First, the obvious – The First Amendment DOES not protect free speech when comes to using tax dollars to promote a political candidate. This doesn’t even take a Constitutional scholar to figure it out. This is why Trump was impeached in Congress. He was withholding tax dollars to help his presidential candidacy.

While I understand a local entrepreneur casually mentioning a city council candidate he is helping out in an article funded by two institutions that receive some tax funding (state and city) may seem not as grand as what our president did, it is still worth talking about and correcting.

I was extremely irritated that some elected officials on the council chose to defend this obvious violation of free speech rights and state law.

Just because you violate campaign rules ‘a little bit’ doesn’t make it alright. That essentially was their argument.

While what councilors Brekke, Stehly and citizen Bruce Danielson said may have been uncomfortable, it was very appropriate to say and the right time to say it, in a public meeting. No one was advocating to arrest anyone, no one was going to throw some one in jail or fine them. This was simply an effort to ‘nip it in the butt’ before it became common place. People make mistakes, we get it.

Over the past day, I have told several people that Matt Paulson (Alex Jensen’s quasi-campaign manager, treasurer and fundraiser) did nothing wrong, neither did Stehly wasn’t attacking them, she was simply telling the Sioux Falls Development Foundation (and I guess DSU) that moving forward they should not promote certain candidates because they receive public money.

This isn’t an attack, it’s a fact, and many journalists and citizens agree.

We know what’s going on here, and we have been seeing this across the state for several years. The Republican establishment (a very small elitist group) has controlled our State House for almost 50 years, and they are trying to take control of our County Commissions, State’s Attorney offices and other non-partisan government entities like city councils and school boards. I want to clarify, I have voted for ‘good’ Republicans (like Stehly, Brekke, Staggers and Jamison) on these non-partisan bodies, because they have integrity and want to keep party affiliation out of politics. The group I am referring to is a very small group of ‘know it all’ elitist, establishment Republicans that want to control their business interests, and they see an opportunity here, though their actions look more like ‘amateur hour’.

I have said it already, they are using candidates like Jensen for city council, Cynthia Mickelson for school board and State’s Attorney candidates like Haggar and Bengford to stack the deck and implement their pro-corporate welfare of government, these are NOT Republicans in the sense of tradition, these are elitist greed mongers that only pray to one God; money. Don’t believe me? Why else would the South Dakota GOP Chair, a Jewish Iowa businessman lobby for an Islamic theocratic government? Because party doesn’t matter, only money and greed.

So yes, Stehly was on the attack yesterday. She was attacking greed, corruption, partisanship, lack of integrity and lack of open government. And not just ‘a little bit’ but a lot.

17 Thoughts on “Sioux Falls City Councilor Stehly was on the attack yesterday, and it was the ‘Good Fight’

  1. Matthew Paulson on January 8, 2020 at 9:00 pm said:

    For your readers just tuning in, here is the article that supposedly promotes Alex Jensen’s political campaign.

    Buried in the 9th paragraph, there is this sentence: “Organizations and businesses that I am currently involved with include 1 Million Cups, Alex Jensen for Sioux Falls, Downtown Rotary, Faith Baptist Fellowship, Falls Angel Fund, GoGo Photo Contest, MarketBeat, the Sioux Falls Ministry Center, Sioux Falls Seminary and the Zeal Center for Entrepreneurship.”

    Please explain to your readers how a passing mention that I am involved in the “Alex Jensen for Sioux Falls” candidate committee among a dozen different organizations constitutes “using tax dollars to promote a political candidate.”

    If you are going to complain about that, you should probably also complain that I mentioned three religious organizations on that list as well.

  2. “If you are going to complain about that, you should probably also complain that I mentioned three religious organizations on that list as well.”

    Oh, and that is inappropriate also, Jesus Plows Part II, thanks for pointing that out.

  3. “Name in quotes for no reason” on January 8, 2020 at 9:26 pm said:

    We get it, Stehly can do no wrong. Oh, and it’s “bud”, not “butt”. Gheesh.

  4. “Name in quotes for no reason” on January 8, 2020 at 9:29 pm said:

    Please explain where in the constitution it says “thou shalt not mention religion what so ever if affiliated with someone running for office”. You clearly don’t understand what the constitution says about separation of church and state. It’s pretty obvious to most. The state can’t regulate the church. The end.

  5. “You clearly don’t understand what the constitution says about separation of church and state.”

    Nope. You don’t. Now go paint a Jesus plow.

  6. “Name in quotes for no reason” on January 8, 2020 at 9:43 pm said:

    You’re using Urban Dictionary as a source? Would probably tell you that your and you’re are the same thing “to”. That’s probably the best thing I’ve ever seen you post. Well done. Credibility slipped a notch.

  7. Oh, how I knew your response was going to be that. Hook, line and sinker. The Urban Dictionary is a fantastic source of modern slang. The growth of art is working outside of ‘boundaries’. I’m guessing you are conservative, maybe not. But new ideas never happen when people want to restrict cultural rules while embracing conservative restrictive rules like what ‘words’ people should use. I have always enjoyed this video, because it describe people like you, to a tee; or is it tea, or is it ‘T’ or is it . . .

  8. “Name in quotes for no reason” on January 8, 2020 at 9:56 pm said:

    Funny, someone who thinks he can fix the city all by himself also thinks using slang is a good way to make the point. Whether I’m a conservative or not is really irrelevant. I read all the blogs, and while I enjoy the content on them all, yours is so poorly written that it is sometimes hard to read. I suspect that’s why there are usually so few comments on your posts. You’d benefit yourself by brushing up on basic English. Good night, I have to be at work early.

  9. “I read all the blogs, and while I enjoy the content on them all, yours is so poorly written that it is sometimes hard to read.”

    I’m sorry, maybe I should start paying those writers so they can get some proper educating?

  10. and words and such

  11. no mores slang and inuendogoeish stuff

  12. It really appears that Theresa struck a nerve with a couple of the other Council members. They way they lashed out is common for them, as they do like to work in pairs when Theresa is involved. To me though, it exposes their lack of ethics, their arrogance and better than you attitude. It looked like a couple of high school ‘mean girls’ arguing back and forth. Hopefully this is the only ‘drama’ for the week with our City Council.

  13. Selberg, Do Your Job on January 8, 2020 at 10:40 pm said:

    I have watched city council meetings for many years.

    Never, have I seen the Chair allow a citizen to call out a sitting councilor at a formal meeting in the people’s town hall! Matthew Paulson should have been gavelled!

    In addition, Councilor Kiley made a very inappropriate comment during public input. As one citizen left the podium and another was approaching to give input he said, “more fabrication”. Listen to the replay, it’s now part of the public record.

  14. "Very Stable Genius" on January 8, 2020 at 11:25 pm said:

    “Name in quotes for no reason,” is that you “Unstable Genius?” How were your Holidays? Is it fair to say, that your commentary existence is merely to elect Jensen and make Paul happy, right?

  15. Plausible Deniability on January 9, 2020 at 12:20 am said:

    The SFDF was on the agenda for the Informational Meeting, part of a review of “Partner Organization Agreements.” This presentation and/or Q & A to follow would include info about the tax dollar support these orgs – including the SFDF – receive from the COSF. If there was any evidence that via “mission creep” the SFDF’s expenditure of their tax-supported reserves was straying into questionable territory, this was the time to raise the issue. Stehly did so. Licensed attorney Councilor Brekke and others weighed in questioning the judgement and propriety of the SFDF’s actions where the paid article was concerned, and asserted credible evidence that SFDF’s actions strayed into prohibited territory. To avoid any appearance of impropriety, this “evergreen” article could have been delayed until after the April 2020 election. SOMEBODY or -BODIES were either not doing their job(s), or saw this an opportunity to capitalize with some candidate/campaign branding during the campaign season . . . . just like the fairly recent Premier Bank TV spots which have a scene with Premier’s employeed Alex Jensen featured prominently. Since the SFDF receives taxpayer monies, they got caught. Given Premier Bank is the COSF’s municipal bank institution partner…and likely receives taxpayer money via the services they are paid for . . . perhaps the TV spots deserve scrutiny, too.

  16. D@ily Spin on January 9, 2020 at 12:38 pm said:

    It’s important that councilors are apprised of constitutional infringement. The only manner of enforcement is an ethics hearing and that can’t happen without council action. The council majority preserves acting outside from the law and Roberts Rules. An ethics hearing, NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

Post Navigation