Monthly Archives: July 2012

The real problem with the U.S. Olympic uniforms

27 Replies

After noting that failing to have the U.S. Olympic team’s uniforms made in this country was a serious missed opportunity, Peggy Noonan raises the other problem, which has occurred to me whenever I’ve seen photos of these ridiculous togs:

But that isn’t the biggest problem. That would be the uniforms themselves. They don’t really look all that American. Have you seen them? Do they say “America” to you? Berets with little stripes? Double breasted tuxedo-like jackets with white pants? Funny rounded collars on the shirts? Huge Polo logos? They look like some European bureaucrat’s idea of a secret militia, like Brussels’s idea of a chic new army. They’re like the international community Steven Spielberg lined up to put on the spaceship at the end of “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.”

Americans wear baseball caps, trucker hats, cowboy hats, watch caps, Stetsons, golf caps, even Panama hats and fedoras. They wear jeans and suits and khakis and shorts and workout clothes. The Americans in the now-famous uniform picture look like something out of a Vogue spread where the models arrayed on the yacht look like perfect representatives of the new global elite.

Our athletes aren’t supposed to look like people who’d march under a flag with statues and harps and musical notes. Also, the women’s uniforms make them look like stewardesses from the 777 fleet on Singapore Airlines.

The failure of the uniforms is that they don’t communicate: “Here comes America.”

They communicate: “Chic global Martians coming your way.”

Amen to that, Peggy.

I saw a photo in the WSJ the other day showing the uniforms, and at first I thought sure they were on male fashion models — you know, the kind who are distinguishable from the female models only by slightly larger jaws, with neither gender looking entirely like normal, healthy humans? The effect was heightened by the fact that they were wearing clothing no normal person would wear.

I was shocked to learn they were actual American athletes. I’m still not sure the cutline was right. So maybe it was entirely the uniforms that made them look so unreal.

Eerie coincidence: Critic wrote of death threats related to “Dark Knight” BEFORE the shootings

29 Replies

Publicity still from the official website.

This is downright eerie.

Joe Morgenstern wrote this postscript to his review of “The Dark Knight Rises” in the edition of The Wall Street Journal that was delivered to my home this morning — meaning it went to press well before the mass murder in Colorado:

A note about the perils of being a movie critic in the age of polarized fandom.

I may have saved my life without realizing it by liking “The Dark Knight Rises” sufficiently—or disliking it with sufficient restraint—to have my review categorized as “ripe” rather than “rotten” on Rotten Tomatoes, a popular website that aggregates movie and DVD reviews. For those of us who write about movies to provoke discussion, these reductive categories are awfully silly, but they’re also symptoms of the love/hate, either/or ethos of contemporary discourse. In the realm of the Internet, as well as talk-radio and politics, that discourse has been growing ever more poisonous, and now the poison has contaminated Rotten Tomatoes. Earlier this week the website was forced to shut down its user comments on “The Dark Knight Rises” when negative reviews—officially adjudged “rotten”—by two of my colleagues, Christy Lemire and Marshall Fine, provoked floods of vile responses that included death threats.

Batman movies may be a bit of a special case, what with fanatical fanboys trolling the Internet to root out negative opinions of their supersolemn hero. But the Dark Knight’s acolytes don’t have a monopoly on intolerance of dissent. They’re part of a rising tide that threatens to drown Internet discussion in shrill opinion. The editors of Rotten Tomatoes have the right to excise such clearly intolerable comments, and the responsibility to improve procedures for screening out new ones. Once that’s done, however, the comments function should be fully restored. Free speech for the many shouldn’t fall victim to abuse by the few.

Write to Joe Morgenstern at [email protected]

Wow. If the shootings had NOT happened last night, I would simply have agreed with him about the decline of discourse, particularly on the Web.

As things happened, this is particularly startling.

By the way, the way I learned of this horror was particularly unsettling. I mentioned earlier today having trouble sleeping last night, worrying because my daughter was ill in a faraway country. What sleep I got was punctuated by the sound of my iPhone receiving bulletins about the shootings. The first bulletins confused me — how could there have been a shooting at a mall in the wee hours of the morning? It was only later — 5 a.m. or so — that the more complete bulletins mentioned the midnight showing of this film, so that I understood. To the extent that you can understand anything like this.

Playing the unemployment blame game

40 Replies

On the national level, it’s the Republicans touting high unemployment and blaming it on President Obama.

On the state level, it’s the Democrats who eagerly greet each piece of bad employment news, only they blame it on the local Republicans:

Representative Leon Stavrinakis Statement on Spike in SC Jobless Rate
Charleston, SC – South Carolina’s jobless rate rose to 9.4% in June from 9.1% in May, while Charleston County’s unemployment rate rose significantly from 7.9% last month to 8.5% in June. Charleston State Representative Leon Stavrinakis released a statement in response:
“These unemployment numbers are troubling and unacceptable for the Charleston area and the state of South Carolina as a whole. As the nation’s unemployment rate continues to drop or hold steady, South Carolina’s rate is going in the wrong direction and at an alarmingly fast rate. Perhaps Governor Haley should stop her international travels and simply attending every press opportunity she can find so she can actually put real time and work into creating jobs in South Carolina. The last place potential businesses want to relocate is a state led by a Governor who is only interested in being a celebrity, cutting education, and refusing to invest in infrastructure. We can also be sure that Governor Haley’s recent budget attacks on existing South Carolina industry are not helping our ability to attract and recruit jobs to our state. It is time for Governor Haley to quit stalling and present the legislature with a comprehensive jobs plan. If she refuses to give us a plan, I suggest she take a look at the plan I released months ago,  which to date she has not indicated she has even taken the time to read.”
###

Funny how things can look so different from Columbia (or Charleston) than they do from Washington.

Does Nikki maintain her Facebook page herself? I suspect so…

71 Replies

Someone speculated earlier that Nikki Haley doesn’t maintain her Facebook page herself. I suspect that she does. Or at least that some of the posts, or status updates, or whatever you want to call them (I’m a Twitter man, and get impatient with Facebook) are written by her personally.

They are so emotional. And they are so carelessly written that I hate to think anyone was paid to produce them — unless the rough edges are part of the service being provided, to add authenticity.

For instance, there’s this:

SC Law Enforcement Dir. Chief Keel responding to The State Newspaper: “I have expressed my concerns, as of yesterday, that publication of info regarding minor children of elected officials creates problems for State Law Enforcement and its efforts to provide security for the children of this governor or any governor. In my 30 yrs plus of experience at SLED, the security or activities of minor children of elected officials is something that the media in general has taken a “hands off” approach to in reporting except as released by the elected official’s office.”

First, one wonders what she’s on about. I didn’t see anything in the paper about her daughter before this appears. That sort of airing of a background battle as though everyone knows what’s going on is so off, so unprofessional, that it really feels like it’s coming from her.

Also, it follows her pattern of embarrassing her appointees by enlisting them in her personal political battles. I feel for Mark Keel.

It’s probably a reference to this thing Will Folks wrote about. I suppose The State was working on the story (the MSM have this quaint habit of confirming things with on-the-record sources, which makes them lag the blogosphere), and that freaked Nikki out in a way that Will’s post did not.

There was an earlier post on the same subject that was more emotional, and blasted The State as a worthless, “biased” entity that was persecuting Nikki’s family, and that one really felt like her. Here it is:

Scrutiny of me comes with the territory of being governor. I expect it. But it’s a sad day for journalism in South Carolina when The State newspaper goes after my 14 year old daughter. Public officials have a right to expect that their minor children are off limits from political opponents and even from biased media outlets like The State. Its disgusting. Shame on them.

If a paid staffer wrote that for her, then I’m embarrassed for that person, too.

How do YOU define “middle class”?

52 Replies

Today, I went over to AARP’s local office to participate in a discussion about the future of the Social Security system. More about that later.

I just wanted to focus on one thing we didn’t really talk about.

Before our local group started interacting, we watched a video feed being broadcast to groups like ours at AARP affiliates across the country, which featured two experts who pretty much represented the expected “liberal” and “conservative” sides of the issue. They fielded questions from groups like our across the country.

At one point, they were asked to give their definition of “middle class.” Neither of them did, in simple terms, although both were eager to assert that their respective plans would benefit said class.

I don’t blame them. Middle class is a state of mind to a great extent, and as one of the experts noted, it’s hard to find any American who does not think he is middle class, however low or high his income. And of course, assets other than income play into any assessment of economic class.

But… in order to kick off a discussion, I’m just going to pick a couple of numbers and throw them out, and let y’all tell me how wrong I am and why.

I hereby proclaim that one is “middle class” if one’s household income is between:

$50,000

and

$150,000

I’m sure lots of people who make less than 50k will assert they are card-carrying members of the gray hordes of suburbia, but we have to make room for the underclass and working class somewhere, and I’m just going to say that working class ends and middle class starts at 50k. Perhaps higher. And with today’s prices, that pretty much means you are just hanging on to your bourgeois status by your fingernails.

Plenty of arguments could be offered for raising the upper limit as well. For instance, is a person who makes 100k still middle class? I’d say yes. So if a couple each make 100k, would they not be a middle-class couple making a household income of 200k? Sure, you could say that, but for the purposes of this discussion, you have to draw the line somewhere, and I’m drawing it at 150k.

Does that mean I think you’re “rich” if you make more than that? No. I think there’s a broad territory between middle class and “rich.” A place where people are comfortable, but they’d better not kick back, or they could still lose it all.

Of course, all of this is fuzzy. You could have $50 million in assets, but just be making $100k — or even $10k, or not a thin dime– in additional wealth per year, and you’d still be rich.

But given the obvious shortcomings of any definition of class based purely on income, what do you think?

Nikki, you just keep right on Facebookin’…

7 Replies

At one point in the midst of his reporting on the Senate’s override of most of the governor’s vetoes, Adam Beam Tweeted this:

Sen. Joel Lourie tells ‪#scgov‬ @NikkiHaley to “stay off Facebook.” He was referring to this post: http://on.fb.me/Q4QnOg

So I followed the link, to where the gov posted,

veto of SC Coalition of Domestic Violence $453,680. Special interests made their way into the DHEC budget. This is not about the merit of their fights but the back door way of getting the money. It’s wrong and another loophole for legislators and special interests to use. Defeated 111-0

Hey, if this is the kind of response she’s going to get, the governor should spend more time on Facebook, not less:

  • Nick Danger Dunn Loopholes for special interests are only okay when they’re being used by people who have donated enough to your campaign, or who share your similar “interests” of furthering your political power and mutual backscratching. Right? Right? Otherwise they are unacceptable and wrong.

    Tuesday at 11:30pm ·  ·  16
  • Kim Ponce Obviously you are clueless as to how sexual violence impacts adults and children in South Carolina. DHEC has a long history of providing much needed funding for these services, many of which insurance companies will not pay for. What if it was your child, your sister, your mother needing a change of clothes at the ER, a child sensitive medical exam or interview, counseling?

    Tuesday at 11:32pm via mobile ·  ·  16
  • Xiomara A. Sosa again, with all due respect, this is not a “special interest” issues. This is a health and human services issue. please doo not muddy the water with such political jargon that is only divisive and pointless. Respectfully, Xiomara A. Sosa

    Tuesday at 11:32pm ·  ·  15
  • Marnie Schwartz-Hanley Does that mean the agencies will get the money to help us so that we are not 8th in the nation for criminal domestic violence?

    Tuesday at 11:35pm ·  ·  8
  • Alyssa Daniel As a 20 year victim of domestic violence, you should be ashamed

    Tuesday at 11:36pm via mobile ·  ·  16
  • Angie Wilson Rogers Maybe now YOU can stop being a distraction to SC voters, One-Term Haley?

    Tuesday at 11:37pm ·  ·  13
  • Grace Ammons The people have won. But I still cannot concieve of how this woman became our Governor!

    Tuesday at 11:40pm ·  ·  13
  • Dawn Ridge We’re 7th in the Nation and climbing, but GOD forbid we have money to support Victim’s Rights!!!!! Just make sure those inmates are watching cable tv and having 3 hot meals a day!!!!! This is complete and utter BS!!!!!!

    Tuesday at 11:43pm ·  ·  9

… and many more…

Of course, the comment thread is liberally sprinkled with the kind of “You go, girl!” responses Nikki expects. But it’s far from the unadulterated stream of fawning adulation that caused her to retreat to Facebook as her favored means of communicating with the world to begin with.

Are some of those responses a little on the emotional side, and lacking in calm discernment? Yep. But so are the kind of responses that Nikki goes to Facebook seeking. You can get calm and detached on an editorial page, but our governor scorns that. This is her medium.

I just hope she reads them all.

Since you mention it, Tillman statue should come down

49 Replies

In arguing that Penn State shouldn’t take down a statue of Joe Paterno because Happy Valley should not be allowed “to forget its own compliance in a national crime,” a guest columnist in The New York Times this week drew this comparison:

The need to clean history so that the record might reflect our current values, and not our sordid past, is broad. In Columbia, S.C., there stands a statue of Ben Tillman, the populist South Carolina senator who helped found Clemson University and, in his spare time, defended lynching from his august national offices. For years there have been calls to remove Tillman’s statue, emanating from those who think it a shame to continue to honor him. But in a democracy, memorial statues are not simply comments on their subjects, but comments on their makers. That Americans once saw fit to honor a man who defended terrorism from the Senate floor is a powerful statement about our identity and history.

Whereas Tillman’s most spectacular sins were known at the time of his lionization, Paterno’s only later came to light. And yet the central sin that now haunts Happy Valley has long been in evidence — a tragic myopia….

Ta-Nehisi Coates’ mention of Tillman wasn’t the best way to illustrate his point. After all, Paterno is a man whom this generation idolized, and who has fallen into disgrace at the end of his life, and these people who lived through both the glory and the shame are now forced to reassess what they think of him — or not, as their consciences dictate.

Ben Tillman is a whole other sort of mess.

To begin with, most South Carolinians, I’ll venture, don’t know who Ben Tillman was, or that that statue represents him. Until it became my business to know SC politics inside and out — which involved understanding our history — all I knew about him was that when my grandmother was a little girl, he was her neighbor in the Washington area (her father, my great-grandfather, was an attorney for the Treasury Department). Once, he coaxed her to sit on his lap by offering her an apple from his cellar. She asked to see under his eyepatch, but he declined. Her parents, who were from South Carolina, were later appalled that she had come anywhere near that awful man (I suspect they were of the same political persuasion as the founders of The State, which was established for the purpose of fighting the Tillman machine), but she never understood why.

Generations later, when I learned what Tillman was about, I was pretty horrified that she had gotten near him myself.

But walk through the mall and show a picture of his statue to 100 people, and I’m pretty sure far fewer than 50 will be able to tell you much about him.

I have no opinion about Joe Paterno, but of course the Tillman statue should come down. Mr. Coates notion of what to do with the Paterno statue…

Removing the Paterno statue allows Happy Valley to forget its own compliance in a national crime, to expunge its own culpability in its ruthless pursuit of glory. The statue should remain, and beneath it there should be a full explanation of Sandusky’s crimes, Paterno’s role and some warning to all of us who would turn a pastime into a god and elect a mortal man as its avatar.

… would never, ever happen with the Tillman one. The idea that South Carolinians would a) come to form a strong opinion collectively about Tillman, b) have that consensus opinion be one of condemnation, c) agree generally on wording that criticized, even by implication, their ancestors for having admired him enough to put it up, is pretty much beyond the category of things we should hold our breath while waiting for.

Basically, those of us who know who he was should just take it down, with a minimum of fuss, or with no more than a quiet exorcism ceremony. Of course, we’d have to get the approval of the powers that control the State House grounds.

I’ve spent all these years trying to get the flag — a symbol that most South Carolinians at least think they understand — off the grounds, but hey, I’m game. Let’s go for it.

And while I think it’s worth undertaking, I do feel obliged to warn those who help in this enterprise that we would likely encounter lawmakers who previously knew nothing about Tillman, but who, once they learned about him, would be inspired to rise to his defense…

McCain’s gracious defense of Clinton aide Abedin

32 Replies

Just wanted to make sure all of you have seen this, which I first saw yesterday:

John McCain took to the Senate floor on Wednesday to repudiate suggestions by his fellow Republican lawmaker, Michele Bachmann, that the family of a longtime aide to secretary of state Hillary Clinton had ties to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

McCain praised the work and patriotism of Huma Abedin, a State Department employee who has been a constant presence at Clinton’s side. Without mentioning congresswoman Bachmann by name, McCain described the attacks on Abedin, a Muslim, as an example of ignorance and fear that defames the spirit of the nation.

“Huma represents what is best about America: the daughter of immigrants, who has risen to the highest levels of our government on the basis of her substantial personal merit and her abiding commitment to the American ideals that she embodies so fully.” McCain said. “I am proud to know Huma and to call her my friend.”

Bachmann, a member of the House intelligence committee, made the allegations in a June letter to the state department as well as in a letter Wednesday to fellow Minnesota lawmaker, represenative Keith Ellison, a Democrat…

Please watch the video, if you haven’t already seen it. Watch it all, and let its tone and pacing wash over you.

It’s a testament not only to the respective characters of the speaker and his subject, but a painful reminder of how seldom today we hear such graceful, honorable and high-minded speeches in our hyperpartisan, name-calling public sphere.

It is all the more satisfying to hear my kind of senator so gracefully decry the excesses of a politician who is emblematic of what has happened to his own party.

I’d like to hear someone like John McCain give a speech like this in response to someone like Michele Bachmann every day. It would really bolster my faith in our system.

Interesting footnote: McCain ends by saying “Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.” These are not the days of Daniel Webster. Today, not only are too few senators capable of such a speech as this, most of them won’t even sit and listen to one.

Following the Senate’s override votes

6 Replies

Yesterday’s override votes by the House overrode nothing. It takes a 2/3 vote of both chambers to override a veto. This means the legislative branch’s rejection of the governor’s decision has to be pretty resounding, in the nature of a consensus.

Again, I’m following Adam Beam’s blow-by-blow account, since he’s there and I’m not. Here’s what he’s posted so far:

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate has 51 vetoes to vote on. Each vote takes about 6 minutes. That’s 5 hours, assuming Senators do not talk in between (yeah, right)

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate taking up arts veto now. Sen. Hayes points out 70% of arts commission money goes to grants for local arts projects ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Of course, opponents say the other 30 percent goes to administrative costs.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Some questioning Arts Commission director’s $90,000 annual salary. Sen. Lourie asks: “How much does the governor’s chief of staff make?”

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate overrides Arts Commission veto, 29-10. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate sustains Haley’s veto of EPSCOR, 25-15. House initially sustained this yesterday, then changed its mind and overrode it. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate voting on this: http://bit.ly/OOs012 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate overrides veto of Sea Grant Consortium, 34-7. Vote means the state agency will continue to exist. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Arts Commission veto overridden by four votes. They have one more veto on the agenda: $500,000 in grants for local projects. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Four vetoes so far. Senate has overturned two, sustained two. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Certificate of Need veto is next. This is the process by which hospitals can expand or build new hospitals ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate (barely) overrode Certificate of Need veto last year.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Supporters of Certificate-of-Need say vetoing the funding — but not the law — would cause chaos ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

So far, Senate has overturned $10 million worth of vetoes. They have sustained $344,075 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Certificate-of-Need veto overturned, 36-5. Next up: $10 million in one-time money for teacher pay raises. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Teacher pay raise veto overturned, 41-2 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

You can keep track of each veto here: http://bit.ly/LseSNM ‪#sctweets

Andy Shain ‏@andyshain

Follow Gov. Nikki Haley’s running commentary on the budget vetoes here:http://www.facebook.com/NikkiHaley ‪#sctweets

Retweeted by Adam Beam

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Senate now reconsidering earlier vote to sustain Veto No. 2. House did the same thing yesterday ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 2 is the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research. It affects colleges and universities. $161,314. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

While we were at ‪#scgov @NikkiHaley‘s news conference, the Senate went back and changed their votes on a few vetoes. Sneaky.

More later, as it develops. I have to run out to a reception now. Gotta be a Mad Man.

SC DOT: One example of how SC constantly underfunds basic functions of government

45 Replies

This post should be seen as the background to this little drama over the governor’s vetoes, to provide some perspective. What seems to have been missing on most, but not all, of Nikki Haley’s vetoes has been a clear explanation of what she would spend the money on instead.

Her ideology prevents her from setting out powerful arguments for alternative spending plans, because she, like the governor before her, lives in a fantasy land in which the government of South Carolina simply spends too much in the aggregate. That South Carolina bears no resemblance to the one in this universe.

The truth is that South Carolina appropriates far too little for some of the most fundamental functions for which we rightly look to the public sector. And the deficit between what we spend on those functions and what we should in order to have the quality of service other states take for granted is sometimes quite vast, involving sums that dwarf the amounts involved in these vetoes that you hear so much fuss about.

What is needed is a fundamental reassessment of what state government does and what it needs to do, to be followed by the drafting of a completely new system of taxation to pay for those things. Our elected officials never come close to undertaking these admittedly Herculean tasks. But they should. The way we fund state government needs a complete overhaul, and spending time arguing about, say, the “Darlington Watershed Project” doesn’t get us there.

This is something I’ve long understood, and often tried to communicate. I was reminded of it again at the Columbia Rotary Club meeting on Monday.

Our speaker was SC Secretary of Transportation Robert C. St. Onge Jr. He’s a former Army major general, having retired in 2003 — until Nikki Haley asked him to take on DOT in January 2011. Some of his friends congratulated him at the time. Those were the naive ones. The savvy would have offered condolences.

Normally, public speakers like to inspire with phrases such as “From Good to Great.” Sec. St. Onge’s talk was far more down-to-Earth, far more realistic. He entitled it “Getting to Good.” And once he laid out what it would take for SC to get to “good enough” — to get all of the roads we have NOW up to snuff, much less building any roads we don’t have but may need for our economy to grow — it was obvious that we aren’t likely to get there any time soon.

The secretary started out with some background on how we have the fourth-largest state-maintained highway system in the country, after Texas, North Carolina and Virginia. He didn’t have time to explain why that is, but I will: It’s because until 1975, county government did not exist in South Carolina. Local needs were seen to by the county legislative delegation, one of the more stunning examples of how our Legislature has appropriated to itself functions that are not properly those of a state legislature. When we got Home Rule, supposedly, in 1975 and county councils were formed, many functions that had been done on the state level stayed there. So it is that roads that would have been maintained by county road departments in other states are handled by the state here. It’s not that we have more roads, you see — it’s that more of them are the state’s responsibility.

He also noted how woefully underfunded our system is. Georgia, for instance, has less road surface to maintain, but twice the funding to get the job done — and three times as many employees per mile. He alluded to why that is, and I’ll explain: We have the most penny-pinching state government I’ve ever seen, with lawmakers who (contrary to the fantasies you hear from the likes of Mark Sanford and Nikki Haley) would rather be tortured than raise adequate money to fund a decent state government. OK, so the retired general didn’t explain it that way. He just mentioned the fact that we haven’t raised the inadequate gasoline tax that funds his department since 1987 (the year I arrived back in SC to work at The State). Add to that the fact that the tax is levied per gallon rather than per dollar spent, and you have a recipe for a crumbling road system.

Here’s the secretary’s full PowerPoint presentation if you want to look at it. If you don’t, at least look these representative slides, which sketch out the basic challenges…

Above compares us to neighboring states. Note that only North Carolina has our bizarre problem owning responsibility for most of the roads.

This is a breakdown of the categories of roads SC maintains at the state level. Note that almost half are secondary roads for which the state gets no federal funds. This is where the state is squeezed the hardest.

Above is what it would take to get just the interstates in SC up to “good” condition, and keep them there.

This is what it would cost to fix up and maintain all those secondary roads, which make up most of the state’s responsibility.

This is the most important slide. This is what South Carolina needs to spend, and has no plans to spend, to get the roads it has NOW up to good condition, and maintain them in that condition.

Gov. Haley could arguably justify ALL of her vetoes by saying, “We need to put it all into our crumbling roads.” Then, after she had eviscerated all of those agencies as being less important than our basic infrastructure, she would have to turn around and call for a significant increase in the state gasoline tax, to come up with the rest of what is needed.

But our elected state leaders never go there. They either don’t understand this state’s basic needs, or aren’t honest enough to level with us about them. They’d rather truckle to populist, unfocused, unthinking resentment of taxes, and government in general, than be responsible stewards of our state’s basic resources.

That’s the money picture. Beyond that, here are some small things that in the aggregate add up to a big problem. If our governor won’t take on fully funding our state roads system, maybe she could work with the Legislature to get rid of some of the worst white elephants that DOT is saddled with:

This is a parking lot in Fairfield County that DOT is required to maintain. Sec. St. Onge would like to get rid of it, but can’t.

Ignore the dirt road, and look at the cemetery that DOT is required to maintain in Saluda County. Sec. St. Onge would like to get rid of that, too, but he can’t.

Here’s a road leading to a church in Florence County, which DOT is also required to maintain. The church is the only thing that the road leads to. Sec. St. Onge would like to give it to the church, and the church’s pastor would like to have it. But guess what? They can’t make it happen.

So… I’ve given you examples here from but ONE agency illustrating how we tolerate the intolerable, and refuse to fund the necessary, in our state government. THIS is the sort of thing we should be discussing, instead of having unnecessary culture wars over the Arts Commission.

A couple of last thoughts: Before any of you who think like Nikki Haley’s base start trying to dismiss all this by quibbling about what “good” means, or going on a rant about how these government bureaucrats just always exaggerate the need for funds in order to pad their fiefdoms, consider the following:

  1. This is Nikki Haley’s chosen guy to run DOT, not some “career bureaucrat” she inherited.
  2. This is a retired general officer — a guy with a very comfortable, generous retirement package — who did not have to take this job, and does not need it to improve his lot or to define himself. He’s about as objective and practical a source you can find for leveling with you about such things as this.

Adam Beam’s Tweets about veto votes in House

48 Replies

Young Adam Beam is doing a very conscientious job covering the House as it runs through the governor’s vetoes. Here are some of his key Tweets thus far (sorry that this looks junky; I haven’t had time to clean it up):

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Voting now on Arts Commission. Overwhelming to override ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Vote was 110 to 5 to override Arts Commission veto. Voting “no”: Frye, Chumley, Nanney, Norman, Southard. # sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Arts Commission veto now heads to the state Senate. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 2 is EPSCOR funding — basically research money for universities. Vote is close.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

EPSCOR veto (No. 2) is sustained, 70-45. Score: Haley 1, House 1.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House is leaving open option to reconsider veto No. 2. Could come back to it.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 3 overridden, 110-10. Sea Grant Consortium survives until at least tomorrow ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Four and five overridden. Next up: Certificate of Need program, the process that determines if a hospital can expand or open a new hospital

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Certificate of Need veto overridden. Next up: $10 million in one time money for teacher salaries. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Looks like only “no” vote on teacher pay raises will be Rep. Ralph Norman, R-York ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Yep. Vote was 113-1 for teacher salaries. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 8: Governor’s School for Science and Math. Background:http://bit.ly/OOr4d2 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Gov. School veto overridden 109-3

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto 9 is $1 million in deferred maintenance at the Dept of Mental Health. They got a huge increase this year, so House votes to sustain

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House voting now on funding for a committee started in the Senate. Rep. White asks to send it to Senate, let them decide. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

But the House doesn’t listen to him, votes 58-53 to sustain the veto.‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Next is $783K for Education Oversight Committee. Governor says she likes EOC, but doesn’t like how it is funded.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House overrides EOC veto, 80-34

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Next: $2.8 million for IT dept at Judicial Dept. Background: http://bit.ly/LHScPR ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

During votes, House members passionately discuss SEC media day — particularly anything Spurrier says ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House overrides judicial veto, 108-6 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

So far, House has only sustained one veto that has money attached to it: $300,000 for the Committee on Children ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Wait, I was wrong. They sustained the $1 million in deferred maintenance for the Dept. of Mental Health ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House has sustained 8 vetoes so far. Overridden 10. ‪#sctweets

Follow his Twitter feed at @adambeam. To find out how your legislator voted on vetoes, Adam says to go here — but that must be for later, because I haven’t seen the info show up there yet.

Silly me, for thinking DeMint cared what I thought

17 Replies

Couldn’t help responding to Jim DeMint today when he Tweeted,

My response was in two parts. First, I answered his question: Yes!

I had read with interest the top story in The Wall Street Journal this morning, which said that the long logjam on national legislation to require online businesses to pay sales taxes just like their bricks-and-mortar competitors may finally have broken:

Republican governors, eager for new revenue to ease budget strains, are dropping their longtime opposition to imposing sales taxes on online purchases, a significant political shift that could soon bring an end to tax-free sales on the Internet.

Conservative governors, joining their Democratic counterparts, have been making deals with online retail giant Amazon.com AMZN -1.09% to collect state sales taxes. The movement picked up an important ally when New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie—widely mentioned as a potential vice-presidential candidate—recently reached an agreement under which Amazon would collect sales taxes on his state’s online purchases in exchange for locating distribution facilities there.

Mr. Christie called taxation of online sales “an important issue to all the nation’s governors” and endorsed federal legislation giving all states taxing authority.

This should lead to quick resolution, in a rational universe, since Amazon has said they support a national solution. And that’s very good news for states like South Carolina, which have unwisely shifted so much of their tax burdens to sales taxes just as conventional, “analog” store sales have been drying up.

I was particularly interested because the change that had come about was that Republican governors, such as Chris Christie, saw the need to do something about the fact that their states’ coffers had been depleted by the shift of our economy to online shopping.

It caused me to wonder what it would be like to have a real conservative Republican governor, rather than a darling of the Tea Party or the Club for Growth, one who — like any real conservative — believes in responsible governance, one who sees his or her role as a steward of the state’s public sector.

And then I remembered, that I did experience that, for years, when Lamar Alexander was governor in Tennessee. And so it is fitting that Lamar is the senator pushing this legislation:

Seizing on the recent political shift, Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican, and co-sponsors from both parties are attempting to speed up action on a bill they wrote to give states authority to compel online companies to collect sales taxes.

One of the co-sponsors, Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.,) said, “It gets down to a basic issue…of simple fairness for small businesses that create jobs and opportunities all across America. And with the sales taxes they collect, they provide for local police and firemen, for the sewers and streets.”…

Oh, but wait… as soon as I said, Yes!, I realized that Sen. DeMint’s question was purely rhetorical, meant only to set up his announcement that he’s leaping into the fray to fight against common sense.

You can always rely on Jim DeMint. Unfortunately.

Silly me, for thinking Jim DeMint cared what I thought.

What, Me Worry about what YOU think?/File photo from an editorial board meeting in 2007.

Just once, it would be nice to be able to respect one of this governor’s vetoes

44 Replies

2008 file photo

Cases could probably be made for some of Nikki Haley’s vetoes, but she doesn’t offer them. With each news story I read about yet another veto, I wait for her argument — and it never comes.

For instance, here’s what was offered instead of an actual reason for vetoing the Governor’s Schools:

“All of these are good things, but if we’re going to lead and take South Carolina to a new place, we’ve got to take the emotion out of it,” she said Thursday. “How can we handle these things smarter? To do that sometimes hurts, and to do that sometimes means we wait but we make good decisions in the end.”

You almost get the feeling that she pulled those words out of a dictionary at random. Take emotion out of it? What emotion? “Handle these things smarter?” OK, in what way? Just give us one of your smarter ideas. That would be helpful. Give us just one example of what a “good decision” might look like, by your lights. If you can.

But it increasingly appears that she can’t. These vetoes aren’t intended for analysis; they’re intended to appeal to gut impulses within her base. She vetoes the Arts Commission because it’s the closest she can get to slapping at the National Endowment for the Arts, which Robert Mapplethorpe put on the map as a favorite whipping boy of the right. (Yes, I know that doesn’t make sense, but with the Snake Flag crowd, things don’t have to make logical sense.)

She vetoes the Governor’s Schools because, I don’t know: Maybe some of those kids will grow up to be supporters of the Arts Commission. Maybe she figures none of her most ardent supporters have kids who go to the Governor’s Schools. Maybe she’s right.

(Disclosure: Two of my children attended the governor’s schools — one the one for science and math, the other the one for arts and humanities — but neither chose to stay there until graduation.)

I’d feel better about it if she would explain precisely what she wanted to do with the money instead, and why. I might argue with it, but I could respect her more.

As it is, I’m just sick and tired of hearing about her little gestures of pointless destruction. I’ve never been a fan of nihilism.

Fifty years of summertime pop, rated

27 Replies

The sleeve of my "Honky Tonk Women" single.

Last week, I called into question the value of recent pop music. I was moved to do so by this feature on NPR, regarding “The Songs Of The Summer, 1962-2012,” which ran the gamut “from surf rock in the early 1960s through British then American rock ‘n’ roll, disco, power ballads, R&B, boy bands and hip-hop.”

I thought it particularly meaningful that it counted from what Gene Sculatti’s The Catalog of Cool described as “The Last Good Year.”

I listened to the Spotify mix that the story linked to (there’s also a version provided by NPR itself, but you don’t get to pick where you jump in — it’ more like conventional radio that way).

The list confirms me in my belief, that there hasn’t been a summer like that of 1966 since. As I said before:

Puts me in mind of the summer of ’66. I came back from the beach determined to go out and buy three singles: “Green Grass” by Gary Lewis and the Playboys, “I Am a Rock” by Simon and Garfunkel, and “Little Red Riding Hood” by Sam the Sham and the Pharoahs.

OK, so sue me. I was 12. At least “I Am a Rock” was cool.

But look at what else came out that summer:
PAPERBACK WRITER – The Beatles
WILD THING – The Troggs
PAINT IT, BLACK – The Rolling Stones (still my favorite Stones song)
SUMMER IN THE CITY – The Lovin’ Spoonful
HANKY PANKY – Tommy James & The Shondells
STRANGERS IN THE NIGHT – Frank Sinatra
MOTHER’S LITTLE HELPER – The Rolling Stones
AIN’T TOO PROUD TO BEG – The Temptations
DIRTY WATER – The Standells
WHEN A MAN LOVES A WOMAN – Percy Sledge
SUNSHINE SUPERMAN – Donovan
MONDAY, MONDAY – The Mamas & The Papas

Not to mention these forgettable items that I loved at the time:
RED RUBBER BALL – The Cyrkle
SWEET PEA – Tommy Roe
THEY’RE COMING TO TAKE ME AWAY, HA-HAAA! – Napoleon XIV

That was all just one summer.

Come on — what will today’s 12-year-olds have to look back to in the future?

The answer to that question doesn’t appear to be very encouraging.

Gradually, over the past week, I listened to that mix while doing a lot of other things. Here’s how I rated what I heard, on a scale from zero stars to five:

2012: Carly Rae Jepsen, “Call Me Maybe”

2011: Adele, “Rolling In The Deep”

2011: LMFAO, “Party Rock Anthem”

2011: Nicki Minaj, “Super Bass”

2010: Eminem featuring Rihanna, “Love the Way You Lie”

2010: Katy Perry, “California Gurls”

2010: Taio Cruz, “Dynamite”

2009: Black Eyed Peas, “I Gotta Feeling”

2009: Taylor Swift, “You Belong With Me”

2008: Coldplay, “Viva La Vida”

2008: Katy Perry, “I Kissed A Girl”

2008: Lil Wayne featuring Static Major, “Lollipop” – Only gets a 1 because, if you only hear a second of it, it’s catchy. After 2 seconds, you hate it

0 2007: Rihanna featuring Jay-Z, “Umbrella”

0 2007: T-Pain featuring Yung Joc, “Buy U A Drank”

2006: Gnarls Barkley, “Crazy”

0 2006: Nelly Furtado featuring Timbaland, “Promiscuous”

2006: Shakira, “Hips Don’t Lie”

0 2005: Gwen Stefani, “Hollaback Girl”

0 2005: The Pussycat Dolls featuring Busta Rhymes, “Don’t Cha”

0 2004: Juvenile featuring Soulja Slim, “Slow Motion”

2004: Usher, “Confessions Part II”

2003: Beyoncé featuring Jay-Z, “Crazy In Love”

2003: Chingy, “Right Thurr”

2003: Sean Paul, “Get Busy” – This would get a 2, but for the monotony.

2002: Avril Lavigne, “Complicated” – Almost it to a three in the middle part, but not quite.

2002: Jimmy Eat World, “The Middle”

0 2002: Eminem, “Without Me”

0 2002: Nelly, “Hot In Herre”

0 2001: Destiny’s Child, “Bootylicious” – What did this in from the start was the ripped-off sample from Stevie Nicks’ highly irritating “Just Like the White-Winged Dove.” It only got worse from there.

2001: Eve featuring Gwen Stefani, “Let Me Blow Ya Mind”

1999: Christina Aguilera, “Genie In A Bottle”

1999: Jennifer Lopez, “If You Had My Love”

0 1999: Len, “Steal My Sunshine”

1999: Smash Mouth, “All Star”

0 1998: Next, “Too Close”

0 1998: Vengaboys, “We Like To Party”

1998: The Backstreet Boys, “Everybody (Backstreet’s Back)”

1997: Hanson, “MMMBop” – Bubblegum, but not bad bubblegum. The chorus almost raises it to 3.

1997: Notorious B.I.G. featuring Puff Daddy & Ma$e, “Mo Money Mo Problems”

1997: Puff Daddy featuring Faith Evans & 112, “I’ll Be Missing You” – How much credit should a sample get? Because without that, this is nothing.

1996: Bone Thugs-N-Harmony, “Tha Crossroads”

1996: Los Del Rio, “Macarena” – Yes, the craze became a joke, but at least it has some musicality.

1996: Mariah Carey, “Always Be My Baby”

1995: Seal, “Kiss From A Rose”

1995: TLC, “Waterfalls”

1994: Ace of Base, “Don’t Turn Around”

1994: All-4-One, “I Swear”

1994: Lisa Loeb, “Stay” – Keeps threatening to sound good, but doesn’t get there.

1994: Warren G & Nate Dogg, “Regulate”

1993: Tag Team, “Whoomp! (There It Is)”

1993: UB40, “Can’t Help Falling In Love” – Too bad Elvis never heard this version.

1992: Boys II Men, “End of the Road”

1992: Red Hot Chili Peppers, “Under the Bridge”

1992: Sir Mix-A-Lot, “Baby Got Back” – I agree with the sentiment, at least.

1991: Bryan Adams, “(Everything I Do) I Do It For You” – Not his best effort.

1991: DJ Jazzy Jeff & The Fresh Prince, “Summertime”

1991: EMF, “Unbelievable”

1990: Mariah Carey, “Vision Of Love”

1990: New Kids on the Block, “Step By Step”

1989: Martika, “Toy Soldiers”

1989: Richard Marx, “Right Here Waiting” – Syrupy.

1988: Cheap Trick, “The Flame”

1988: Steve Winwood, “Roll With It” – Not as good as his work with Blind Faith, not by a long shot. But it’s catchy.

1987: Heart, “Alone”

1987: U2, “With Or Without You” – Perhaps their best song.

1987: Whitney Houston, “I Wanna Dance With Somebody” – Excellent example of the genre, but I’m not a big fan of the genre.

1986: Madonna, “Papa Don’t Preach”

1986: Peter Cetera, “Glory Of Love”

1985: Huey Lewis & The News, “The Power of Love”

1985: Tears For Fears, “Shout” – One of the best of the 80s.

1984: Cyndi Lauper, “Time After Time” – Not as good as “Girls Just Want to Have Fun”

1984: Prince & The Revolution, “When Doves Cry” – Not as good as “1999”

1983: The Police, “Every Breath You Take”

1983: Irene Cara, “Flashdance…What a Feeling”

1982: Paul McCartney & Stevie Wonder, “Ebony & Ivory” – Just chock full of good intentions, though.

1982: Human League, “Don’t You Want Me”

1982: Survivor, “Eye of the Tiger”

1981: Rick Springfield, “Jessie’s Girl”

1981: Kim Carnes, “Bette Davis Eyes”

1980: Lipps, Inc., “Funkytown”

1980: Billy Joel, “It’s Still Rock & Roll to Me”

1979: Donna Summer, “Bad Girls” – It would be a 1, but I don’t want Bud to hate me.

1979: Anita Ward, “Ring My Bell”

1978: Andy Gibb, “Shadow Dancing”

1978: Frankie Valli, “Grease” – Sorry, Frankie, but there were better songs in that show.

1977: Fleetwood Mac, “Dreams”

1976: Starland Vocal Band, “Afternoon Delight” – An oddball little hit.

1976: Elton John & Kiki Dee, “Don’t Go Breaking My Heart”

1976: Wings, “Silly Love Songs”

1975: The Captain & Tennille, “Love Will Keep Us Together” – Perhaps a better song, done by someone else.

1974: Bo Donaldson & The Heywoods, “Billy, Don’t Be A Hero”

1974: George McCrae, “Rock Your Baby”

1973: Diana Ross, “Touch Me In The Morning”

1973: Jim Croce, “Bad Bad Leroy Brown”

1972: Bill Withers, “Lean On Me” – This just gets better and better.

1972: Sammy Davis, Jr., “The Candy Man” – How did this get in there?

1971: Bee Gees, “How Can You Mend A Broken Heart?” – I’m throwing the Bee Gees a bone here.

1971: Carole King, “It’s Too Late”

1970: The Carpenters, “(They Long To Be) Close To You”

1970: The Jackson 5, “The Love You Save”

1970: Edwin Starr, “War” – Good song, though it overstates its case (“absolutely nothing”).

1969: The Beatles, “Get Back”

1969: The Rolling Stones, “Honky Tonk Woman” – Not only a superlative summer song, it’s a great driving song, too.

1968: Simon & Garfunkel, “Mrs. Robinson”

1968: The Rascals, “People Got To Be Free”

1967: Aretha Franklin, “Respect” – Give her some.

1967: The Doors, “Light My Fire” – I probably would have rated this higher at the time.

1966: Tommy James & The Shondells, “Hanky Panky”

1966: The Troggs, “Wild Thing” — Elemental, proto-punk, garage band purity.

1966: The Lovin’ Spoonful, “Summer In The City”

1965: The Byrds, “Mr. Tambourine Man” — I’d have given the Dylan original another star.

1965: The Beatles, “Help!” — I feel bad that I didn’t give the Beatles five stars on anything, but none of their best songs were listed.

1965: The Rolling Stones, “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction”

1965: Sonny & Cher, “I Got You Babe”

1964: Dean Martin, “Everybody Loves Somebody”

1964: The Animals, “House of the Rising Sun”

1964: The Beach Boys, “I Get Around”

1963: Lesley Gore, “It’s My Party”

1963: Jan & Dean, “Surf City”

1962: Ray Charles, “I Can’t Stop Loving You”

1962: Neil Sedaka, “Breaking Up Is Hard To Do”

1962: Little Eva, “The Loco-Motion” – Had trouble deciding on this one; may only be a 3.

McCain makes case for helping Libya — and Syria

3 Replies

Not much has happened newswise today, so I’m going to hark back to something else I read in this morning’s papers. This is another item from the WSJ, an opinion piece by John McCain, which begins:

The people of Libya have again confounded their critics. Once dismissed by many as al Qaeda fanatics in a tribal backwater, doomed to despotism or chaos, Libya voted on Saturday with a higher turnout than most mature democracies.

International monitors certified the balloting, which I witnessed first-hand in Tripoli. It now appears that Libyans gave plurality support to a centrist political party headed by a U.S.-educated technocrat, Mahmoud Jibril, who then called for a national unity government….

McCain goes on to make the point that we should deepen and strengthen our relationship with this new Libya:

U.S. support will be critical for Libya’s continued success, and it is in our interest to provide it. Libya is strategically located for global trade. It has skilled fighters and shares many of our counterterrorism interests. It has vast natural economic potential, from energy resources, to a pristine coastline, to billions of dollars in former Moammar Gadhafi assets. And it shares our democratic vision for the broader Middle East. With good governance and U.S. support, Libya could punch far above its weight, akin to U.S. partners such as the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Singapore.

Libyans want America to be their partner of choice, and it is time to take our relationship to the next level, starting with the many legacy issues from last year’s revolution….

Finally, he says that what worked in Libya could also work in Syria:

Libya’s experience holds an important lesson for Syria. Those who once insisted that we did not know, could not trust, and should not support the Libyan people are now saying the same about the Syrian people. The two countries are very different, but the ideals that inspired both revolutions are the same. We did the right thing in Libya, and while there is no guarantee that Libyans will succeed, they have a great chance.

It is every bit in keeping with our democratic ideals—and even more in our national interest—to halt the slaughter in Syria and help the Syrian people gain the same chance to succeed that the Libyan people now have…

As usual when McCain talks foreign policy, I tend to agree.

Binge TV watching: “You don’t want to know”

5 Replies

Never mind that noise. It's just a bunch of walkers...

The “walker” down in the well was making that characteristic noise they make — the half-strangled, wheezy, snuffling snarl — as the survivors debated what to do about getting it out of there. And I guess I had it turned up a little louder than usual.

My wife called from another part of the house, “What is that noise?”

I hesitated.

Then, I said, “You don’t want to know.”

She laughed, and dropped it. I breathed a sigh of relief that I didn’t have to answer further, which would have embarrassed me. I was deep into a “Walking Dead” binge. And I knew that my wife had the exact attitude toward the series that I did before I got hooked on it — I couldn’t imagine wasting my time watching something that gross.

I had recorded the entire second season when they showed it in marathon form a weekend or two back, and was well into it now. This was to prepare me for the premiere of the third season, which is in… October! How’m I going to wait that long? Especially if this season leaves things hanging the way it almost certainly will, with this unresolved conflict between Rick and Shane, and Herschel likely to throw everybody off the farm any minute? And of course, walkers all over the place, and ammunition in finite supply.

At the back of my mind lingers another worry — my DVR is running out of space. Do I go ahead and erase this when I’ve watched them all? And what about the most recent seasons of “Breaking Bad” and “Mad Men,” which aren’t on Netflix yet? OK, I can erase “Breaking Bad” Sunday, when the Season 5 premieres and Season 4 does go up on Netflix, but what about the rest? It’s a tough call.

So it is that I could identify with this piece in The Wall Street Journal this morning, headlined, “Binge Viewing: TV’s Lost Weekends,” which is all about how, “Using streaming and DVRs, TV viewers are increasingly gobbling up entire seasons of shows in marathon sessions: How that’s changing the game for media companies, advertisers and show creators.”

An excerpt:

With the new season of “Breaking Bad” starting Sunday night, Chad Rohrbacher plopped down on his couch recently to catch up on some past episodes of the show about a chemistry teacher turned drug kingpin. Twenty-two hours passed before he clicked off the set. Pausing only for bathroom breaks, sandwiches and occasional comments of disbelief from his wife, he watched two entire seasons in one go. “It just kind of snowballed,” the 40-year-old novelist and college professor recalls.

When last season ended with a showdown between the bespectacled antihero and his drug boss, Mr. Rohrbacher watched the climax alone in his Greensboro, N.C., living room at 4 a.m. “I could barely see,” he says. The next day, “he was there in body, not in mind,” says his wife, Melanie, who did not participate. “I have a house and kids to take care of.”…

I feel for you, Chad. Been there.

Used to be, I had Netflix — and my DVR —  just for the movies. In fact, that was pretty much the only reason I had a TV. But now, that’s changed. And AMC has played a big role in making that happen. They seem the best at making must-keep-watching, high-quality TV shows. And now, you can watch them all at once.

So you’re saying that you’re a grownup, and you have your head on straight and a solid set of priorities, so this doesn’t affect you. Well, yes it does, if you watch TV at all — because it’s altering what’s being offered. Writers are having to write differently for this kind of audience. And it’s changing the whole business:

The industry ramifications are bigger than the occasional weekend lost to “Lost.” Bingeing breaks habits that have long supported the TV business, built on advertising and syndicated reruns. TV executives are torn by the development: gratified that people are gorging on their product, frustrated because it’s a TV party that all-important advertisers aren’t invited to. For middlemen like Amazon Instant Video, Hulu Plus and Netflix, it’s a godsend, boosting their quest to attract and retain subscribers. Writers and producers are just starting to confront the challenges of creating TV for an audience that may digest an entire season in one sitting.

Vince Gilligan, the creator of “Breaking Bad,” got his start in the writers room for “The X-Files.” There, he was schooled by creator Chris Carter in building cliffhangers to lure the audience through commercial breaks and into the next episode. Now, besides unspooling a narrative week by week, year by year, writers must also keep in mind fans who take the story “in a giant inhalation,” says Mr. Gilligan.

He describes his show as “hyper-serialized,” in the way writers try to close the loop on every character and plot point. A homemade poison that methamphetamine whiz Walter White (Bryan Cranston) tried to use on a drug dealer in season two ended up driving a big plot twist in season four. “We use every bit of the buffalo,” says Mr. Gilligan. He now believes fans who devour multiple seasons in short order are “more rewarded” because their memories of all the story threads are fresher. (Others disagree: TV critics are arguing about whether serialized TV is better when savored between episodes.)

Of course, the good news is, if I’m caught up on all three of the AMC series I watch (there would be four, if they hadn’t cancelled “Rubicon“), and I haven’t gone off on another tangent, like that period several months ago when I was plunging through all six seasons of “Lost,” I’m relatively free to live my life — interact with actual humans, or even read a book.

But when I’m in the middle of a season, it can be bad. The WSJ piece warns, “Brain chemistry plays a role in bingeing. ‘We get into something akin to a trance with great storytelling,’ says psychiatrist Norman Doidge, author of ‘The Brain That Changes Itself.’ Viewers identify with characters on screen and subconsciously begin to mimic their emotions—be it sadness or triumph or anxiety—and each emotional state triggers different brain chemicals, which linger.”

No kidding. I remember, in the first couple of seasons of “Breaking Bad,” when I’d stayed up long after my wife had gone to bed, I’d hesitate to go in and hit the sack, because I felt guilty. She might wake up and ask questions. No, I hadn’t personally been running a mobile meth lab and killing off competitors and keeping it a secret from my wife. That was Walter White. But I’d been so wrapped up in his tension, trying to keep it from his wife, that my nerves were on edge. I felt like an accomplice. I felt like I was descending into the sordid depths as surely as he was.

This feeling eased up in the most recent season, as Walter became more ruthless and started agonizing less over his actions. So… does that mean I’m as bad as he is now? Aye, there’s the rub.

But there’s always the fallback. If there are any questions, I’ll just say, “You don’t want to know.”

Nothing, dear! I'm just cooking up a batch of... stuff...

Your Virtual Front Page, Thursday, July 12, 2012

12 Replies

Here’s what I’m seeing out there at the moment:

  1. US tightens sanctions on Tehran (BBC) — One more click of the rachet. Do we have those naval assets in place yet? Is anyone paying attention?
  2. Damning Penn State report reveals abuse cover-up (The Guardian) — Wow. If The Guardian is leading with this uber-American scandal (as are the WSJ, NPR, and the NYT), I guess I’d better put it on my front. But I can’t see leading with it. WashPost seems to agree with me…
  3. Ray Tanner to be named new USC Athletic Director (thestate.com) — I can see how the job would have been his if he wanted it. But who’s going to coach baseball now? Oh, wait — I see it’s Chad Holbrook.
  4. 2 charged in Beltway-style sniper case (Spartanburg Herald-Journal) — I hadn’t even heard anything like this was going on just up the road.
  5. Wells Fargo to Settle Mortgage Bias Case for $175 Million (NYT) — This was to settle “to settle accusations that its independent brokers discriminated against black and Hispanic borrowers during the housing boom.”
  6. Is recovery near? Why the housing bust may be over (WashPost) — This is what the Post led with instead of Penn State.

Do you think the Jet Ski image hurt Romney?

61 Replies

Daniel Henninger over at the WSJ is kinda torqued at whoever over at the Romney campaign allowed the indelible image of Romney on vacation be the one of him looking “fabulous” with this “fabulous-looking wife” on a Jet Ski.

And if it was Romney himself, he says it’s over: The Henninger column is subheaded, “If that jet-ski ride was the candidate’s call, his campaign is headed for a Dukakis-like catastrophe.” He elaborated:

What the Romneys thought they were doing with this innocent spin around the lake is irrelevant. Mr. Romney happens to be the GOP’s candidate for the American presidency. That fellow in the jet-ski photo would be the same Mitt Romney described in political analysis the previous week as having taken on water with the public because of the Obama campaign’s attacks on him as a rich guy from Bain Capital.

It would be the same Mitt Romney whom Barack Obama plans to define from now till November as out of step with a middle-class America in which “so many folks are just trying to get by.”

But “catastrophe”? Really? Look at the picture and see what you think.

Is America really that malleable, that much a sucker for a single image? It’s not like he looks like a total dork, like Dukakis in the tank. The comparison that Henninger makes to John Kerry windsurfing is probably more to the point. But if we’re going to attach importance to these things, isn’t riding on a Jet Ski a more plebeian pastime, less effete, than windsurfing? They’s a heap a good ol’ boys out yonder on Jet Skis at Lake Murray of a weekend — right?

Or have I got that wrong? I tend to associate people roaring around on the waterborne equivalent of Harleys as more something Joe Sixpack would either do, or want to do.

But hey, it’s not about what I think. It’s about how it plays. How does it play with you?

SC politician uses ‘communitarian’ in a sentence!

18 Replies

A friend brought to my attention this interview with Bob Inglis, who will be in Columbia next week to speak at the SC Clean Energy Summit. An excerpt:

Q. So you think the main thing driving the current conservative attitude toward climate science is economic anger?

A. I think that’s where the explanation starts. Yesterday, in my class [Inglis is a Visiting Energy Fellow at the Nicolas School of the Environment at Duke University], I assigned J.M. Bernstein’s great piece “The Very Angry Tea Party.” It starts with economic dislocation, but his point is, at a very deep emotional level, it shows that our self-concept as autonomous beings is inconsistent with our reality of interdependence, and to some extent dependence, on a social network of support from Medicare, Social Security, and other ways that we have formed community.

The thing where I’m obviously out of step is, I think it’s possible to be a conservative who wants to build community. That it is consistent with the ethical teachings of Jesus — to be a communitarian, to care for the sick. But right now what we have is anger and rejectionism. On energy and climate, there’s an element that just rejects action, rejects the science, rejects anything and anybody with a PhD.

I think you should respect people who have given their lives to learning about climate systems and listen to them carefully. They know a lot more than I do. But this is not where we are right now.

If you look at the history of this country, there was something called the Boston Commons. Savannah, Ga., was a planned city and has beautiful parks; Charleston has some beautiful public spaces. The idea being, we can build a community here. We’re going to care for one another. Now, there’s a big difference of opinion about how far that goes in terms of the role of the state. But you start with the notion that we’re going to build community.

Another reason for rejectionism has to do with an assumption of technological progress, that they, whoever they is, will come up with something. It’s not a strategy as far as I’m concerned. The unnamed they will come up with something faster if we set the economics right.

And some of the rejectionism is based on a sort of recoiling from the apocalyptic vision of some advocates of action on climate change. That apocalyptic vision actually hurts us because it drives the sense that, well, we’re all toast anyway. We may as well eat, drink, and be merry. If I believe that I’ve got some control over my destiny, I might rise up and exercise responsibility. But if I think it’s all predetermined and I’ve got no hope, denial is a pretty good coping mechanism.

If I accept the science, and that leads to the conclusion that something’s up, and I’m a responsible moral actor, I should change my behavior. But if I’m not willing to change my behavior, it’s better for me, not to admit that I’m selfish, but to attack the science. Attacking the science is an easier way to dispense with the question.

And here you can see, of course, why the Tea Party essentially rode the congressman out of office on a rail in 2010: He thinks too much.

Related to that is the main reason this was brought to my attention: This may mark the first time in the history of our state that a present or former South Carolina officeholder actually used the word “communitarian.” And even used it in a way that indicated he identified the concept with himself!

Beth Bernstein touts 2nd quarter fund-raising

4 Replies

Just got this from House candidate Beth Bernstein:

Beth Bernstein, House District 78 candidate, raises over $32,000 in second quarter

Has more than $54,000 on hand

Columbia, SC — Beth Bernstein, candidate for House District 78 against incumbent Rep. Joan Brady, filed her second quarter financial disclosure with over $32,000, bringing her overall fund raising total to just under $70,000.

Bernstein, an attorney and small business owner, released the following statement on her fund raising quarter:

“I am very excited that so many people have invested in my campaign,” Bernstein said. “As a small business owner, attorney, and mother, I decided to run because I was frustrated with the current leadership when nothing gets done. I want to bring back balance to the Statehouse and common sense solutions to state government. As I speak with voters across the District on a daily basis, I hear their frustrations and am motivated more than ever to work on the real issues affecting our everyday lives: education, job growth, and improving our quality of life. My message to the people of this District is: Help is on the way.”

Beth Bernstein, 42, chose to run for the House because of her concern about the direction of South Carolina under the current leadership. She grew up in the District and has chosen to raise her family there. She practices law in her family law firm, Bernstein and Bernstein, LLC, in Columbia. She and her husband, Rip Sanders, are proud parents of Caroline, 8, and Isabel, 3.

For more information, go to www.beth4house.com.

####

OK, so maybe you’re not all that impressed with that amount of money raised. But I take note because I’m interested in this race, as one of the very few seriously contested general election legislative races in this part of the state.

Watching from the outside, I expect this one will turn on how voters feel about Joan Brady and the other members of the House Ethics Committee dismissing charges against Nikki Haley not once, but twice. We’ll see.