Agreed.
I’ll add it seems beyond question she is a subpar writer, fumbling in her attempt to connect with a tough, gun-culture rancher audience, having exaggerated or even concocted her tale entirely. Yet, her ghostwriter or editor seemed to have approved it with scarcely a glance.
Her terrible use of leadership in raising her own pet, and her then blaming her literal failure in training and thus leadership on the puppy, which then leads her to reason she should just actually execute it…and then also kill a goat right nearby because it seemed like a convenient time to cross that off too…just, wow.
And then to put it all in a book intended to show how she’d be a good leader, and should receive more power?
Just amazing. I haven’t seen a lack of self-awareness in a conservative like this since…well honestly, it’s hard to keep track. Maybe 30 minutes ago.
OMG!!! Please send a boop from me!!!
Honestly, these dipshits really believe that leadership means being cruel, which to them is “making the tough decisions.”
It really isn’t a lack of self-awareness, I think. It’s them living out their morality. They believe that this is a moral life to live. 
It really isn’t a lack of self-awareness, I think. It’s them living out their morality. They believe that this is a moral life to live.
Tomato, sociopathy? : )
But, in theory at least, politicians are supposed to be more aware of how they come across to a general audience. One would think she, Romney and others who have risen to a level of success where they are entering the national stage, would save the capriciousness of animal mistreatment like this for a more specific audience. Or at least spin the story better.
It would have been so easy for her to make it more of an “old yeller” story. She could go as far as saying the dog had actual rabies so she shot it to protect innocent children. No one would even be able to check.
Instead, she’s now immediately limited herself and her future out of the gate. Which I’m also personally glad for. It just surprises me.
Perhaps it’s yet another lesson that people who gain status in a field aren’t necessarily competent. Just, perhaps, more competent in some ways than others in that field. Or, just possessed of qualities that help them only until they get to a certain level. Qualities that then, at their introduction to a larger audience outside their comfort zone, become less effective at covering their other flaws.
My step daughter recently rescued a pointer pup that she found tied to a post along a county road. We suspect it was something similar, a hunting breed pup that didn’t respond to hunting training. That said, Rosey is a smart and amicable dog, who has responded well to daughter’s obedience training.
And it sounds like Noem should be taken out to the gravel pit…
My current cat isn’t the most warm fellow, he rarely comes when called… held to the standard of my last cat… he fails badly. Am I looking forward to maybe 15 more years of this?
Not really.
But I will continue to give even if I don’t get much in return.
Yeah and I think in this case, she very much is. She’s appealing to a particular audience who agrees with this kind of action, because it’s part of what they see as the proper moral order. They have no interest in appealing to the rest of us, who are appalled by this. She believes to be speaking to some great “silent majority” of Americans and believes that they are enough to swing the vote to Trump.
But again, I think they view such acts of violence not as tragic and sad, but as necessary and just. Violence is not tragic, but natural, necessary, and in the right hands absolutely just and morally defensive. They believe in complete and total deference to authority, which is wielded via violence if necessary, and is the ultimate goal here. This animal isn’t seen as a living being who should have rights and protections, but as an object beneath contempt for not doing as its told. It’s the failure of the animal, not of Noem, in their mind.
Again, though, they don’t see it that way. They believe that most Americans (at least white Americans in the “heartland”) view the world through the same lens that they do.
Well yeah… failing upwards is a time-honored tradition for wealthy white folks. But she’s actual quite competent in hitting all the right notes for the MAGA movement, I’d argue. Of course it fails with anyone who objects to their POV, but they don’t care about that, and don’t think it maters. It is a fascist movement, after all.
Oh yes, agree. This and the Romney thing happened because the stories they told were smack in the middle of their unconscious assumptions about “reasonable Americans.”
I’m just surprised when experienced politicians, who’s literal job is to know what works with crowds of people and who’ve risen to a pretty high level, misjudge wider US sentiment and make an unforced error that’s this easily avoidable and this bad. They’ve got TV, they’ve got internet, they’ve got social media advisors.
And in both cases, they had risen at a level where, to keep growing, they have to appeal to more people outside their current audience. And had written these self-promoting books intending to do that. So I’d think they’d know what that might take.
But, here we are. 
I wish I had never read this.
I guess that’s where I disagree here, that they’ve misread anything. I don’t think they care to appeal to the rest of us. Even if they ARE aware that most of us find this disgusting, they don’t just don’t care what we think. We’re “woke fascists marxists” who should either be destroyed or at least silenced and ruled over.
I’m guessing many of whom came up via the now solid, right wing media/political science pipeline, from private right wing Christian schools, to private right wing universities (Bob Jones and Liberty), and onto right wing think-tanks, and are operating from a shared ideology that they are seeking to impose on the country. Again, this is their goal, not winning people over to their ideas. They don’t really have any outside of hate, tax cuts, and putting the church (or rather a particular interpretation of faith that just happens to align with their fascist views) in place of the state in regulating our lives.
I just really don’t think that growing the movement is the goal. Domination is the goal, via force, intimidation, voters suppression, and a coup if necessary. They are happy to toss out democracy if it doesn’t get them what they want.
yeah, yeah… true. People like her are going to keep showing us who they are, until this movement is buried, I’m afraid.
Unless the kids are problematic and then they wont grow up at all
Fair enough. For me, I agree that they emotionally don’t care to appeal to non-conservatives. But, as experienced conservative politicians at a high level, I do see them as cynically willing to spin or mask whatever is needed as long as that gets them more net votes.
I guess I see them both as more interested in furthering their political careers for personal ambitions, than in growing the movement. I’m sure they still care about their messed-up movement too. But I think that if they had to soft-pedal their beliefs enough to get in power and then fully execute their beliefs, they would be absolutely happy to.
So I do see her and Romney’s pretty similar situation as a misreading. And at interestingly similar times. They both published books at a point where they’ve basically regionally topped out, and are still clearly driven by higher aspirations. And so I see the books they wrote at this point as deliberately intending to introduce them to a larger and more moderate audience. To try and expand their conservative base just enough past their current audience that they could win the next level - presidential or vice-presidential candidacy.
With that view of them intending to expand their careers, it’s them failing to cover and soften this attitude that’s most surprising to me. I would expect that most of both books is intended to paint them as more reasonable moderates.
All that said without reading either of their books though. Really because of self-care. I don’t need to know exactly what they said enough to endure reading it.
I think that used to be more true, but it’s getting far less true with the MAGA movement, honestly. Just think about the difference between W. Bush’s “compassionate conservativism” vs. Trump’s tone…
They likely realize that there is no furthering their careers at this point without the movement. I think they’ve clearly gone all in.
I’m not convinced by that anymore, and that’s what makes it so dangerous a movement, especially with the BS games SCOTUS is playing… but wait, do you mean Noem vs. Romney? I think Romney does care about a larger audience, and I think he believed his dog story would come off as relatable, not cruel. That was a true misjudgement on his part, but not on Noems. But Romney’s authoritarian views are softened by his actual belief in Democracy. The fact that he’s not running again when he knows he’s going to lose is evidence of that, I think.
I think that’s true of Romney, but not Noem. She’s very much preaching to her fascist choir, and the expectation is that soon, those of us who oppose their movement will be silenced, so… it’s not something she feels she needs to concern herself with.
Excuse me, uh, someone in charge? I’m in the wrong universe and I need help finding and getting back to the right one. I’ve had suspicions I was in the wrong one since 2016, but this, this here is conclusive proof. The universe I come from doesn’t have state governors openly admitting to killing puppies. There’s clearly been a mistake and I’d like to know what can be done to fix it.
also, organize against them. Whatever you can do, do it! We can rid ourselves of these fascists, but it’ll take work and effort on our part…
*cough*DeSantisonthenationalstage*cough*
Or repeat.
"If you hold 'em by the ears it doesn’t hurt as much. "
Yeah, and wanna know why the FBI is interested in video games that track the “lol random!” stats of animals killed? Not like it’s a prime indicator for sociopathic tendancies or anything.
