Monthly Archives: August 2009

Picturing DeMint in a powdered wig

Tim Cameron, formerly of The Shot, wrote on Twitter today:

It appears DeMint’s reelection in 2010 will be much more like the Battle of Yorktown than Waterloo http://tinyurl.com/ncs6j3

… to which I had to respond:

Yorktown? So who’s DeMint gonna be? Cornwallis?

Tim came back with:

I was referring to ease of victory for JD. But Obama hasn’t even meet w/ Graham & McCain on HC. How bi-partisan is he being?

And being a last-word kind of guy, I said:

Well, in fairness — he had promised to do that on national security issues. I don’t remember him saying he’d [be] consulting them on domestic…

I’m not even sure how we got onto Obama. Oh, I guess because of the Waterloo thing….

So I guess Tim was casting Jim as Washington. Hey, whether Washington or Cornwallis, I’m having trouble picturing him in a powdered wig. Now if he were Bonaparte or Wellington, that wouldn’t be a problem, since the wigs had gone out of style by 1815.

Take me, Starbucks — I’m yours

First, a confession: I really like Starbucks’ new ad campaign. When you Google it, you find a lot of people sneering at it. They find it pompous, overbearing, supercilious, and so forth. Everything that people who don’t like Starbucks don’t like about Starbucks comes into play.

But me, I love Starbucks. So when those ads — which I first saw in The New Yorker recently — say things like “If your coffee isn’t perfect, we’ll make it over. If it’s still not perfect, you must not be in a Starbucks,” I just think, that’s absolutely true. Other people think it’s obnoxious.

But as I said, I love Starbucks. There was a time when I was prepared not to. Back when I was not a coffee drinker, back when I avoided caffeine (and fell asleep a lot in meetings), I bought into the anti-Starbucks propaganda. When Starbucks replaced the Joyful Alternative in Five Points, I sneered along with all the others at the supreme irony of that venerable head shop (which, let’s face it, had since its early-70s heyday morphed into more of a boutique) with the perfectly symbolic name being displaced by this ultimate, soul-less cookie-cutter corporation that was trying to take over the world, yadda-yadda.

Of course, at the time, I had never been in a Starbucks, much less tried the coffee.

My conversion began in New York City in 2004. I was there to write about the Republican National Convention. National political conventions will wear you out if you’re a delegate, with delegation meetings, the plenary sessions, the parties, the sightseeing, the shopping, and more parties. No one ever gets a full night’s sleep at a convention. For journalists, it’s worse. You’re imbedded with a delegation, and you try to be there for everything they experience. Then, when they’re grabbing a nap, you write. You also branch out and check out newsworthy things that the delegates don’t do. Two-four hours sleep at night is about par.

There was a Starbucks near my hotel (of course; there’s one on practically every block in Manhattan), so I fell into the habit of grabbing a tall House Blend before I’d sit down to the laptop in my room. A House Blend with several Sugars in the Raw, because my palate had not yet adjusted to enjoying coffee in its own right.

As time wore on, I got more and more into it. Starbucks coffee is inextricably tied up with the early days of my first blog. One of my favorite early blog posts, headlined “The Caffeine Also Rises,” was — while not technically written in a Starbucks, but in a Barnes & Noble, was nevertheless written on Starbucks coffee, which B&N proudly serves — written on a coffee high. An excerpt:

This is blogging. This is the true blogging, el blogando verdadero, con afición, the kind a man wants if he is a man. The kind that Jake and Lady Brett might have done, if they’d had wi-fi hotspots in the Montparnasse.

What brings this on is that I am writing standing up, Hemingway-style, at the counter in a cafe. But there is nothing romantic about this, which the old man would appreciate. Sort of. This isn’t his kind of cafe. It’s not a cafe he could ever have dreamed of. It’s a Starbucks in the middle of a Barnes and Noble (sorry, Rhett, but I’m out of town today, and there’s no Happy Bookseller here). About the one good and true thing that can be said in favor of being in this place at this time is that there is basically no chance of running into Gertrude Stein here. Or Alice, either.

I’m standing because there are no electrical outlets near the tables, just here at the counter. And trying to sit on one of these high stools and type kills my shoulders. No, it’s not my wound from the Great War, just middle age….

In those early days, blogging and Starbucks coffee sort of went together like Kerouac’s continuous rolls of butcher paper and benzedrine. But in a good way…

Over time, I quit taking the sugar, because it got in the way of the wonderful taste of the coffee. House Blend. Komodo Dragon. Sidami. Gold Coast. Verona (my favorite). Even the ubiquitous Pike Place. They’re all wonderful.

But beyond that, there’s the Starbucks experience. Yeah, it’s all based in a conscious marketing strategy, but it’s a strategy based on good stuff that works. For me, anyway. First, there’s the smell, which immediately makes you glad you’re there, and makes everything else about the place more pleasant. Each Starbucks is both warm and cool, in all the positive senses of those words. The music is pleasant, and chosen with enough thought and originality to rise miles above the stuff you hear in most stores. Everything is nicer in a Starbucks. Women are more beautiful, for instance. No, I don’t think they are objectively more beautiful; they just seem that way. It probably all arises from the smell, but the rush after you get started on that first cup probably plays a role, too.

The whole thing just works. It works to an extent that if I were ever to endorse a product for money, the one I could endorse more wholeheartedly than almost any other would be Starbucks.

Hint, hint.

For a couple of years, I’ve had this idea, which I would pitch to someone at Starbucks if I knew how to get in touch with the right person. Basically, it would be to have Starbucks sponsor my blog. And in return for lots of free, gratuitous mentions of how wonderful Starbucks is, I would get a nice chunk of change and all the coffee I want.

I would spend a couple of hours a couple of times a week blogging live from different Starbucks stores, with my Webcam on. I could do impromptu interviews with the people who come and go (and at the Gervais St. store, there’s almost always someone newsworthy to chat with), and otherwise share the experience while blending blog and product. This I could do with no ethical qualms at all, because my love of the product would be completely unfeigned.

There are a couple of problems with this idea, I’ll admit. First, I’ve seen no sign that anything like this fits into the Starbucks marketing plan. Second, I have no idea how to find the right person to pitch it to.

So I’ll just post it here, and refer to it from Twitter. Starbucks is one of my followers on Twitter, so there is an extremely thin chance that it will get to the right person, and an even thinner one that said person will like it. But nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Why am I passively pitching this now? Because I’m about to try to start selling advertising on my blog. I don’t know how or whether that will work, or whether it will be worth the bother, but I thought I might as well give it a try. And Starbucks would sort of be my dream client.

Dude, you’re not getting a Dell, are you?

As I’ve mentioned, I’ve been hanging out at an ad agency recently, which means I’ve been dwelling in the world of Mac. That’s all they’ve got around here. I’m writing this on one.

So as I got ready to get a laptop — I had decided it was a necessity, with the freelance work I’m doing and all — I had a number of people around me telling me I must convert to Apple, for all the usual reasons and more. You’ve heard them: More solid, more reliable, better designed, better software, far better for graphics, cooler, etc. In particular, they said, a Mac would be better for video production, something I’ve wanted to do more of for the blog.

So, of course, I went out and got a Dell. First, it’s about a fourth of the price (my daughter the graphic designer is buying a Mac laptop, and it retails at $2,600 with the software she needs). Second… to paraphrase Billy Jack, I’ve tried; I’ve really tried. When Jean and the kids at the school tell me to practice nonviolence and use a Mac, I really try. But when I’m doing something that would normally call for a right-button mouse click, and my fingers fumble with that one massive button on a Mac… I just go berserk!

Bottom line, I’ve been using PCs too long. The ways of navigating through Windows are built into my body’s muscle memory, and it’s too much work to change.

So I got a Dell. Specifically, this model Dell Studio. Last week, when they were on sale for $80 less than the price on that link. An Intel Core 2 Duo processor T6500, 4GB RAM, 320 Gig hard drive, plus the usual bells and whistles that have become standard — DVD burner, multi-format card reader, Webcam and so forth.

It not only had what I needed on it, but I liked the look and feel of it. It looked and felt solid and well-built. Compared to the Inspiron, it was like a Volvo versus a Trabi. The Inspiron seemed chintzy by comparison. It had little features that don’t mean much, I guess, but which I liked — for instance, it had a slot for CDs and DVDs instead of that flimsy tray that pops out, and which always makes me afraid I’m going to break it pressing the disc in. That seemed clean and smart, better design.

And the first few days went great. I was particularly pleased with my first effort with the Webcam.

Then yesterday, it crashed. Yeah, I know, you Mac folk are sneering now that that’s what PCs do; they crash. And yes, they do. It’s something PC users deal with. Rebooting makes for a nice bathroom break, gets us away from work for a moment. Part of life.

But this crash was atypical. I was running Firefox in two or three windows, with maybe two other low-intensity applications up, when everything froze up. I went to Task Manager, and saw that my CPU usage was at 100 percent, which was impossible. I bailed out using the power button, booted back up, and tried running Firefox alone — and it was showing more than 50 percent CPU usage. One of the cores of the duo core was running at capacity, the other hardly running at all.

So I took the Dell back to Best Buy, where an interesting thing happened. The Geek Squad guy, after pronouncing that I had an incurable hardware problem, leveled with me, saying that he wouldn’t buy a Dell. Yes, once they were reliable, but he had seen too many Studios come back. I should get an Asus or an HP instead.

Funny thing was, the sales guy last week had tried, gently to steer me toward an Asus. But I had never heard of Asus. I had used Dells for years, so that’s what I got. Now, I went back to that same sales guy, and he nodded and said yeah, he liked the Asus better but I had been obviously set on a Dell…

So we went to look at the comparable Asus — same processor, same memory, same hard drive size. The battery was longer-lasting. The screen was smaller (although perhaps slightly sharper). It had the flimsy pop-out tray instead of the slot I liked. It cost $30 more than I had paid for the Dell.

And it looked cheap and flimsy compared to the Dell. Sorry, but aesthetically it was not pleasing, and even though these tech guys were all but beating me over the head with the inside knowledge that it was very solid and reliable, it didn’t LOOK solid. Finally, I was unable to call up the Webcam to try it out, because of some quirk of how they had the machine set up in the store.

So, sheepishly, I said I wanted to try another Dell Studio, hoping that this one wouldn’t be a lemon. The sales guy said he understood, that it was like buying a car; you either liked the look and feel or you didn’t. But I could hardly look him in the eye, because I knew he thought I was an idiot, a guy who just doesn’t learn.

And when we got up to the customer service desk — where I was to leave it to get it “optimized” (cleaning off all the marketing junk such as trial software, and installing service packs), which is why I don’t have it yet — and I realized the Geek Squad guy who had warned me was standing right there and had to have noticed what I was doing… I almost went over and apologized to him.

But I figure I’ve got two weeks to try this one out (and longer, if it has a hardware failure), and if it isn’t everything it should be, I can go back and get the Asus, no questions asked. So I can’t lose, right?

By the way, I really hope I’m not getting these guys in trouble telling about how open and honest they were. Frankly, I think they should both get a raise, because they were going out of their way to help a customer. And they were both obviously good at their jobs, very knowledgeable about the product. Bright young men, a credit to their organization. I felt much better about Best Buy for having dealt with them.

It’s just that in this case, the customer was too stupid and stubborn to listen to them. Proof yet again that in the marketplace, consumers do not make rational choices, notwithstanding all the propaganda. At least, this one doesn’t. Neither do most people; I’m just logical enough to understand how fallible I am.

Today’s reading, ripped from today’s headlines

Gotta run get ready to read at the noon Mass. I have the 1st reading today, and I just read over it. It’s pretty topical. It’s from Deuteronomy:

Moses said to the people:
“Now, Israel, hear the statutes and decrees
which I am teaching you to observe,
that you may live, and may enter in and take possession of the land
which the LORD, the God of your fathers, is giving you.
In your observance of the commandments of the LORD, your God,
which I enjoin upon you,
you shall not add to what I command you nor subtract from it.
Observe them carefully,
for thus will you give evidence
of your wisdom and intelligence to the nations,
who will hear of all these statutes and say,
‘This great nation is truly a wise and intelligent people.’
For what great nation is there
that has gods so close to it as the LORD, our God, is to us
whenever we call upon him?
Or what great nation has statutes and decrees
that are as just as this whole law
which I am setting before you today?”

Only it modern language, we would speak of Israel as the one outstanding democracy in the Mideast, and therefore a nation worthy of emulation, instead of speaking in terms of the statutes and decrees.

And then we would launch into a vehement debate over the whole thing about God having decreed that the people of Israel should “enter in and take possession of the land which the LORD, the God of your fathers, is giving you,” and do so in perpetuity.

And to think, some people think the Bible has no relevance to their lives. Of course, nowadays plenty of people don’t think anything that goes on elsewhere in the world is their concern…

Having delivered that mini-homily, gotta run now. Maybe I’ll see you at Mass.

Peter, you left out the “lashing” part

Hmmm… After taking up the cudgels for John O’Connor and others in the media whom my friend Peter Hamby says the governor “lashed out” at and “blasted” today, I saw the video clip above.

What I saw, and what you will probably see as well, is the usual, casual, lollygaggin’ Mark Sangfroid delivery, delivered complete with little chuckles thrown in — not exactly a foaming rant. (Which means that, while I hear the guy really has a temper, I still have never really seen it fully on display.) More of a passive-aggressive sort of delivery.

Missing is what in text seems like the worst part of the session, which is what really set me off (everyone knows I have a temper), and which Peter describes thusly:

Sanford singled out John O’Connor — a political reporter for South Carolina’s largest newspaper, The State — and accused the newspaper of covering the political back-and-forth over the travel controversy while skimming over Sanford’s arguments defending himself.

Sanford took one question, but refused several others. But when O’Connor asked a question about private flights that Sanford failed to report on public disclosures, the governor became irritable.

“John, we’re not going to play your game,” he said, jabbing his finger in the reporter’s direction. “I don’t work for you.”

Wish that part was on the video.

Now, I just think Sanford was taking unfair advantage of his bully pulpit to make the press the issue rather than his own misconduct. But he did it without the ill grace of a Spiro Agnew. He was affable about it. Which means he still has his equanimity. Which you can see as good or bad. Personally, I’d like to see a guy who was feeling that pressure and moving a little closer to changing his mind about himself. But I don’t see that, either.

What do y’all think?

Our governor certainly doesn’t lack for gall

Today, our governor, increasingly detached from reality, lashed out at the media. At least, he did according to CNN’s Peter Hamby:

(CNN) – South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford lashed out at the media on Friday, admonishing reporters at a press conference for their coverage of the multiple investigations into his travel expenses.

“One of the frankly disappointing things I’ve seen in several instances here over the last 60 days of my life since I’ve been through this thing is that in some cases it’s not been about objective journalism, its been about advocacy journalism with an agenda,” he said.

Sanford was in the town of Conway revealing his plans to waive confidentiality in a state Ethics Commission investigation into his use of state airplanes and taxpayer-funded travel, a move that will allow to the public to view the results of the probe.

But the governor, who has adopted an increasingly combative tone in recent days, also blasted members of the state legislature for being hypocritical, accusing them of spending state money on travel as well. He called on members of Senate and House to make their travel documents public.

Then he turned his sights on the South Carolina press corps, with whom he had a largely cordial relationship before he turned the state’s political world upside down in June by copping to an extramarital affair with an Argentine woman. He chided the media for its coverage of his travel record and said he has been an excellent steward of taxpayer money, unlike previous administrations…

… and I trust Peter’s account. He’s young, but steady.

The nerve of this guy Mark Sanford. With all of this insanity that he’s dragged us through because of his own narcissistic little drama, and which he keeps dragging us through, he has the unmitigated gall to lash out at the hard-working people who are merely reporting it to the people of South Carolina. Every day, he amazes me a little more.

I call your attention in particular to this passage:

Sanford singled out John O’Connor — a political reporter for South Carolina’s largest newspaper, The State — and accused the newspaper of covering the political back-and-forth over the travel controversy while skimming over Sanford’s arguments defending himself.

Sanford took one question, but refused several others. But when O’Connor asked a question about private flights that Sanford failed to report on public disclosures, the governor became irritable.

“John, we’re not going to play your game,” he said, jabbing his finger in the reporter’s direction. “I don’t work for you.”

Ah, but see, governor, that’s the thing — you do work for John. And you also work for the other four million-plus people of this state, which includes Andre Bauer, and most emphatically includes the many, many of us who believe your one great remaining chance to perform a service for this state is to take Andre up on his offer and resign. If you do that, we no longer have to be subjected to this farce of having you as governor, and will be spared the risk of having Andre elected in 2010.

But as each day goes by, with each outburst from you that we witness or hear of, our hope that you will come to your senses and do the right thing fades.

We deserve better than this.

Political art, for art’s sake

Do you like my latest header image (I figured y’all had had your fill of the ugly, rusty car with the big Confederate flag painted on it)? It’s filled with hidden meaning, regarding our political past and future.

It was taken at the S.C. State Museum Dec. 15, 2007, a Saturday, after a John McCain event in which he had publicly accepted the support of a large number of retired admirals and generals. (It was the same day I got his attractive young press secretary to promise me, on video, that she would quit smoking if he got the nomination. I wonder whether she did?) He and supporters were getting onto the elevator, and before the doors closed I got this artsy-blurry shot, which I think looks fairly cool.

At the far right, somewhat out of focus, you have a figure from our recent political past. Then at the opposite end, you  see the back of someone we’ll hear a lot from going into 2010. Since he represents the future, you can’t see his face. You know, the future being hidden from us and all.

Like I said, Baby, fraught with meaning…

mccain-032

Notes from the Benjamin campaign

benjamin-notes

Quite literally…

This morning when I met with Steve Benjamin and Jack Van Loan at The Gourmet Shop, Steve started doodling on his legal pad to illustrate benjamin-notes2the problem with Columbia’s current system of government. As you may be able to better see at right in the low-res action photo from my Blackberry, he drew two boxes. The one on top showed how in the current system, forces push from every direction, and the result is you go nowhere. He was suggesting that with a strong mayor system (the box below), you can focus political energy to move forward.

Then later, he stared illustrating all sorts of other concepts. The list to the right center shows what he thinks a leader needs to do in Columbia. At the bottom is a series of questions elaborating on the building and articulating a vision things.

Anyway, always come to bradwarthen.com for the best stolen documents from political campaigns…

OK, the truth: I asked Steve for the page, and he gave it to me. I like to try all sorts of content on the blog…

But is not being a “yes man” a good thing or a bad thing, job-searchwise?

Jack Van Loan, continuing to promote Steve Benjamin’s candidacy for mayor of Colatown, is hosting a serious of informal meetings with the candidate and folks Jack hopes will support him, or at least offer constructive feedback.

I was one of the guests for coffee this morning. As I’ve done with Vincent Sheheen and everyone else, I made it clear from the outset that I was just there to collect info, that I have NOT decided whom to support. I like Steve, but I also like Mayor Bob. They said fine, they understood.

Anyway, perhaps because of that statement on my part, but probably also based on knowing me over the years, Jack said something at the end of the meeting that got me to thinking about my own situation. I forget the exact context. I think he was saying he hoped Steve would get support among people who think for themselves. Anyway, here’s what he said:

This guy is the last guy in the world if you want a “yes man.”

He was indicating me when he said it.

I thanked him for the compliment — and coming from my friend Jack, I knew it was a compliment — but then I thought, Is it a good thing for people to think of me that way? Is it good, in particular, for prospective employers to think of me that way?

There’s no doubt that it’s accurate. It’s not that I’m not a team player — I am very much a team player, vigorously so, once I’ve made up my mind to be on the team. But I may take some persuading.

A couple of nights ago, I watched the Jim Carry vehicle “Yes Man” (which by the way was a lot better than I thought it was going to be). The idea was that a very negative guy resolved to start saying “Yes” to life, “Yes” in all circumstances, and it made him more open to life and happier — until it started to catch up with him.

I’m not a negative guy, certainly not the way the Carrey character was. But I do question, and challenge, and need to be persuaded if you want me on board. Once I am on board, I’ll be your fiercest ally. Under certain circumstances, I’m thinking that could be invaluable to the right employer. But do the employers themselves think so?

Why did The Beatles break up? I can’t tell…

29724352-29724353-large

Well, Rolling Stone certainly got my attention when I saw this cover headline in the checkout line at Earth Fare yesterday:

Why

The

Beatles

Broke Up

THE INSIDE STORY

So I immediately resolved to look up the piece and read it when I got to my laptop.

But I couldn’t, because they didn’t post the actual article. Oh, they posted all sorts of teasers and promotional material, such as the 29722154-29722159-slarge1story behind the story,” and gallery after gallery of fab pics of the lads back in the day.

But not the actual story.

We can debate from now until the last newspaper closes the relative wisdom of posting one’s precious content online for free. Maybe Rolling Stone’s got it going on teasing us to distraction this way. But I wonder: Which approach sells more magazines — this, or the Vogue approach? No, I didn’t go out and buy a copy of the Vogue with the Jenny Sanford piece; I was satisfied with what I found online. But I’ll bet the fact that bloggers were able to read, and then tout, the contents did lead to at least some people who are more in Vogue‘s demographic to go out and buy the slick dead-tree version.

I don’t know. But I know I’m not shelling out $4.99 to read the piece about the fall of The Beatles. Hey, I lived through the time, and I know why The Beatles broke up — because the ’60s ended. Duh.

Now there was a time when I would have shelled out the money. But not anymore. I guess that shows how old I am. And that the ’60s really are over…

No, Burl, THIS was a beard that needed trimming

18

My high school classmate Burl out in Hawaii posted this picture taken on a recent family trip to the Mainland, and observes:

Jeez, I need a beard trim before I’m mistaken for Santa Bin Laden.

Obviously, that’s Burl down front in the Buddha-like pose. But no, Burl, you shouldn’t worry until it looks like mine in the above photo from late 2004.

Burl’s lucky. He’s got one of those thick, yet maleable, beards that lend themselves to actual grooming and shaping. When I grow mine, I have to settle for more of a Russian dissident or Mad Monk look. Hey, we’re each the way God made us, and with me, He showed His sense of humor. Believe it or not, the beard in the photo WAS carefully trimmed. You should see what it would have looked like otherwise…

Oh, and prospective employers — this is NOT the way I look now. Now, I’m all neat and ready to go. The above photo was taken, like, on my day off years ago. I grow a fast beard…

Maybe I’m putting too much into Twitter…

It occurs to me that maybe too much of my energy that could go into making my blog better is going into Twitter.

Traditionally, I get a lot of my blog ideas when I’m reading the papers over breakfast in the morning. That first cup of coffee coinciding with the reading generally leads to far more ideas than I have time for. I used to stew through the morning meeting, which came right after breakfast, when I was at the paper because I was anxious to get to the computer and start putting some of the ideas on the blog before my enthusiasm (or the coffee, whichever you want to think of it as) wore off.

Now, since I started Twittering, I just go ahead and post a lot of the ideas as they occur to me, on my Blackberry, while eating. Which is great, I guess. Except that this gets each of those ideas out of my system, and by the time I’m at my laptop (It’s possible to blog on the Blackberry, but it’s a LOT harder), my mind has moved on.

So they don’t go totally to waste, bleeding off into the Twitter void, I decided to reproduce this morning’s tweets here, improved with links to the original sources of these brief comments.

You’ll see that only one was developed into a full-fledged blog post. The others I share for whatever minimal value they have:

  • Gov says calls to quit are “pure politics.” Let’s hope so. The alternative is the divine right of kings. (This, of course, is the one that became a blog post.)
  • Paper says “South Carolinians aged 18-20 cannot drink alcohol.” Actually, they CAN, but aren’t allowed to…
  • Twitter followers come and go so quickly. The number constantly fluctuates; the pattern eludes me…
  • Ad in paper touts “powerful joint pill,” which makes me think “THC,” but that’s not it, apparently…
  • Sanford sez other govs flew 1st Class. Yeah, but they weren’t hypocrites about it. Big difference…
  • Just inadvertently did a subversive thing: went to the WSJ Web site and searched for “trotsky”
  • Just saw meter maid downtown, and the bag across her shoulder made her look a little like a military man…

And as a bonus, here’s one I just posted:

  • Gov says he won’t be “railroaded” out of office. How about “trolleycarred?” Or “pickup-trucked?” Or “little-red-wagoned?” Any mode will do.

Time for some ‘pure politics:’ Who can talk sense to our governor?

Check it out — I have a new Webcam. And so today, I decided to go with some video commentary rather than do all that tedious typing.

But to add a little something to this clip, here are some links to what I’m talking about:

Today’s job fair: Sweatin’ at the museum

Today's job fair at the S.C. State Museum. (Don't know whether all these folks are job-seekers; some may just be visiting museum.)

Today's job fair at the S.C. State Museum. (Don't know whether all these folks are job-seekers; some may just be visiting museum.)

Well, the job fair at the State Museum today was a great success, if you measure it by turnout. The place was packed during the noon hour. I had meant to go earlier (it started at 11), but I wanted to swing by the Bauer thing at the State House, so I think I was probably there at the peak.

By the time I got in from the jammed parking lot I was already pretty sweaty, even though I didn’t put on my coat until I was inside. Looks like I’ve got another candidate for the cleaners (sorry, bud, but I don’t know any way to job hunt except in a coat and tie). And for all the sweat, it wasn’t as productive for me. I think the employers at the Fort Jackson one I went to probably came closer to having openings that I might be suited to. Better yet, that one was less crowded, and it was easier to have a normal conversation with the folks at the tables.

This one was a madhouse. I guess some civilians hesitate to go to something on the Fort, but they definitely didn’t hesitate to show for this one.

Not much else to say, except to share my Tweets from while I was there:

This job fair has some of same names as Ft. Jax one: Aflac, Richco sheriff, others. Much bigger turnout…

I’m ruining another jacket milling about sweatily at job fair. A dry cleaner’s dream…about 4 hours ago from web

Toys not as good at this job fair as the last one. All I have so far is an unexciting keyring from Carmax.about 4 hours ago from web

Mary Kay and Avon going head-to-head at the job fair…about 4 hours ago from web

Maybe I’ll come back to job fair later. Can’t have tete-a-tete w/ prospective employer in this madhouse…about 4 hours ago from web

Video from Bauer press conference

Andre Bauer’s press conference today was pretty much as advertised. I dropped by to check it out on my way to the job fair today at the State Museum.

Above is some sketchy video from my Blackberry. (And just to show how good I am to y’all, here is much higher-quality video at thestate.com.) You can see me shooting it, my arm obscuring my face, in the photo below by Tim Dominick of The State. You may be able to tell that the turnout on the part of media types was somewhat sparser than for the now-infamous Sanford press conference that started all this rolling.

No, excuse me: What started it rolling was Gina Smith catching the gov at the Atlanta airport getting off the plane from Argentina. Had that not happened, there would have been no confession, and we’d probably still be in the dark. Gina was at today’s press confab, and I was able to congratulate her for the S.C. Scoop of the Century. I’ve had some pretty good stories in my lengthy career, and put one over on the competition a few times in my reporting days. But rare is the reporter who can say that something this broke purely because she was on the spot in the right place at the right time. Sure, the credit goes to teamwork — someone else got the tip that the governor had been seen in Argentina, and the folks at The State determined that there was a chance he’d be on this flight — but the glory goes to Gina.

Anyway, the Andre thing told us pretty much what we knew. In essence:

  1. He called on the governor to resign, becoming the first statewide elected official to do so.
  2. He promised that if the governor quits and makes Andre governor before Andre announces his own candidacy for governor in October, Andre will not run in 2010.
  3. He made it pretty clear that if it takes longer than that — such as if we have to wait for the Legislature to be in session to impeach Sanford — the deal is off.

So, if ANYBODY has any influence over Mark Sanford (something which I doubt, unless his “soulmate” chooses to weigh in; this guy is singularly immune to what other people think), now would be a really good time to try to get him to quit.

379-bauer_td122standaloneprod_affiliate74

Do you MEAN it this time, Andre? If so, it’s settled: Sanford should go

How about it, Gov? (2006 file photo by Brad Warthen)

How about it, Gov? (2006 file photo by Brad Warthen)

The State is trumpeting the latest word from Gov Lite Andre Bauer that he would NOT run for governor in 2010 if only we’ll let him serve in the job as a temp between now and then:

EXCLUSIVE – Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer plans to call on embattled Gov. Mark Sanford to step down during a noon news conference today. Bauer will also renew his pledge to bow out of the 2010 gubernatorial race should Sanford resign within a month or so. By early October Bauer will formally announce his intentions to seek the GOP nomination for governor in 2010.

Bauer is the first constitutional officer to join a growing chorus of lawmakers pushing for Sanford to resign, including a majority of Republican state senators.

Today’s announcement, according to a source close to Bauer, is intended to send a message to State House leadership that Sanford needs to step down and Bauer won’t stand in the way. Some lawmakers have been hesitant to push for Sanford’s resignation because it would give Bauer an unfair advantage in the 2010 race, as he would be running for governor as an incumbent.

There are several points to make about this development:

  • First, does he really mean it this time? Andre floated the “I won’t run if you let me be governor now” balloon before, then added a sotto voce “maybe” to the non-pledge. If we can hold him to it this time, it makes all the difference.
  • All the difference, I say again. It changes everything. Before some (such as my friends at The State) have maintained it was too dangerous for South Carolina for Mark Sanford to resign now, because it would give Andre a leg up in the 2010 race, and the actual election of Andre Bauer as our governor for four years would be disastrous. I have disagreed. I mean, I agree that Andre winning in 2010 would be horrific. But I disagree on whether an interim elevation would help him. Here’s the thing, folks: As things stand, Andre has about as good a chance as any other Republican of being elected if he runs. Scoff if you will, but I have watched this unlikely fellow win election after election when it made no sense at all. In a crowded field, he would not get nearly the scrutiny he should get. But put him in the top job now, at a time when the governor’s office is under the closest scrutiny I have ever seen in this state, and his many flaws would be magnified; they could not be missed. To me, the one way to make sure Andre Bauer is not elected governor is to give him the job now. But if he promises not to run, and we can hold him to it, there’s nothing left to argue about. There is no question that it would be in the best interests of the state to let him occupy the seat for a few months.
  • And no, we wouldn’t be giving up anything in the leadership department. Even before the current scandals, Mark Sanford was a dead loss for this state as governor. The limitations of the office, the circumstances of his promotion, and the wariness of State House leadership would prevent Andre from doing real harm. And since there was no chance Mark Sanford was going to do any good, there’s nothing lost. Yes, this state needs real leadership from the governor’s office. But letting Andre have the job now increases the chance that the voters will get serious and elect somebody good next year.
  • Unfortunately, “Sanford should go” is a lot easier to say than to make happen. The man is immune to political pressure from within his own party or from any other quarter. He does what pleases Mark Sanford. He always has, and always will. And the rumblings about impeachment are unpersuasive to me. The idea that South Carolina Republicans will actually summon the will power to impeach one of their own — even one whom they despise as much as they do Sanford — is hard for me to imagine. We’ve seen some unlikely things happen in the news lately — Santee Cooper backing down on the coal plant, the Rev. Jimmy Jones deciding not to build a duplicative homeless service shelter, neither of which I expected to see — but SC Republicans summoning the chutzpah to do that would be truly stunning. Anyway, the deal Andre is offering doesn’t seem to apply in the case of impeachment. Sanford has to resign, and he’s under a deadline to do it — by the first of October, roughly. So if anyone has the lever that will move our gov, now is the time to insert it and start prying.
  • Talk about your ironies: By making this gesture, calling upon the governor to resign and making his promise, Andre Bauer is exercising true leadership. In fact, one would have to go back a few years to find an instance of leadership by a governor or would-be governor that compares to this. Yes, the idea of Andre Bauer being our governor is appalling. And yet he’s doing this. Whatever else we say, I give him credit for it. Sure, he’s probably banking on the smart bet that there’s no way Sanford will quit. But it’s still impressive.

What do y’all think?

I’ll bet Obama asked him not to shave, either


First and foremost, I want to congratulate fellow South Carolinian Ben Bernanke for keeping his job under trying circumstances. I’m glad he doesn’t have to go back to working at South of the Border.

Any time any South Carolinian can keep his job in this economy, considering the total cock-up the folks in charge have made of it, it’s good news… Oh, wait, Ben Bernanke IS one of the people in charge of the economy…

Seriously, though, I have no complaints about Bernanke’s performance. And maybe he has even helped us avoid things getting worse, as the president suggested today in reappointing him.

At the same time, I’m not sure how much difference it makes. The president wanted to signal stability — was in such a hurry to do so that neither he nor Ben could take a moment to put on a tie — and he did that with this action. Fine. And I love it when Democrats appoint Republicans, and vice versa (in fact, about the only Republicans I can stand are those who would appoint or be appointed by Democrats, and again vice versa).

And that might be as far as substance goes. It would be unsettling to change horses at this point, so the president interrupted his vacation to tell the markets he’s not going to shake them up that way. Fine.

And while it wasn’t mentioned, I’ll bet part of the president’s private conversation with Bernanke involved begging the Fed chair to not even consider ever shaving his beard. You don’t think that’s important? Huh. Shows what you know. Just as Ben Bernanke is an expert on the Great Depression, I happen to be an expert on the subject of the economic impact of Ben Bernanke’s beard. I was quoted by The Wall Street Journal on the subject, no less. Do you know anyone else who’s been quoted by the Journal on that subject? I didn’t think so. So all right, then: That makes me the world’s leading authority.

And speaking ex cathedra from my considerable store of expertise, I can assure you that the president reappointed the Dillon Countian for the same reason why Bernanke doesn’t get up one morning and decide to shave (even though I sort of suggested he should last year, but the situation was more desperate then): Because the markets couldn’t handle the change. They’re too fragile.

Welcome to the 2010 race, Henry

Let’s all welcome Henry McMaster to the 2010 gubernatorial contest. Or, if you won’t, I will.

I like Henry. For a guy who was our fourth choice for attorney general back in 2002 (we endorsed Jon Ozmint in the primary, Larry Richter in the runoff and Steve Benjamin in the general), I think he has turned out very well. This is partly by comparison with his predecessor, but on the whole I think Henry’s done well.

Then there was the fact that Henry backed John McCain through thick and thin. In the darkest days of his quest for the GOP nomination, when everybody was saying he should quit, Henry was proud to stand up and support the senator from Arizona. And since McCain was to me the only guy in the GOP contest worth considering, that counts for a lot with me.

For me, those two considerations — the job he’s done as AG, and his sticking with McCain when almost no one else would — more than cancel the qualms I had about Henry back when he was best known as a party chairman who regularly traded partisan silliness with his counterpart Dick Harpootlian.

At this point, Henry seems clearly the strongest candidate on the GOP side — especially after my interview with Gresham Barrett early on gave me the strong impression that he hasn’t even thought about what he would do as governor, and nothing I’ve heard since has disspelled that.

Not that Henry is chock full o’ specifics yet, either. And this seems to be an occupational hazard for Republicans. They know they have to live down the disaster that Sanford has been, but they are fearful of alienating the support that the governor continues to enjoy, bizarrely, among the GOP rank-and-file (which is to say, among Republicans who don’t actually have to deal with the guy, which is always where his greatest support has lain).

So they tiptoe. So we have Henry, in the video above, speaking vaguely, and awkwardly, about how “there’s been too much dishonesty and too many scandals…,” implying he’d get us away from all that. But what dishonesty? Which scandals? What is it that YOU, Henry McMaster disapprove of? Let us know where you stand. We all disapprove of “scandals” and “dishonesty,” but tell us where you see those bad things, so we can decide whether we approve of YOU.

The State seems to believe the “scandals” Henry refers to have to do with Sanford. But I don’t know that — not until Henry SAYS that’s what he means. And if so, he needs to go further: Which aspects of the governor’s behavior does he find scandalous? His affair? His use of the state plane as a personal taxi when he’s telling state employees to double up in hotel rooms? How about the fact that as governor he does not govern, in the sense of taking responsibility for the course of our state? Is that scandalous? And if so, why?

Beyond that, his initial platform seems remarkably like that of uber-Democrat Dwight Drake: Jobs. Again, not exactly a controversial position, not a defining trait, not a chisel that will help sculpt a clear image in the voter’s mind.

So I go into this inclined to like Henry, but wanting to hear more.

‘Detainees?’ Why not just call them ‘prisoners?’

Today, reading about the latest on Gitmo and torture and prosecutions and so forth, I reached my saturation point on the word “detainees.”

Personally, I’m not too squeamish to go ahead and call them “prisoners.” Why don’t we just go ahead and do that? We’ve been holding some of these people since 2001, and many of them we don’t ever intend to let go (and if we do, we’re crazy). So why not “prisoners?”

Yes, I get it that their legal status is unsettled, and in U.S. crime-and-punishment parlance we generally save “prisoner” for someone duly convicted to spend time in a “prison,” which is an institution we distinguish from jails where people await trial or holding cells where they await bail or whatever.

But if we can’t be honest enough to say that Gitmo is a prison and they are prisoners, whatever the technicalities, could we please come up with something that sounds a little less prissy, somewhat less a-tiptoe, than “detainees?”

Whenever I hear the term, I picture a Victorian gentleman saying “Pardon me, sir, but I must detain you for a moment…”

Whose sensibilities are we overprotecting by the use of this word? Those who feel like the “detainees'” “rights” are being trampled? Those like me who are glad we have a secure place to put some of these people? (Hey, go ahead and close Gitmo if you’d like. That’s what Obama says he’ll do and it’s what McCain would have done, too. Fine. But find someplace just as secure to put the ones we need to hang onto.)

Maybe we could sort out all the rest of the mess — the legal status, the security issues, who should interrogate and how, whom to keep and whom to send home and whom to send to a third location, whether any of our own should be prosecuted, etc. — if we started by coming up with something less mealy-mouthed to call these people.

Santee Cooper on Pee Dee coal plant: Never mind

You know, back during the controversy, when everyone else seemed to know exactly what they thought on the subject, I never was sure whether I favored Santee Cooper building the proposed coal plant in the Pee Dee or not.

The arguments against were fairly strong-sounding, but they never fully answered the question of where the power would come from instead. I would have found the arguers more persuasive if they had said we need to expedite nuclear plants. But they said too often that we could do away with the need via conservation. I’m all for conservation, but that’s a solution that makes more sense if you’re not planning on growing your economy. And in South Carolina, we need to grow our economy.

Now there’s an answer to where the power will come from — Duke Energy. And so now even the former advocates are saying “never mind,” which makes sense:

PINOPOLIS – Santee Cooper will not pursue construction of a controversial coal-fired power plant that has drawn intense opposition from environmentalists over the amount of mercury and greenhouse gas pollution the facility would release.

The board of directors of the state-owned utility voted unanimously today to suspend an effort to secure state permits for the $2.2 billion plant in Florence County along the Great Pee Dee River. The board’s vote followed a similar vote this morning during a board committee meeting.

The agency’s action makes it unlikely the plant will ever be built, said Santee Cooper board chairman O.L. Thompson.

Committee members and Santee Cooper staff said the down economy, looming federal regulation of carbon and a potential agreement with another power company made it possible to forgo building the power plant.

So I don’t have to struggle to make up my mind about it any more. That’s good.