Folks, it occurs to me as I read comments back here that some of you might not fully understand how Judge Beatty has been targeted by these groups he’s talking about. You might want to go back and read some of what I wrote when he was elected to the court. As I said back then, he didn’t seem to me to be the best-qualified at all. But what I objected to was the grotesque campaign conducted against him, using some of the cheesiest, low-down tactics that have sullied our political branches in recent years.
If you will recall, these critics like to call him a "liberal" judge. They don’t provide evidence of this. What they do is show his picture. Get it? He’s black. Black equals liberal. Liberal equals black. He’s black, therefore he’s the kind of judge we don’t like. It’s moronic, and it’s racist.
To give you further perspective, I urge you to peruse this column of Cindi’s from last year. Yeah, you might think the judge’s rhetoric is over the top. But he sure as hell has had to put up with stuff he shouldn’t have been subjected to. Here’s the column:
THE STATE
ANTI-BEATTY CAMPAIGN A DISTURBING TURNING POINT IN JUDICIAL RACES
Published on: 06/06/2007
Section: EDITORIAL
Edition: FINAL
Page: A6
Cindi Ross Scoppe
Associate EditorTHE PHONE message was from a long-time acquaintance who was simply beside himself because I as a woman wasn’t beside myself over the fact that a capable, talented woman wasn’t the odds-on favorite to be elevated to the state Supreme Court.
This wasn’t the only person who mistook my opposition to the below-the-belt attacks on Appeals Court Judge Don Beatty as support for his candidacy. Understandable, I suppose, since I didn’t pick a favorite in the three-way race between what looked to me like three capable judges.
Simply put, I don’t like to offer opinions unless I feel sure I know what I’m talking about, and I didn’t feel like I knew enough about the three would-be justices — only one of whom I had ever said more than "hello" to as far as I can recall — to make an informed choice.
As anyone who watched the circus that surrounded last month’s contest in the Legislature knows by now, others didn’t let their ignorance stand in the way. For the first time in S.C. history, several specialinterest groups not only took a position, and took to the airwaves with it; they demanded that legislators follow their orders — even when the basis for their position was at best flimsy and at worst fabricated.
What’s worse, that spectacle was likely only a taste of what’s to come as South Carolina’s judicial selection process takes on many of the corrupting and degrading influences of public elections.
Let’s get the hot-button stuff out of the way first: I’m not convinced that everybody who opposed the only African-American candidate in the race was doing so for racist reasons; I think much of the opposition to Justice-elect Beatty was a mindless, knee-jerk reaction to the fact that he had been a Democrat when he served in the House in the 1990s.
But the TV attack ad by a fringe group with a demonstrated absence of scruples: That was race-baiting. Not because it showed Mr. Beatty’s face; it would be strange not to show a picture of the person you’re attacking. What made it race-baiting was the way it managed to juxtapose his black face with the image of that extremely white young family just as it called for a judge with "South Carolina values." That, according to
my ad-savvy friends, is classic; anything more blatant would have been a turnoff to all but the most unreconstructed racists.
Distasteful as it was, though, the race-baiting isn’t what makes it important that we examine the ad campaign. There’s nothing new about using race in politics, and besides, we probably won’t see that again in a judicial race, since it’s unlikely that another African- American will be a serious contender for the high court for years to come.
The reason it’s important to examine the ad is that we almost certainly will see further attempts to turn judicial contests into the same kind of "our team vs. your team" contest that has come to define our actual elections. That’s bad enough when serious people are trying to figure out who would make the best governor or who should represent them in the Legislature — positions that are supposed to be filled by politicians. When it comes to judges — who if they have even an ounce of integrity rule based on the law, without conscious regard to their own personal, political preferences — the political language doesn’t even apply.
The ad, a $13,000 effort by Greenville-based "Conservatives in Action" that you can see at http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v= T463tgvvrdg, centers on the same largely irrelevant charges about cherry-picked votes from Rep. Beatty’s legislative career that had been making the e-mail rounds among other interest groups. But it frames them in the context of federal judicial appointments. As the screen fills with a farcical picture of two plump tuxedo-clad men at what apparently is supposed to be their wedding, the announcer intones: "Liberal judges continue to wreak havoc on America, from banning prayer in schools to legalizing gay marriage to restricting property rights. Outof- control judges have hurt our country. So how come some South Carolina Republican legislators are supporting a left-wing politician for our state Supreme Court?"
The announcer is unperturbed by the fact that no one has been able to cite any such liberal lawmaking from the S.C. bench — and particularly not by Mr. Beatty. He informs us that "as a legislator, Beatty opposed a measure to prohibit public funding of abortion; he also voted against gun rights and opposed tax and spending cuts." And finally: "South Carolina doesn’t need an ultra-liberal Democrat partisan on the state Supreme Court. We need somebody who represents South Carolina values."
A spokesman for Conservatives in Action told The Greenville News that the group "very well may" air more TV spots "to educate the public" in future races.
If you’re trying to place that name, think back to those pink pigs that were stuffed into Midlands mailboxes in the days leading up to last year’s Republican primary. This is the secretive group — believed by many to be a front group for the voucher lobbying group SCRG — that failed rather spectacularly in its attempt to unseat Rep. Bill Cotty for the sin of not licking SCRG’s boots.
The Conservatives in Action spokesman said the group would be "watching" the legislators who voted for Judge Beatty. It would make more sense to watch Judge Beatty, to see whether he actually does morph into South Carolina’s first activist justice. But don’t hold your breath: There’s an awfully good chance that would require the group to admit it was wrong about him.
Ms. Scoppe can be reached at cscoppe@thestate.com or at (803) 771-8571.
All content © THE STATE and may not be republished without permission.
All archives are stored on a SAVE™ newspaper library system from NewsBank, inc.
Related Posts
Brad…
The comments reflect the whacko libertarian side of your readers.
I used to be a libertarian, then I grew a soul.
So how come some South Carolina Republican legislators are supporting a left-wing politician for our state Supreme Court?”
A left-wing politician on the Supreme Court. What a great fantasy! That would be a great thing for South Carolina. If only it were so, but of course that statement is nonsense.
Of course we’ve always had activist judges in SC. They were the ones who outlawed video poker, not the General Assembly.
Judge Beatty reminds me of Jeremiah Wright, crying foul at the sight of any four-letter word that starts with an F.
It could be he’s the racist here, burning the evil white man with the Klan brand just because he sees a white face.
We need to get past the day when any time a black man says something is racist we give him credence just because he’s black.
That’s what’s moronic here, and the fear-of-carpetbagger mentality that if the money comes from outside the state, that means it’s wrong.
Heck, The State’s entire editorial board, with the exception of Warthen, comes from outside South Carolina, and Warthen himself learned most of what little he knows in the far climes of Kansas, Memphis, Hawaii and the dark side of the moon, not to mention Moscow.
> I used to be a libertarian, then I grew a
> soul.
I used to expect the government to take care of me from cradle to grave, then I decided to rely on my own efforts.
A libertarian helps other people by choice, not by government command. Apparently you’d rather have someone else do the job.
How do you grow a soul? What sort of soil does it need? Do you have to water it a lot?
All I seem to be able to grow is Vietnamese cilantro, which is now twice as big as it was when I took this picture.
Socialism is like the lottery – it sells the notion of something for nothing, that everyone is going to get more out of it than they put into it, buy robbing the others. In reality, those running the game keep most of the money for themselves, and the poor suckers are a few dollars poorer every time they play.
Back in college, I had this boring survey class that all journalism majors had to take. It was in one of those huge lecture halls. At the back of the room, in a corner, sat a guy who inevitably would raise his hand, and eventually the professor would give up trying to ignore him and would call on him, and the guy would say something about the Memphis Tams. The Tams, in case you’ve forgotten or never knew, were a highly forgettable professional basketball team.
This guy obsessed about the Tams. He wore a tam-o-shanter to class. No matter what the professor was lecturing about, he would torture logic in an attempt to make it have something to do with the Tams. Every time the professor called on him, the class groaned, but that wouldn’t stop the guy. He’d say something like, "Dr. So-and-so, isn’t the situation you describe in a way like the situation the Tams found themselves in during the second half the other night, when….?"
Arrrggghhhh! I can still hear his voice!
Anyway, that guy had the Tams. Lee has "socialism."
Actually, p.m., Warren was born in Columbia. He has spent his whole life here.
Cindi, on the other hand, was born in North Carolina, so you’ve got me there. She compensates for it by knowing more about how state government works — and doesn’t work — than any other journalist in the state.
Is it any surprise that many of the candidates backed this cycle by S.C. Club for Growth and SCRG are clients of the Sandlapper Group, which was just founded last fall? Sandlapper was founded by SCRG board member Chad Connelly and CIA spokesman Taft Matney. That’s no accident. If someone had the ability to check the books at certain places, I’m sure there would be ample proof of illegal campaign coordination.
Thanks, Mr. Warthen.
Now that I know Warren has spent his whole life in Columbia, I feel better. Sort of. Maybe.
Anyway, his on-line bio should make that clear. The way the bios read makes it seem only you among the editorial columnists hail from South Carolina.
Brad,
You need to take some time off and educate yourself about socialism, and learn that educated people use it to accurately andn briefly communicate with one another.
At least you know socialism is bad.
Now just learn how much of your political philosophy is bad, because it is based on personal socialist greed.
Cialis.
Metaprolol cialis. Buy cialis. Cialis.