Governor Noem doesn’t grasp Reality

I could certainly tell you again about how ignorant Noem is. I could also rant about her authoritarianism or how she seems to have a rotating plastic surgery schedule like it is her chiropractor. But what troubles me the most is her lack of understanding reality.

While average South Dakotans can barely afford to put gas in their cars she jet sets all over the country on our dime visiting extremist radical right events. She makes no apologies about nepotism and special treatment for her children. She lies about a 10 year old pregnant rape victim calling it fake news. She also continues to lie to national audiences saying nothing closed down in South Dakota because of Covid. Uses tax dollars to overturn a Rec MJ constitutional amendment. Thinks people can secretly carry concealed weapons while gun violence rages in South Dakota’s largest city. Ignores corrections workers concerns while lying to the media about fixing it. Sends our National Guard troops to the Texas border because apparently South Dakota is overran by illegals. Has barred transgender youth from sports even though there is NOT ONE SINGLE transgender athlete in South Dakota asking to participate. Has banned CRT from public schools even though it has NEVER been taught here and is an advanced law school class about civil rights litigation.

But I think the last straw was this week when she turned down a debate on SDPB saying;

Today (July 15, 2022), in response to an inquiry from South Dakota Public Broadcasting (SDPB) regarding why Governor Noem does not plan to participate in their gubernatorial debate, the Kristi for Governor campaign announced that they will not be participating in the debate due to extreme leftist slant from National Public Radio (NPR) and SDPB.

“For years, we have watched as NPR and SDPB both drifted further and further to the left. The final straw was NPR eliminating the annual reading of the Declaration of Independence on the 4th of July,” said Ian Fury, Communications Director for Kristi for Governor. “In the past, Governor Noem has made clear that she will not participate in debates hosted by hyper-partisan organizations or outlets. SDPB has repeatedly promoted the radical effort to re-write American history and cancel our Founding Fathers. As Governor Noem said at Mount Rushmore, ‘To attempt to cancel the Founding generation is an attempt to cancel our own freedoms.’ Governor Noem has participated in this debate in the past, but SDPB’s extreme leftward swing precludes the possibility of a fair debate.”

I have been watching the Newshour for years, and what attracted me most is that it is non-partisan unlike cable news. During the last couple of months PBS has strived to bring in both sides of the abortion debate. Unlike the partisan garbage spilled on FOX and MSNBC, PBS has always had a fair approach to the news.

Secondly, this is a live debate, not sure how the moderator would be able to twist or edit Noem’s answers? She is really is the dullest knife in the dull knife drawer.

Here is an interview Mayor TenHaken recently did with SDPB, notice there is no left wing nuttiness, just basic questions about how city government is functioning;

After reading this statement, it is clear that Noem has lost all connection with reality and what is really going on in our country and state. Everything she says or does is opposite of what people really think or are going thru. Bizzarro Noem for Governor.



36 comments ↓

#1 Scott D Hudson on 07.17.22 at 12:10 pm

I’m laughing my ass off at the claim she won’t appear at “hyper-partisan organisations or outlets”.

#2 l3wis on 07.17.22 at 12:34 pm

She really needs a mental health evaluation.

#3 Very Stable Genius on 07.17.22 at 1:41 pm

Not surprised, a few years ago I met someone who knew of her and her husband through a church in Watertown. Apparently, the First Man often led the church services there and this person advised me of how wacko their religious beliefs are and how wacko that church was, which also explains their wacko politics.

Noem’s attack against public tv and radio is analogous to Trump’s hate of most media. It’s the first sign of the infancy of an authoritarian mind in the making.

But you know what that old SDSU slogan back in the mid 2000s used to say: “You can go anywhere from here….. ”

#GoYotes!!!!

( and Woodstock adds: “Ya, and she probably thinks that the Teletubbies are gay, too, huh?”….. )

#4 l3wis on 07.17.22 at 1:55 pm

I think she is part of this group;

https://www.foursquare.org/

flopping around on the floor like a fish and speaking tongues.

#5 l3wis on 07.17.22 at 1:57 pm

I wrote about her association 10 years ago;

https://www.southdacola.com/blog/2012/10/sister-aimee-is-that-kristi-noem-waggin-her-tongues-guest-poster/

#6 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 07.17.22 at 3:26 pm

Wasn’t it Noem who taught BradyHaken to say “No” to masks, or at least her politics did? Trust me, BradyHaken will start saying “No” to public tv and radio, especially if he finds himself in a senate primary against Noem in ’26.

Noem knows how to control men. Even Jackley bows to her now. Come to think of it, Noem is kinda like Janklow, except she hasn’t met her intersection yet.

#7 "Woodstock" on 07.17.22 at 3:30 pm

“That’s why Noem likes to ride her horse free across the open prairie, because there ain’t any intersections there …”

#8 D@ily Spin on 07.17.22 at 3:59 pm

Rejecting public broadcasting makes me wonder if she helped promote what happened at the US Capitol on January 6th. Just another Trumpet but this one is a brunette.

#9 Mike Lee Zitterich on 07.17.22 at 4:23 pm

Incumbents really do not have to debate anyone after serving at least one term. They have their voting record, public policy evidence, and their voice is recorded as public record at every public speaking engagement for people to hear.

And how is using our own “State Guard” to help secure our borders an issue to many South Dakotans? The State Guard or Militia is well funded by State Taxes and of which does in fact allows American Citizens to private donate to the State Guard as per State laws, and per the State constitution, the GOVERNOR is the commander in chief of the State Guard, and by laws adopted by the people of the State, she has the ability to use the Guard any such manner to defend and secure our borders, and that means she has the right to send them to Texas in collaborating with and adjoining with Other States to aide and defend their borders.

#10 l3wis on 07.17.22 at 5:03 pm

Mike, you are correct, she doesn’t have to debate at all. That is not the issue. The issue is making up some kind of false narrative about PBS as the excuse. She could have just said, “I have a clear record that my constituents are aware of and am satisfied with agreeing to one debate.” Why make BS accusations about the venue. It’s very authoritarian like.

Also, last I checked, SD is NOT a border state.

#11 VSG on 07.17.22 at 6:19 pm

“…. The State Guard or Militia is well funded by State Taxes… ”

So, then Mike agrees that the 2nd Amendment is about guns for the militia, but since it has been replaced by the National Guard, then this Amendment right is now a moot issue, right?

#12 VSG on 07.17.22 at 6:31 pm

Republicans have a history of being too scared to debate Democrats in this state. Many of us remember when Abdnor was too afraid to debate McGovern in 1980. Or, in more recent years, when Rounds began to bail from debates with Weiland and Pressler. Rounds never debated Ahlers either, did he?

All of this is just an evolutionary growth of hate for democracy by Republicans, which is further exemplified by the recent decision of the RNC to withdraw from the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Whoever would have thought that a political party, that Lincoln pretty much created himself, who then himself became a national figure because of the Lincoln/Douglas debates, would overtime become so antagonistic towards the institution of political debates themselves?

( and Woodstock adds: “Hell, I member the time that Janklow and McGovern debated (August, 1979) each other just for fun”…. “Those were the good old days” ….. “I think it was promoted as ‘The Rumble in the Jungle’ if my memory serves me right”…. )

#13 l3wis on 07.17.22 at 6:37 pm

Remember when Tim Johnson would not debate Joel Dykstra (because Tim had brain surgery) and how they were so appalled. I joked with someone, ‘Even with a speech problem, Tim probably would have cleaned his clock’ Now Joel, in all his angst has decided to be the treasurer of Mayor TenHaken’s PAC. Who says South Dakotans don’t like recycling?

https://www.southdacola.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/8-12-08-dyk.jpg

#14 VSG on 07.17.22 at 10:10 pm

Speaking of BradyHaken, he’s no real champion of debate either. Isn’t he the one who is responsible for moving public input to the back of the council meetings where you can only talk about next week’s issues? That’s an undemocratic Catch22 if you ask me, where any good input comments will be lost in time to the eventual council debate on a given issue because of the lull in time before our “fearless” leaders deliberate and “publicly” decide on a given new policy issue the following week.

But speaking of debate and Republicans in South Dakota, my most favorable moment was in the fall of 1980, with Abdnor refusing to debate McGovern, but then who comes to town none other than former President Ford, who was responsible along with President Jimmy Carter for the reinstitution of presidential debates, where Ford campaigns for Abdnor here, and then a KELO reporter asked Ford if political debates were important and he claimed they were “vital” I believe is the word he used with Abdnor standing along side of him, and you should have seen the look on Abdnor’s face when Ford said that …..

As far as Johnson and Dykstra, I know in 2008 the Johnson camp used to talk about a poll they had that showed a large majority of South Dakotans were sympathetic to the thought of no debate between Tim and Joel given the circumstances.

#15 anominous on 07.17.22 at 10:39 pm

Oh well, she won the debate vs. Varilek a few years ago, which was the worst debate SDPB ever moderated. I’m sure the libertarian will make a mess of it this time.

#16 SPQR on 07.17.22 at 11:14 pm

Juxtaposed to MN, SD is kind of a border state!
Seriously though, Gov. Noem is nothing less than a pure political being at this point. Every decision being made on political grounds, not on the merits or what is on the best interests of our state; but in the best interests of a pure politician. We deserve better.

#17 Further Fear & Loathing on 07.18.22 at 1:10 pm

East River is the “border state”, and the James River is the new dividing line. The Forestburg melons are up for grabs! He who controls the James controls the melons.

#18 Mike Lee Zitterich on 07.18.22 at 1:31 pm

It is funny, how democrats so rudely misrepresent the 2nd Amendment as VS has just did..

2nd Amendment reads as follows – “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

1) The PEOPLE have the right to keep “ARMS” in order to defend themselves, their property, secure their state, by forming a Militia;

The South Dakota Constitution adopted by a “Sovereign People” gave to themselves the right to:

Article 6, Section 24- “Right to bear arms. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied”

–> This means ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS of the “STATE” have the right to own/bare Firearms to protect themselves, their family, their neighbors, their commercial interests, the security of the STATE.

ARTICLE 15 – “The militia of the state of South Dakota shall consist of all able-bodied male persons residing in the state, between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such persons as now are, or hereafter may be, exempted by the laws of the United States or of this state.”

–> The Militia or “State Guard” is ALL American Citizens of the State ages 18-45 years of age.

As per 33-2-6 –> “The Governor may order out from time to time, for actual service, as many of the militia as necessary to execute the laws, preserve order, suppress insurrection, repel invasion, and provide disaster relief assistance” and whereas under SDCL 33-2-7 the “When in active service of the state, pursuant to the order of the Governor, the compensation and expenses of the militia and claims of the members thereof for injury or illness incurred in line of duty, shall be paid out of any funds in the state treasury not otherwise appropriated”

SDCL 33-14-1 –> “he Governor may organize and maintain within this state such military forces as the Governor deems necessary to protect life and property in this state. Such forces are additional to and distinct from the National Guard and are known as the South Dakota State Guard.”

As per SDCL 34-14-6 – “The South Dakota State Guard is not required to serve outside the boundaries of this state except as provided by § 33-14-7, which says, “Any organization, unit, or detachment of the South Dakota State Guard, upon order of the officer in immediate command of the organization, unit, or detachment, may continue in fresh pursuit of insurrectionists, saboteurs, enemies, or enemy forces beyond the borders of this state into another state until they are apprehended or captured by the organization, unit, or detachment or until the military or police forces of the other state or the forces of the United States have had a reasonable opportunity to take up the pursuit or to apprehend or capture such persons. However, no such pursuit beyond state borders may be undertaken unless the other state has given authority by law for such pursuit by the forces of this state. Any such person who is apprehended or captured in the other state by an organization, unit, or detachment of the forces of this state shall without unnecessary delay be surrendered to the military or police forces of the state in which the person is taken or to the United States. However, such a surrender does not constitute a waiver by this state of its right to extradite or prosecute the person for any crime committed in this state.”

So – the PEOPLE of the STATE makes up the Militia, our Governor is our Commander in Chief, and the governor may upon request of another State, or upon her command order the Militia or State Guard to protect the State’s borders by lending our services to another State aka TEXAS in its ability to defend its Southern Border, which instinctively protects “OUR BORDERS”.

The STATE GUARD and the NATIONAL GUARD are two totally separate entities, less of course “WE” agree to combine them as one collective unit to DEFEND ALL FIFTY STATES in times of National Wars, Conflicts, etc. Both are funded totally separately, and both serve the same purpose.

#19 l3wis on 07.18.22 at 2:23 pm

Mike, when are the Mexicans invading SD? Asking for a friend.

#20 Hispanics on 07.18.22 at 2:36 pm

Hispanics Scott. Great people, hard workers, obviously conservatives. Ask any of them that came here legally (hint: we know one) and see what they say about the border.

#21 Ogre Rants on 07.18.22 at 2:59 pm

Over 1000 women downtown 2 weeks ago chanting “F Kristi Noem” and other 600 last weekend. Maybe that’s why she backed down on the abortion special session. Lots of passion in that group.

#22 "Woodstock" on 07.18.22 at 3:18 pm

“I hope they bring more Mexican Pizzas, if they do…. ” …. “And say, when is Bubbles going to invade us with some Labatts?”….

#23 VSG on 07.18.22 at 3:32 pm

Mike, your most recent piece dances back and forth between the federal and state constitutions. You can’t do that legally. You need to stick with one “supreme” doctrine. Which one is it?

Plus, Noem sent the National Guard and not the “State Guard” to Texas.

And, the South Dakota State Guard is currently not active, so by your logic then we have no gun rights, is that right?
(Maybe that’s moot, too, huh?)

#24 Mike Lee Zitterich on 07.18.22 at 6:13 pm

Scott,

I am not sure I understand your question, but when Multiple States work together to help protect each other, it accomplishes the same as if the Federal Govt does it themselves.

In fact, the Governor of SOuth Dakota has every right, permission to utilize the South Dakota Guard (or militia) to protect the life and property of all Citizens of South Dakota, and by doing so, she has the permission to ‘declare’ an emergency, then call forth that militia to come to the aide of another State upon that state requesting help.

Governors Noem, Desantis, and Abbot have been known to work together in holding the Federal Government accountable for its actions, or lack of actions, and yes, the three States can in fact form an Alliance to commonly defend their common borders.

Helping Texas to protect its southern border, also protects the American Citizens in South Dakota, for it protects not only our lives, our property rights, but our Commercial Interests as a State – that means protecting JOBS here in South Dakota,

Not sure why you claim that Mexicans are only coming across the southern border, when in fact, much of the illegal immigration is deriving from deeper south of Mexico, let alone from the east and west across the globe. We have bad people attempting to come into America, and by helping Texas lock down its border, is also securing “OUR” South Dakota borders as well.

The South Dakota Constitution and the laws of the State allows for ALL Residents and Non-Residents of South Dakota to participate in the S.D Guard/Militia so long as they fit the criteria established by law. Any American Citizen can at anytime donate private funds to the South Dakota Treasury earmarked to any Such Govt Department, including State Military Affairs.

The word “State” is defined as a body of persons constituting a special class in a society, a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory, especially one of whom is a sovereign in itself totally separate from other groups of people.

“WE” The People Republic together in order to pool our assets to collectively manage our commercial interests, let alone our public affairs as a State, let alone secure our Life, Liberty, Property, and Pursuit to Happiness.

The STATES themselves can effectively operate the Country with or without the Federal Govt, we have done so in the past, and we can do so again in the future. Meaning, the STATES can at anytime, shutdown the Federal Government anytime they choose to if it no longer does what it was delegated to do, nor does what the States desire it to do. The States can accomplish this by using DIPLOMACY, or they can accomplish that feat by WAR.

Hence, you see the movement by the FEDS to restrict our Second Amendment Right, trying to take our GUNS away, let alone our ability to FIGHT to defend our own Borders.

I suppose you may twist my words around to claim I am some kind of insurrectionist, but again, I would expect that from those who claim to be Democrat, NOT saying you are a democrat, but…

I will never understand why some of you have an issue with the STATES wanting to defend their borders, let alone work together to do what they promised by adopting the 1783 Articles of Confederation.

Again, we entrusted those duties when we created thte Federal Government in 1789, but today, the Federal Govt has become to tyrannical in nature, it has refused to do its obligated duties assigned to them by the States.

I look forward to your response,

Mike Z

#25 VSG on 07.18.22 at 7:21 pm

“…. Again, we entrusted those duties when we created thte Federal Government in 1789, but today, the Federal Govt has become to tyrannical in nature, it has refused to do its obligated duties assigned to them by the States…. ”

Mike, are you aware of two things called the Civil War and the 14th Amendment?

#26 l3wis on 07.18.22 at 7:26 pm

Mike there is no state militia or guard. I googled it and couldn’t find any organization. Every search came up with the National Guard, there are NO separate and frankly imaginary militia forces in SD. The National Guard’s mission statement,

“That mission is to maintain properly trained and equipped units, available for prompt mobilization for war, national emergency, or as otherwise needed.”

You could argue ‘otherwise needed’ could mean the political aspirations of a governor. But it seems they have 2 major jobs, backing up our regular Army in a foreign war or helping with a national disaster cleanup and security. There function isn’t to act as border police.

#27 scott on 07.18.22 at 9:45 pm

using the 18-45 “rule”, you are no longer in the militia, and therefore not entitled to a gun?

#28 Mike Lee Zitterich on 07.19.22 at 1:48 am

Scott, what did you Google by chance, clearly SOUTH DAKOTA GUARD is clearly spelled out in the statutes.

#29 guns guns on 07.19.22 at 7:26 am

maybe Mike is looking for his flintlock?

#30 Blasphemo on 07.19.22 at 9:23 am

. . . . but her recent appearance on hyper-right wing propaganda fake news outlet Newsmax (to promote her book) is no problem for her whatsoever. What a wretched hypocrite.

#31 2A on 07.19.22 at 9:52 am

The 2A isn’t for muskets, isn’t for hunting, etc. it is to defend ourselves from our own government if they overstep their authority. With the way the lib’rals are going, the 2A may become very important sooner vs later. IMHO

#32 Fearing the Fuhrer & More on 07.19.22 at 10:07 am

South Dakota Guard, isn’t that one of the four pillars of protection? Or, am I thinking of Trojan? Say, cum to think of it, what kind of guardsmen where in that horse anyhow?

#33 Sick of Fearing on 07.19.22 at 10:13 am

Based on Alito’s antiquated legal logic, only the flintlock is protected under the 2nd Amendment. #FlintstonesLaw

#34 "Woodstock" on 07.19.22 at 10:19 am

“‘#FlintstonesLaw’?”…. “Say, is that anything like Redstone Law?”….

#35 Mike Lee Zitterich on 07.19.22 at 8:17 pm

To all who may be concerned, if you do as much research as I do, and you search key words, their definitions, and you study and understand the constitution, both the federal and state documents, let alone the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, etc-etc, you will learn that there is in fact a difference between the State Guard or Militia from the National Guard or Federal Army. IF you actually take the time to read the South Dakota Constitution, and the laws of this State, you will see in fact, that there are several mentions to “State Guard” of which since 1933, we have titled it South Dakota National Guard on paper, but in code, still refer to it as the “State Guard” or militia of the State, of which is paid for, and supported by the “tax payers” of South Dakota. “WHEN” Practicable, ‘we’ conform to federal codes to govern the “National Army” in respect to the UNITED STATES, but at the same time, “WE” have a well established, and regulated State Guard of which you can clearly see where the lines are drawn in the sand, IF you have actually read the State Constitution let alone South Dakota laws adopted by the people. For more detail, I will not elaborate further, but you may contact me at zitterich76@gmail.com for more information. – Mike

#36 Fear Not! on 07.19.22 at 9:20 pm

2A believes in the 2nd Amendment remedy, which is like the person who is losing at cards so they get mad and grab and hive the entire card game and its table to the amazement of the other participants.