Response from "Representative Kristi No."

[queen_of_kithia]

That's how her name appeared in my inbox, anyway, and I think it's oddly appropriate.

Comments

[eofs]

You're also an American family member

[queen_of_kithia]

You're also an American family member.

True. But I'm no longer anyone's dependent nor do I have any dependents of my own, so for tax purposes, my membership in a family is irrelevant.

The more I think about her response, the angrier it makes me. At best, it shows that she's too stupid to understand percentages or too lazy to get her facts straight. At worst, she's deliberately misleading her constituents with strawman fallacies and petty politics, showing more loyalty to her party than to her state.

I guess when her campaign materials said that she was "One of us, fighting for all of us" someone should have asked her whether "us" referred to South Dakotans or Republicans.

[bluealoe]

"Representative No" amuses me. :)

I think your response was really good. It pointed out how eliminating funding for PBS really isn't going to solve the budget issues, and it wasn't condescending or "holier-than-thou". I couldn't have been as polite.

[queen_of_kithia]

Thanks. I'm starting to wish that I had been, if not less polite, then at least a little more forceful or aggressive in the hopes of provoking her just enough to get off her talking points and say something honest for once. I'm a believer in politeness and diplomacy, but sometimes I think that too much politeness can get in the way of the truth and of honest, effective communication.

Yesterday I got a response from John Thune. Thus far, I've only given it a cursory glance, but he seems to cite the same figures that Noem does. How convenient that everyone can just use whatever facts best support their own position and ignore the rest of them!