

    As I have said before, I don’t care who the councilors or mayor PERSONALLY endorse and I defend Erickson, Huether and Staggers for their involvement with their respective parties, whether they are delegates OR chair people for the party.

    This is an ‘appearance’ issue. Since Erickson serves on the city council (a non-partisan body) she may be making the ‘appearance’ she is representing the city council and city by endorsing Mike Rounds.

    This couldn’t be farther from the truth. You and I both know that is NOT what Erickson’s intentions are, but it may ‘appear’ to others that she is representing our city council by emceeing a Rounds rally.

  13. Dan Daily on October 20, 2014 at 3:51 pm said:

    Maybe she’s just arm candy!

  14. matt johnson on October 20, 2014 at 5:11 pm said:

    but her integrity was questioned in the original post – she has done nothing to suggest that she can’t support dems- in fact she goes along with 3-m on many issues

  15. Wow you are really reaching.

  16. MJ, Funny, we both know Huether is Dem in ‘D’ only.

    I don’t think I am reaching, why would Dakota Wuss College make a big deal out of this and talk about her service as a councilor? Like I said, you and I who follow politics can distinguish, many regular Joes cannot. This was an attempt by someone in the Rounds campaign to paint the SF city council with a broad stroke as endorsing Rounds. In fact, the Rounds campaign KNOWS they are struggling in Sioux Falls, so why not drag a prominent and ‘Attractive’ former Republican legislator in front of the camera at a Rounds Rally? I am NOT naive, I know what this is about. But keep telling yourself differently, and keep voting in the crooks.

  17. She can argue that she was not representing the City Council at the time, so in her mind she did not do anything illegal or was unethical.

    Will someone be filling a complaint about her being an emcee was unethical?

  18. has Kermit made any appearances with his former running mate Gordon Howie?

  19. Nice work at being a sexist Dan.

    You might want to set down the shovel and stop digging a deeper hole DL. But thanks for keeping up the partisan sniping. It really helps our country get better.

    Kinda like that dickheaded dig at Haggar hitting a deer. Big F’ing Woop.

  20. keytag on October 20, 2014 at 9:38 pm said:

    13WIS: Just curious, but I would like to know just which ones are the crooks? That way I could be as well informed as you are.

  21. Way too many folks just looking for reasons to be offended. Get over yourself.

  22. 12 unspoken rules to be a liberal

    There may be no official rule book for being a liberal, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t rules. There are actually quite a few rules liberals go by and the more politically active liberals become, the more rigidly they tend to stick to their own code of behavior. These rules, most of which are unspoken, are passed along culturally on the Left and viciously enforced. Ironically, many liberals could not explain these rules to you and don’t even consciously know they’re following them. So, by reading this article, not only will you gain a better understanding of liberals, you’ll know them better than they know themselves in some ways.

    1) You justify your beliefs about yourself by your status as a liberal, not your deeds. The most sexist liberal can think of himself as a feminist while the greediest liberal can think of himself as generous. This is because liberals define themselves as being compassionate, open minded, kind, pro-science and intelligent not based on their actions or achievements, but based on their ideology. This is one of the most psychologically appealing aspects of liberalism because it allows you to be an awful person while still thinking of yourself as better than everyone else.

    2) You exempt yourself from your attacks on America: Ever notice that liberals don’t include themselves in their attacks on America? When they say, “This is a racist country,” or “,This is a mean country,” they certainly aren’t referring to themselves or people who hold their views. Even though liberals supported the KKK, slaughtering the Indians, and putting the Japanese in internment camps, when they criticize those things, it’s meant as an attack on everyone else EXCEPT LIBERALS. The only thing a liberal believes he can truly do wrong is to be insufficiently liberal.

    3) What liberals like should be mandatory and what they don’t like should be banned: There’s an almost instinctual form of fascism that runs through most liberals. It’s not enough for liberals to love gay marriage; everyone must be forced to love gay marriage. It’s not enough for liberals to be afraid of guns; guns have to be banned. It’s not enough for liberals to want to use energy-saving light bulbs; incandescent light bulbs must be banned. It’s not enough for liberals to make sure most speakers on campuses are left-wing; conservative speakers must be shouted down or blocked from speaking.

    4) The past is always inferior to the present: Liberals tend to view traditions, policies, and morals of past generations as arbitrary designs put in place by less enlightened people. Because of this, liberals don’t pay much attention to why traditions developed or wonder about possible ramifications of their social engineering. It’s like an architect ripping out the foundation of a house without questioning the consequences and if the living room falls in on itself as a result, he concludes that means he needs to make even more changes.

    5) Liberalism is a jealous god and no other God may come before it: A liberal “Christian” or “Jew” is almost an oxymoron because liberalism trumps faith for liberals. Taking your religious beliefs seriously means drawing hard lines about right and wrong and that’s simply not allowed. Liberals demand that even God bow down on the altar of liberalism.

    6) Liberals believe in indiscriminateness for thought: This one was so good that I stole it from my buddy, Evan Sayet: ” Indiscriminateness of thought does not lead to indiscriminateness of policy. It leads the modern liberal to invariably side with evil over good, wrong over right and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success. Why? Very simply if nothing is to be recognized as better or worse than anything else then success is de facto unjust. There is no explanation for success if nothing is better than anything else and the greater the success the greater the injustice. Conversely and for the same reason, failure is de facto proof of victimization and the greater the failure, the greater the proof of the victim is, or the greater the victimization.”

    7) Intentions are much more important than results: Liberals decide what programs to support based on whether they make them feel good or bad about themselves, not because they work or don’t work. A DDT ban that has killed millions is judged a success by liberals because it makes them feel as if they care about the environment. A government program that wastes billions and doesn’t work is a stunning triumph to the Left if it has a compassionate sounding name. It would be easier to convince a liberal to support a program by calling it the “Saving Women And Puppies Bill” than showing that it would save 100,000 lives.

    8) The only real sins are helping conservatism or harming liberalism: Conservatives often marvel at the fact that liberals will happily elect every sort of pervert, deviant, and criminal you can imagine without a second thought. That’s because right and wrong don’t come into the picture for liberals. They have one standard: Does this politician help or hurt liberalism? If a politician helps liberalism, he has a free pass to do almost anything and many of them do just that.

    9) All solutions must be government-oriented: Liberals may not be as down on government as conservatives are, but on some level, even they recognize that it doesn’t work very well. So, why are liberals so hell bent on centralizing as much power as possible in government? Simple, because they believe that they are better and smarter than everyone else by virtue of being liberals and centralized power gives them the opportunity to control more people’s lives. There’s nothing scarier to liberals than free people living their lives as they please without wanting or needing the government to nanny them.

    10) You must be absolutely close minded: One of the key reasons liberals spend so much time vilifying people they don’t like and questioning their motivations is to protect themselves from having to consider their arguments. This helps create a completely closed system for liberals. Conservative arguments are considered wrong by default since they’re conservative and not worth hearing. On the other hand, liberals aren’t going to make conservative arguments. So, a liberal goes to a liberal school, watches liberal news, listens to liberal politicians, has liberal friends, and then convinces himself that conservatives are all hateful, evil, racist Nazis so that any stray conservatism he hears should be ignored. It makes liberal minds into perfectly closed loops that are impervious to anything other than liberal doctrine.

    11) Feelings are more important than logic: Liberals base their positions on emotions, not facts and logic and then they work backwards to shore up their position. This is why it’s a waste of time to try to convince a liberal of anything based on logic. You don’t “logic” someone out of a position that he didn’t use “logic” to come up with in the first place.

    12) Tribal affiliation is more important than individual action: There’s one set of rules for members of the tribe and one set of rules for everyone else. Lying, breaking the rules, or fomenting hatred against a liberal in good standing may be out of bounds, but there are no rules when dealing with outsiders, who are viewed either as potential recruits, dupes to be tricked, or foes to be defeated. This is the same backwards mentality you see in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, except it’s based on ideology, not religion.

  23. Thank You Jeni, finally someone gets the point I was making.

  24. Poly43 on October 21, 2014 at 6:08 am said:

    Hey ljl. Nice cut and paste. One back atcha.

    You might be a conservative if…

    You think “proletariat” is a type of cheese.
    You’ve named your kids “Deduction one” and “Deduction two.”
    You’ve tried to argue that poverty could be abolished if people were just allowed to keep more of their minimum wage.
    You’ve ever referred to someone as “my (insert racial or ethnic minority here) friend”
    You’ve ever tried to prove Jesus was a capitalist and opposed to welfare.
    You’re a pro-lifer, but support the death penalty.
    You think Huey Newton is a cookie.
    The only union you support is the Baseball Players, because heck, they’re richer than you.
    You think you might remember laughing once as a kid.
    You once broke loose at a party and removed your neck tie.
    You call mall rent-a-cops “jack-booted thugs.”
    You’ve ever referred to the moral fiber of something.
    You’ve ever uttered the phrase, “Why don’t we just bomb the sons of bitches.”
    You’ve ever said, “I can’t wait to get into business school.”
    You’ve ever called a secretary or waitress “Tootsie.”
    You answer to “The Man.”
    You don’t think “The Simpsons” is all that funny, but you watch it because that Flanders fellow makes a lot of sense.
    You fax the FBI a list of “Commies in my Neighborhood.”
    You don’t let your kids watch Sesame Street because you suspect Bert and Ernie of “sexual deviance.”
    You use any of these terms to describe your wife: Old ball and chain, little woman, old lady, tax credit…
    You scream “Dit-dit-ditto” while making love.
    You’ve argued that art has a “moral foundation set in Western values.”
    When people say “Marx,” you think “Groucho.”
    You’ve ever yelled, “Hey hippie, get a haircut.”
    You think Birkenstok was that radical rock concert in 1969.
    You argue that you need 300 handguns, in case a bear ever attacks your home.
    Vietnam makes a lot of sense to you.
    You point to Hootie and the Blowfish as evidence of the end of racism in America.
    You’ve ever said “civil liberties, schmivil schmiberties.”
    You’ve ever said “Clean air? Looks clean to me.”
    You’ve ever referred to Anita Hill as a “lying bitch” while attending a Bob Packwood fund-raiser.
    You spent MLK Day reading “The Bell Curve.”
    You’ve ever called education a luxury.
    You look down through a glass ceiling and chuckle.
    You wonder if donations to the Pentagon are tax-deductable.
    You came of age in the ’60s and don’t remember Bob Dylan.
    You own a vehicle with an “Ollie North: American Hero” sticker.
    You’re afraid of the “liberal media.”
    You ever based an argument on the phrase, “Well, tradition dictates….”
    You’ve ever called the National Endowment for the Arts a bunch of pornographers.
    You think all artists are gay.
    You ever told a child that Oscar the Grouch “lives in a trash can because he is lazy and doesn’t want to contribute to society.”
    You’ve ever urged someone to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, when they don’t even have shoes.
    You confuse Lenin with Lennon.

  25. anominous on October 21, 2014 at 10:27 am said:

    Another example of Mike Rounds not being able to form a natural grin.

  26. anonymous on October 21, 2014 at 2:59 pm said:

    As you are considering who to vote for, remember all the shadiness involving then Governor Mike Rounds and state-owned airplanes……………

  27. Oliver Klosov on October 21, 2014 at 5:24 pm said:

    Poly43 – your cut and paste proves the point of LJL’s cut and paste. Another liberal mantra – snark over substance. LJL’s cut and paste is meaningful, yours is just mean.

  28. teatime on October 21, 2014 at 6:29 pm said:

    Bill: You just might have the most accurate point stated.

  29. Yep…. Liberals operate on feelings and not fact. Thanks for the example poly.

  30. Bill and Teatime, I’m not offended either way. If Erickson wants to parade on stage as a puppet for Rounds, that is her deal, my suggestion as city councilor is to not do that, and realize her role in government, be proud of it, and serve well.

    LJL, you have proven something I have known for a very long time, Republicans don’t have feelings. LOL!

  31. Really on October 21, 2014 at 7:23 pm said:

    That’s a lot of speculation and assumptions. You now what they say when you assume.

  32. I just saw Greg Jamison in the Rich Sattgast commercial.

Post Navigation