Some quick suggestions:
- Big new tire plant in Chester County — It’s expected to employ 1,700 people. That’s quite an industry cluster we’ve got going.
- U.S. and Iran Hint at Joint Effort to Quell Iraq Insurgency — Wouldn’t that be wild? Meanwhile, ISIS captures a key city on the Syrian border.
- WashPost report slams Sally Atwater — The report suggests you listen to this “really awkward interview,” below…
Related Posts
The new tire factory is more evidence of an economy picking up steam. I think we can now declare the economy has moved from a sluggish recovery to a moderate recovery. It’s not a robust recovery just yet but it’s getting there.
I heard that we have 5,000 people in the American Embassy in Iraq. Is that true? Is that typical for an embassy? It’ probably time shut that down before we have another Benghazi.
Oil prices are essentially flat over the last 2 days of trading. The DOW was also flat today. The money folks are not reacting much to the news in Iraq. Seems like our best play is to pass the baton to the Iranians and let them prop up the Maliki regime. Biden’s 3 state solution seems like a pretty pragmatic long-term goal. Getting there is the tough part. But at the very least we could throw that out there for everyone’s consideration.
“The new tire factory is more evidence of an economy picking up steam. I think we can now declare the economy has moved from a sluggish recovery to a moderate recovery. It’s not a robust recovery just yet but it’s getting there.”
Bud, when the Q2 GDP number comes out at the end of June, do you want over or under 3.0%?
I didn’t realize 3% was the standard by which we define a recovery as modest vs sluggish. In any event the growth number is only part of what defines a healthy economy. At some point we’ll have to accept zero growth. Any positive number is unsustainable over the long run.
No, Bud, if the economy isn’t growing it would be withering. Inflation isn’t a bad thing. Personally, I like it. But like with everything, too much is too much.
I listened to the interview. Either Ms. Atwater is refusing to clearly state where she stands, in which case she could use lessons in more effective dodging, or she’s missing the middle card in a straight. Either way, she does not have my vote.
She doesn’t have mine either. Sounded to me like she was hoping that saying she stood by SC standards would be enough for them to move on, and she could sound like she had a position without knowing the details. But those guys didn’t let her off the hook. It became apparent she has no clue what is in the standards and she’s not willing to commit to anything (either out of fear of losing votes or because she just doesn’t have the knowledge required to make a choice??) Either way, not a good thing. My guess is her grasp of requisite knowledge for the job is probably equally shallow.
She didn’t know what she was talking about. She couldn’t name anything in the standards so she just kept repeating herself.
and she apparently doesn’t have a clue who Russ Cassell is either- which is scary too considering he’s been the main talk show host (a conservative) in the upstate of South Carolina for 2 decades now.
I believe her strategy is to run on her last name, end of story.
I was wondering if she was related to “Lee” so I finally looked it up.
A-yup!
Not even dog whistle politics!
I just picked up on the fact that Mick Zais and all those other people endorsed Sally Atwater TODAY — that is to say, AFTER this disastrous interview.
Wow… Are they all hearing-impaired or something?
They don’t care
This is why my wife and I will reprise our voting the the Democratic and Republican elections, respectively, next Tuesday. We did so last Tuesday, knowing that some folks would criticize the decision. I took some heat on this blog when I referred to doing so last week.
No, we are NOT trying to sabotage anyone or either party by voting for the worst candidate in either race. We both know who we will vote for in November, assuming the runoffs come out as we hope. But we would rather see the BEST candidate for Superintendent of Education be offered up by both parties in November.
If our action is seen as immoral, pointless, wrongheaded, or whatever…so be it.
No reasonable person could possibly criticize your wanting, as a couple to have a say in every electoral contest before you.
We should each be able to do that as individuals. But the partisans control the process. They think South Carolina, and the nation, belong to them, rather than to all of us.
I think I need to schedule an appointment with an audiologist to have my hearing tested and then come back and listen to the radio interview again. I still cannot believe I actually heard what I think I heard from Sally Atwater.
If what I heard from Sally Atwater is true, and I have no reason to believe otherwise, once again for me, it is another example of someone who believes they should be in politics because of a perceived legacy. Her husband was the late Lee Atwater and apparently, she is convinced that due to her marriage to Atwater and the connection to the Bush family, she is qualified to be the Superintendent of Education for SC. Based on her responses, I cannot find any other reason for her to be a candidate.
Heaven help us if she should win the run-off and go on to be elected.
Wow. She comes across as as almost hostile (maybe arrogant is the right word) in that interview, almost like she’s annoyed that she has to explain her position. When she says “you’re pressing me” I knew it was not going to end well.
That kind of arrogance and hostility to questioning comes across really poorly. I don’t know the first thing about Superintendent of Education Race or anyone’s position on the issues, but Atwater isn’t winning any votes with that kind of attitude. Her lack of a coherent response beyond “I support the standards” also reflects a lack of preparation, or worse, willful evasiveness. Heck, if her goal was to be evasive, she at least ought to do a better job of it.
I had to chuckle when the host asked her “What ARE the science standards?”, and it was clear she didn’t really know or care.
That statement — “She comes across as as almost hostile (maybe arrogant is the right word) in that interview.” — reminds me of the Hillary Clinton interview with Terry Gross last week.
That was the same impression I had of that clip I kept hearing, in which she boils over on the interviewer. It seemed to fit with the thing I keep hearing about ex-Sen. Clinton, about how little patience she has with the media. I had read an extended piece recently in The New Yorker, more or less on that theme.
But then I listened to the seven minutes that preceded that moment, and got a little irritated with Ms. Gross myself. My wife listened with me, and was completely sympathetic with the former SecState.
Having heard it both ways, and having had both impressions, I’m not sure what to think now…
and of course the usual suspects (Nathan Ballentine included – sad) line up behind Atwater- a woman who can’t even state the basics of the SC standards when asked by a radio host who is already sympathetic to her positions
“Sally Atwater will bring to the State Superintendent’s office solid conservative values and will work tirelessly to expand school choice and educator accountability. I give her my strongest endorsement,” said Superintendent Zais.
23 other prominent conservative members of the legislature also endorsed Sally Atwater for the runoff including: Senator Larry Grooms, Senator Katrina Shealy, Senator Kevin Bryant, Senator Greg Gregory, Senator Mike Fair, Rep. Alan Clemmons, Rep. Eric Bedingfield, Rep. Dan Hamilton, Rep. Garry Smith, Rep. Bill Chumley, Rep. Josh Putnam, Rep. Kevin Hardee, Rep. Nathan Ballentine, Rep. Todd Atwater, Rep. Chip Huggins, Rep. Heather Crawford, Rep. Bill Sandifer, Rep. Don Wells, Rep. Mike Burns, Rep. Anne Thayer, Rep. Philip Lowe, Rep. Murrell Smith & Rep. Ralph Norman.
In this interview- she said she had always wanted to be a teacher growing up
so one wonders (and she was asked) why she took a 30 year break from teaching- only returning a couple of years ago (to teach a self contained special needs classroom)
(She sounds like my mom does when she’s talking about her job – not someone who you’d want in a leadership position influencing policy decisions statewide).
Wow. Thanks for link. Y’all please don’t vote for her. I’m embarrassed for special ed teachers everywhere. She made it sound like the kids in her class had not been psychologically tested and identified for special education yet because they were developmental delay. You don’t get to be identified as having a developmental delay, which is a special education designation, except by being tested by the school psychologist. I am used to parents butchering this information (and I give them leeway – it is a confusing process sometimes), but shes supposed to know the process if she has been working as a special ed teacher. If she has this poor a grasp and/or ability to express the details of the job she’s been doing for the past 2 years, I shudder to think how she would handle being State Superintendent. She also, I’m pretty sure, said flustration and flustrated. And I only made it 6 minutes in. I couldn’t take any more. Y’all please don’t vote for her. Or I will be very flustrated myself.
Rick Noble, whom I suggested you consult in connection with Haley’s First Steps veto, wrote a great op ed in today’s The State. The most damning information: Haley, who claims to just want further investigation of the programs’ effectiveness, chairs the board, but has not attended any meetings or appointed any board members, per her prerogative!
I think we know what beverage she’s pushing….
With the James Metts indictment, is there anyone in local politics who ISN’T crooked? We set the bar so low for elected officials… I’ve spent 35 years in a wide ranging cross section of American businesses and have never come across the level of corruption we find in government.
Doug,
I hate to be the one to tell you, but SC’s state sport is corruption. It’s a cultural problem. And an economic one – too many people chasing what is perceived as too few opportunities.
Well, as I’ve said many times, wrongdoers are far more likely to get CAUGHT in the public sector than in the private… Any crook with half a brain would go into business rather than government. Which just leaves the dumb ones…
Seems like the folks in the banking industry were corrupt enough to rig the LIBOR rate. Folks at GM were allowing people to die because they didn’t want to replace a $2 part. Ford recently publicized false mileage figures. (After a firestorm from consumers they said their testing was in error). BP certainly made of mess of things in the Gulf thanks to a complete disregard for basic safety standards. And let’s not forget ENRON. Cigarette companies have finally been exposed in the US for their false advertising so they’ve decided to peddle their poison overseas. Dr. Oz has now been exposed as a charleton peddling his worthless health additives. Hardly a day goes by when some small business isn’t exposed for labor law violations or discriminatory serving practices. No Doug, government doesn’t have a monopoly on corruption.
bud – yes, the bankers were rigging LIBOR, but what exactly do you think that the banks that make up the Federal Reserve are doing with the Federal Funds rate? What do you think that the Federal Reserve is doing through Open Market Operations? They are rigging interest rates! They are also causing inflation. We need to go back on the gold standard, and move away from fiat currency.
What inflation??? This is a conservative bogey man that’s about as real as the Lizard man.
Besides I wasn’t suggesting there is zero corruption in government, there certainly is, but merely that Doug’s fantasy comment about the lack of corruption in the private sector is demonstrably false. Not sure I understand Doug’s obsession with the virtues of free enterprise. It has it’s place in a free society but not to the point of praising it in quasi religious terms.
By the way, I brought up the Metts indictment in this other post…