By Randall Rasmussen

I’m at home relaxing and the phone rings. It’s Ron Paul!

Actually, it’s a recording of Ron Paul’s voice, but still.

You’re probably wondering: Who’s Ron Paul? I admit I had to think for a second who he was, and why was he calling.

Turns out he’s running for president on the Republican side, and he wants my vote.

You’re probably wondering, too, as I was: There’s a Republican presidential primary on Tuesday?

You can admire Hillary Clinton for fighting for the Democratic presidential nomination to the very end, but Ron Paul has her beat. He lost to John McCain months ago, if he ever had a chance, and he still won’t give up.

Ron Paul is from the fast-diminishing libertarian wing of the Republican Party that is resisting McCain’s pull of the party to the left. For those who don’t want their elections to be between Democrats who promise you everything and Republicans who are for the same things only less so, Paul is their standard bearer.

His recorded message says he wants to abolish the income tax and get rid of the IRS, protect the Second Amendment, pay off the national debt, stop using our military to police the world and secure our borders.

I got to thinking that Ron Paul wasn’t promising me anything. The two Democrats are arguing over who’s going to give away the store the fastest, and McCain isn’t that much of an improvement. No wonder Paul is out of it. He’s not trying to buy my vote.

Actually, Ron Paul makes a lot of sense, except when he’s talking nonsense. It’s refreshing. Almost every other politician makes no sense, except during the rare occasions when they talk straight.

Anyone else up for a protest vote for Ron Paul?

By Scott Aust

Why does Rachael Ray hate America?

Thank God for that eagle-eyed maven of democracy, Michelle Malkin. If it weren’t for her, why the blood-thirsty sleeper terrorist Rachael Ray might have gone undetected.

Thankfully, we have people like Malkin who are awake. Sure, it looks to the uninformed like a simple black and white scarf.

But Malkin’s special terrorism fashion decoder ring caught the despicable, dastardly so-called chef before she could unleash her reign of terror.

See the story here.

Seriously, though, who’s the bigger dilweed in this story: Malkin and her ilk or the suits at Dunkin’ Donuts who pulled the ad?

By Todd Williams
There’s been a lot of speculation on the June 3 primary by South Dakota insiders. Some bloggers have said all long that Barack Obama has the inside track.
If one looks at the state’s superdelegates, that would seem to be true.
But the intense campaigning on the part of the Clinton folk would indicate that they believe they can win and that the race is close.
Has anyone heard how close it might be?

By Todd Williams
A one-two combo of Kevin Woster’s previous blog post wondering when and if Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama would make a South Dakota swing west of the Missouri River and then an editorial in today’s (Wednesday’s) Rapid City Journal apparently proved to be too much for the candidate to withstand.
Obama’s camp today announced the candidate will make a trip to Rapid on Saturday.
Sure, his platform for Native Americans and the “Clinton A Day” plan by opponent Hillary Clinton may have had a little something to do with it. Actually, most or all of it.
But you never know. Barack just might be a covert Blogmorite.

By Kevin Woster

OK, OK, so I spoke too soon.

Clearly in response to my thread below - the one with the Carol Burnett show theme song playing in the background - about his campaign wrapping it up early in South Dakota, Barack Obama has decided to make one last visit to the state this Saturday.

Oh, the power of a political blog in the second-largest newspaper in South Dakota. Oh, the influence of a skinny, grown-up farm kid from Lyman County.

Oh, the joys of self-delusional reporters.

But, really, does anyone doubt that Obama is a regular reader of Mount Blogmore? And that what matters on the mount matters in the presidential campaign?

I think not, being, well, happily delusional.

Anyway, Obama’s announcement today of another South Dakota visit, which didn’t include a location, came as the Clinton campaign was making its final hard push toward the Tuesday primary.

Hillary, Bill or Chelsea Clinton will be in South Dakota every day until the election. That’s a Clinton a day, I presume from Wednesday through Monday. That’s a lot of Clinton.

But now there’ll be a dose of Obama, too.

That all makes this old reporter’s ticker flicker with excitement.

We’re still in the game, baby!

Those Democrats rock!

By Kevin Woster

Todd raised an interesting point below: Has the presidential campaign peaked in South Dakota? Are we on the downhill slide of focus and interest by candidates.

There certainly are indications of that with the Barack Obama campaign. Not so much with Hillary Clinton’s.

I mean, Bill was on the road all day yesterday to three state Indian reservations. Following his May 14 Pine Ridge visit, the Crow Creek, Rosebud and Yankton stops put four hits in Native American country in the state.

Hillary is scheduled to add her own stop to that list Wednesday in Kyle, during a West River trip likely to include at least one other site.

That’s all pretty smart if you’re serious about the Native vote in South Dakota - an admittedly difficult thing to depend on. And it’s well deserved attention for tribal people who are consistently overlooked and underserved by Washington, D.C.

It’s easy to talk about helping the Native Americans. But it means something when you show up on their turf, which often isn ‘t the easiest place on earth to get to.

I’m a little surprised that Obama hasn’t made it to a South Dakota reservation yet, although he did stop at the Crow Agency a few hours away in Montana. And he did meet with representatives from tribes in South Dakota during his stop in Sioux Falls. Plus, his campaign is strong on Native initiatives and outreach.

When I wrote at the end of a short story last week about the Clintons’ Native American stops, I said that Obama was “expected” to visit a reservation before the June 3 primary. I was quickly informed by the Obama campaign that a reservation stop was “a possibility,” but was not necessarily expected.

That surprised me a bit. And it could change anytime, of course, with the next e-mailed news release from the Obama camp. But it had me wondering if Obama wasn’t planning a reservation visit at all. And if he doesn’t stop at a reservation, does that mean he won’t make any West River stops during this primary?

Maybe he figures he has the Native vote wrapped up. Or South Dakota overall.

Or maybe he figures there isn’t enough support West River to be worth a visit.

Or maybe he just figures that it’s time to move on to the general, even as his Democratic opponent - and her well-traveled husband - fight on in the primary.

By Todd Williams
Regardless of the seemingly inevitability of it all, the anticipation in South Dakota over the presidential primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton has been pointed toward the upcoming week.
It started out as a near impossibility that South Dakota could matter in any form in any national race with its last in the nation primary. But as the race between Obama and Clinton proceeded, glimmers of hope among politicos here rose. Then, as Obama took the lead and Clinton refused to give in, the hopes turned to reality.
The candidates visited. They made their stumps. We were even able to squeeze a national story out of one of the sound bites (Clinton’s RFK remark is still getting big play on cable news networks). But as one watches the big game come to town, it’s hard not to get the feeling that the teams are half-populated by replacement players.
For Obama, the campaign speech’s have become less and less about the challenger in the Democratic court and much more about the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain. And the fact that although Hillary Clinton and her husband will have recorded multiple visits west of the Missouri River and statewide but that Obama has made only a limited presence in the Mount Rushmore State, it gives me the feeling that South Dakota’s big week in the limelight will be half in the shade.
Not that it’s all bad. The suggestion in January that South Dakota could garner any kind of attention in either of the primary contests would have been dismissed out of hand.
I think the problem I have is that this is it. Once June 3 moves past on our calendar, the next big presidential question that will include “South Dakota” in the discussion will be what role either Tom Daschle or Barack Obama will have in the new administrations.

By Steve Miller

Sen. John Thune said he doesn’t think President Bush’s veto of the farm bill is going to hurt Sen. John McCain or other farm-state Republicans in this fall’s elections.
Bush, of course, is a lame duck. And, the practical effect of his veto is nil because Congress overrode it.
Thune said McCain, who he supported for the Republican nomination, backed the Bush veto.
“I don’t think he’s ever voted for a farm bill,” Thune said of his Senate friend.
Could that hurt McCain in farm states this November, Thune was asked in an interview this week. “I suppose it could at the margin,” Thune admitted. “He’s going to have to demonstrate some of the positive things he’s done for agriculture. As a presidential candidate he’s going to look at the broader picture,” Thune said. “I don’t think it’s going to splash back on him a whole lot.”
It probably won’t in Republican strongholds such as South Dakota. But could it hurt McCain in farm states farther east, such as Minnesota, Iowa and Missouri if the vote is close this fall?
Ag policy probably isn’t a big factor in most national, or even statewide, elections. But it might have been a factor in Thune’s narrow loss to Sen. Tim Johnson in 2002.
That summer, maybe the worst year of the drought this decade, President Bush came to Mount Rushmore and stood on the platform with Thune and other state Republicans.
Bush basically told the audience, including members of the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, that South Dakota farmers and ranchers would have to suck it up—he didn’t agree with the drought aid proposals from Johnson and then-Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle. Bush said they were too expensive.
But the president could have endorsed Thune’s separate drought aid proposal, which would have been paid for by the money saved in the subsidy program that year achieved through good crop prices.
Bush didn’t mention Thune’s idea.
Thune lost to Johnson by 524 votes. Like all good ballplayers, Thune has never publicly blamed Bush for his defeat.
What do you think, blogmorites? Will Bush’s veto of the farm bill have any fallout in farm country in the November elections?

P.S. Some of the political wags in the newsroom have sometimes wondered what would have happened that summer day at Rushmore if it had been Bill Janklow, not Thune, given the stiff arm by George Bush.

Would Janklow have:

1. Planted a big wet kiss on the president under the granite faces?

2. Hung Bush out of the helicopter on the way back to Ellsworth?

3. Offered to drive the president back to the air base, in Minot?

By Kevin Woster

Here’s how delusional I am: When I saw the name “Michelle Obama” on the sender line of the 1:42 p.m. e-mail, I actually thought it was from her.

“Hey, Michelle Obama!” my muffled brain voice yodeled. “Maybe she liked that story I did with her husband. Or maybe she’s been reading my stuff on Mount Blogmore. Or maybe Deputy Campaign Manager Steve Hildebrand - who, since his ascension into the heavenly heights of national campaign stardom, has stopped sending cucumbers and salsa to produce-starved West River reporters - told her something like: ‘If you really want to understand South Dakota, you HAVE to talk to Kevin Woster.’”

Maybe, huh?

But I was disappointed to open the e-mail and find that Michelle was simply informing me that the Community Captains program was up and running in South Dakota. And she was giving me a chance to “sign on and help out.”

And in reading the e-mail, I came to suspect that I wasn’t the only one who received it.

Maybe she didn’t see my Obama piece, after all.

Anyway, as a reporter I must decline the invitation to Community Captains involvement, unless I also sign up - to be fair - with a Clinton group.

I’m thinking maybe South Dakota Women for Hillary?

Surely, Judy Olson Duhamel would sponsor me.

By Randall Rasmussen

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton split Tuesday’s primaries, with Obama winning Oregon and Clinton taking Kentucky.

A familiar pattern is emerging in the Democratic primary contests. The more liberal the Democratic electorate in a state, the better Obama does.

That’s not brilliant analysis on my part. But it could signal trouble for Obama in the general election if McCain can persuade more of the center to vote for him than for Obama. Right now, Clinton is doing very well in the party’s center and right wing (do Democrats even have a right wing?).

At this point, Obama has an unsurmountable lead in committed delegates. Meanwhile, Clinton is pointing out that she has the lead in popular votes. Obama’s early victories in caucus states where popular votes weren’t counted allows Clinton to claim she has the lead in votes cast while trailing in the delegate count.

I seem to recall that Al Gore in 2000 had more popular votes than George W. Bush but lost in the electoral college. Gore’s supporters cried foul then and have claimed that Bush’s presidency is illegitimate because of his failure to win a popular majority in 2000 – and because of the U.S. Supreme Court decision as well.

To be consistent, wouldn’t Clinton’s lead in popular votes similarly delegitimize Obama’s soon-to-be nomination?

By Kevin Woster

Like his politics or not, Sen. Ted Kennedy has been a unique force in American politics.

A living institution in the U.S. Senate, he is also a reminder of what was, and what might have been, if his two brothers had not fallen from two of the three most tragically significant gunshots in recent U.S. political history.

A man of immense skill, passion and commitment as well as substantial human weaknesses, Ted Kennedy has over the last four decades grown to become the white-haired lion of liberalism - a word that he, like George McGovern, has never been afraid to embrace.

Mount Blogmore sends its best wishes and prayers to the senator and his family.

By Eric Lochridge

I have a theory about why Hillary Clinton continues to contest the Democratic nomination for president in spite of the statistics that show she can’t win it.
Even though it’s been fairly clear for some time that Barack Obama would prevail, she has kept campaigning, exposing Obama’s possible weakness among white working class voters and older women. Obama’s big losses in West Virginia and Kentucky illustrate that.
So why has Clinton risked her party’s chance at taking back the White House after these many long years? My theory is that she’s now gunning for the vice presidency. She has a strong argument with Obama’s showing among those intraparty demographics. Putting her in the VP slot would soothe many of the hurt feelings within the party. And such a gesture would show that both candidates are truly committed to uniting and not dividing, as it has been put before.
And as far as I know, sharing the ticket doesn’t necessarily mean liking one another.

By Randall Rasmussen

Hillary Clinton said Monday she would agree to the George McGovern strategy of joint appearances with Barack Obama during the remaining primaries. Obama’s campaign, according to an Associated Press story, hasn’t responded.
Former South Dakota Sen. McGovern has said that Obama and Clinton should stop ripping into each other and instead talk about what they’d do if elected and how their Republican opponent John McCain would just continue the failed policies of President Bush.
During campaign appearances in South Dakota last week, Obama and Clinton did manage to steer clear of criticizing the other.
It looks unlikely at this point that Obama would agree to a joint appearance with Clinton. The last time they were on the same stage was at the April 16 debate during the Pennsylvania primary.
Obama says he’ll talk with America’s adversaries, but he won’t talk to Hillary Clinton.
Obama is expected to declare victory after Tuesday’s primaries in Oregon and Kentucky with a majority of pledged delegates, although without a clear majority of pledged and unpledged delegates.
Clinton, meanwhile, is saying there’s no nominee yet and no reason for her to quit.
Wouldn’t a joint appearance of Obama and Clinton in South Dakota be great? The two of them with daggers in their eyes saying nasty things about McCain when they’d rather sling mud at the person they’re sitting next to?

By Kevin Woster

Get off the phone with either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, and you can’t help but say: “Wow, that’s one smart candidate.”

That’s what I said Thursday after a call to Clinton and Saturday when I finished a chat with Obama.

A small-daily reporter like me doesn’t get a chance to interview the presidential contenders very often. It’s always a thrill, and a privilege. It’s also part of a continuing education on what it takes to play the political game at that level.

But these two. Well, “bright” doesn’t begin to tell it.

Oh, sure, there’s that “Sioux City” thing with Obama. And the “57 states” thing. They’re embarrassing, and funny, and fun to kick around over coffee and joust about on blogs.

But they’re just silly slips. Even bright people make them. Even brilliant people, placed in the interstate whirlwind of a presidential campaign.

In their shoes, I’d embarrass myself at every campaign stop. And I’d almost certainly get caught telling a story that wasn’t exactly true. Like Clinton on the Bosnia thing. Think she was consciously trying to lie on that? And somebody as smart as she is wouldn’t figure to get caught?

I don’t. I think that story evolved as many do - from fact, as near as human memory can recollect, to stretched fact, with retelling over the years at parties and with friends, to partly wrong, as parts of often-told stories often become.

Sometimes the storyteller, as I’ve experienced myself, doesn’t even recognize the change.

To judge a presidential candidate on such stuff is silly. And to turn it into a key campaign point is a disservice to issues that really matter.

Take that John McCain gaffe on the Middle East. I can’t even remember what it was. And I’m not inclined to “Google” it for this discussion. But it sure didn’t change my opinion of McCain.

Even the “hundred years in Iraq” was a poorly stated version of what he probably really meant.

But anymore, at that level, you aren’t allowed to be human. You’re a candidate for president. You’re expected to appear perfect.

When people aren’t, we magnify those imperfections into campaign catastrophes, or try to. But there’s a war to figure out. And gas prices through the roof. And health-care that many can’t afford.

And odd little gaffes or not, it’s those real issues and others like them that should make or break a presidential candidate.

By Kevin Woster

That was the general exchange Thursday between Hillary Clinton and Tom Lawrence.

Clinton was working her way down a line of people sitting at the service counter at Jerry’s Cakes and Donuts when she paused and stared at Lawrence - the ursine editor of the evil Rapid City Weekly News, known for his unusual kneeling, crouching, looming reportorial poses at news events.

In this instance, Lawrence was sort of kneeling up on top of the counter, but still technically caged in the press area behind it.

As usual, he stood out. And the candidate took notice.

“You look very familiar to me,” Clinton said.

If the crouching tiger, unhidden dragon of weekly news was disarmed, it didn’t show in his response: “I covered you in Lennox in 1994,” Lawrence said.

Ah, but of course. Lennox, 1994. Who could forget?

Lawrence was working for the Argus Leader in Sioux Falls back then, and Clinton was first lady, pushing a health-care initiative that would eventually fail. She held a health-care event in Lennox, which Lawrence apparently covered.

I’ll have to take his word for it. I was working at the Argus then, too,and technically covering medical issues. But I can’t even remember Clinton being in Lennox.

It was unclear whether Clinton’s memory was any better. In fact, when Lawrence played the Lennox card, she looked, for just an instant, as if she had just swallowed half of a sour-cream donut. But she recovered nicely.

“Well, it was an indelible memory,” she said.

That’s exactly what the moment in Jerry’s will become for Lawrence, who mumbled “That was weird…weird” as Clinton moved on to the next handshake.

By Randall Rasmussen

Sen. Hillary Clinton made a surprise stop in Rapid City today (Thursday). With three visits from Hill or Bill in one week, Rapid City is fast becoming a second home to the Clintons.

Hillary stopped at Jerry’s Cakes and Donuts and ordered a donut. You can see her in the photo above eyeing the store’s variety of selections.

Behind her are the media cameras that follow her everywhere she goes, recording everything she says and does.

Hillary knows that what donut she chooses will say something about her as a candidate for president.

What kind of donut is most presidential?

I’m told she ordered a sour cream donut.

Is she president material? Would you vote for someone who likes sour cream donuts?

By Randall Rasmussen

The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation rarely receives this much attention.

Today, former President Bill Clinton will speak at Pine Ridge High School on behalf of his wife, Hillary Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

Bill Clinton is a natural choice to go to Pine Ridge, having visited there as president in 1999.

When one side sends a heavy hitter like Bill C. up to the plate, the opposition has to respond. Sen. Barack Obama is sending Ethel Kennedy, widow of Robert F. Kennedy, and their son, Max Kennedy, to Rapid City and Pine Ridge on Friday.

At stake are votes from Native Americans in the state who tend to vote Democratic. Minority voters in other states have supported Obama more than Clinton in other primary contests. Which is why Bill Clinton is in Pine Ridge today and the Kennedys to follow Friday.

Will the Kennedy name be enough to counter the magnetic Bill Clinton?

By Kevin Woster

What do Dave Knudson, Betty Olson, David Lust, Tom Dempster, Jeff Haverly, Roger Hunt, Shantel Krebs and Brock Greenfield have in common?

Wait, I’m not done.

How about Larry Rhoden, Thomas Brunner, Ken McNenny, Phyllis Heineman, Tim Rounds, Kristi Noem, Don Van Etten and Jim Lintz?

They’re all kinda sweet on Joel Dykstra.

Don’t misunderstand. That’s a political term, “sweet,” which is rarely used in the more mundane campaign analyses you will find beyond the erudite slopes of Mount Blogmore.

We say “gone sweet on” where others might simply say “endorsed.”

That’s one of the many reasons you come here, people, to get what Tim Russert and David Broder and Charlie Rose can’t offer.

Anyway, the Sweet 16 above aren’t the only Republican members of the South Dakota Legislature giving some primary sugar to U.S. Senate candidate Joel Dykstra, a state representative from Canton.

There’s 40 more on board, leading Dykstra to proclaim himself to be the main GOP man in the three-person - Sam Kephart and Charles Lyonel Gonyo being the others - GOP Senate primary.

“There is no greater compliment or display of support than to have the people who know you best and have worked closely with you come out and publicly endorse your candidacy,” Dykstra says.

It’s hard to argue with that. Although given a chance - something we always hope to do here on Mount Blogmore - I’m guessing Kephart and Gonyo might.

—And Sam says: “While I genuinely admire Joel’s gaining of these endorsements, I’m not really clear about what they have to do with achieving a breakthrough in Washington. If any of these fine folks had the answer, we wouldn’t be where we are, would we?
“Perhaps it’s time for a profound shift in perspective… one that can only be brought to light by someone less bound to the existing political track and party relationships.”

By Eric Lochridge

Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia launched a Libertarian bid for the White House on Monday.
So what, you say? It’s true that the last Libertarian candidate, Michael Badnarik, finished with about 1 percent of the vote, behind even Ralph Nader in 2004. But Barr’s candidacy could be yet another wrinkle for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain to smooth out.
While he was in Congress from 1995 to 2003, Barr helped manage the House Republicans’ impeachment case against President Clinton before the Senate. That, and his other bedrock conservative positions, could help peel wavering Republicans from McCain, could it not?
On the other hand, Barr is critical of president Bush and the war in Iraq, saying the administration has destroyed civil liberties to fight terrorism. Could Barr also attract non-Republicans?

By Randall Rasmussen

South Dakota’s Sen. John Thune continues to attract speculation that he could be Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain’s choice as a running mate.
The Washington Post’s Sunday politics section featured a story speculating on who McCain and Sen. Barack Obama might choose as their candidate for vice president. You can read the story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/10/AR2008051002261.html?hpid=topnews

The article by Post political writers Chris Cillizza and Shailagh Murray includes a short list of five possible vice president candidates for both McCain and Obama. First on the list for McCain is Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty; first on the Obama list is Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Both lists include some surprising choices. For Obama, the No. 3 pick is Hillary Clinton.

Thune is the Post’s speculative No. 2 choice for McCain. Here’s how they describe Thune:

“2 John Thune: Thune is handsome and articulate and comes across as a moderate, despite his very clear conservative voting record. Thune is also a hero in conservative circles, thanks to his defeat of then-Sen. Tom Daschle (S.D.) in 2004. The one knock on Thune is that he hails from a state that is already well in hand for Republicans.”

Thune continues to say he’s not interested in the vice presidency. But I’d be very surprised if the McCain camp does not have him on a list, which could be quite long, of possible VP candidates.

Positives: Thune is younger than McCain; he’s more conservative than McCain; he’s an effective speaker; and he has the reputation as a giant-killer by beating Daschle.

Negatives: Thune is unknown and inexperienced; and he is from an area of the nation that McCain is likely to carry anyway.

If the Post can speculate, why can’t Mount Blogmore?