Category Archives: 2010 Governor

It’s not about whether it’s legal; it’s about whether such a person should be governor

My sense is that John Barton was right when he said in The State this morning that John Rainey’s charge that Nikki Haley has violated ethics law by taking 40 grand from Wilbur Smith is without legal merit.

Barton knows about such things, and if he says that payment didn’t cross the line, he’s almost certainly right.

Which of course is beside the point.

That story, which fretted mightily over whether the law was violated or not by that deal, is yet another example of something I’ve bemoaned in the MSM for many years. “Objective” news folks, who fear exercizing judgments, obsess over whether something is legal or not to such a degree that the conversation becomes about THAT, and if in the end it’s determined it’s NOT against the law, then everyone goes “all right, then” and moves on. As though being legal made it OK.

But legal or not, it’s not OK. The issue is that the way Nikki Haley handled this shows her lack of fitness for high office.

And the ultimate issue isn’t her, but us. It’s about the decision we make.

And we have to decide whether we want someone to be our governor who, in this instance:

Took more than $40,000 from a business that can’t tell what she did for them, just that they wanted to retain her because she’s “very connected.”
Avoided disclosing that.
Insists that she should be elected because she champions transparency.

So I doubt that Rainey’s letter will lead to legal action against her. I doubt that she’ll have the pay a penalty the way she keeps having to do because of not paying taxes on time.

But it does serve the useful purpose of making sure voters don’t forget something they should remember.

Uh-oh — Sheheen has conceded Texas!

12 Replies

Over the weekend, I missed this ominous development (it went out on Saturday):

SHEHEEN CONCEDES TEXAS

Camden, SC–Today, Vincent Sheheen directed his campaign to withdraw all staff and resources from the state of Texas, effectively conceding the state to opponent Nikki Haley. Haley continued her nationwide tour of ignoring South Carolina today by campaigning in Austin, Texas, where she is a featured speaker at a national Republican convention.

Sheheen for Governor Communications Director Kristin Cobb said, “Campaigning in Texas shows Nikki Haley’s primary concern is promoting herself and not solving South Carolina’s problems. Her mentor Mark Sanford’s flirtation with the national spotlight proved disastrous and South Carolina needs a change.”

“While Vincent Sheheen campaigns in the Pee Dee and the Midlands today, Nikki Haley is again ignoring South Carolina by campaigning in Texas as she runs for governor of the United States.”

For more information, visit:

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/09/16/redstate-gathering-2010-3/

On the one hand, I worry about Vincent conceding these major battlegrounds. What’s next? Ohio? Pretty soon, only SC would still be in play, and then where would we be?

On the other, I have to applaud him for his masterful application of the “Hit ’em where they ain’t” strategy. And in Nikki Haley’s case, the place that she ain’t is here. Even when she’s here physically, her mind, her focus, and every word she says is all about other places. Her aim is not on being governor of SC. In her mind, she’s won that, left office and moved on…

Debates are more necessary than ever

42 Replies

In the print version, the headline on this story in The State was, “Have debates become unnecessary?” (Why it’s different in the online version I don’t know; it happens sometimes.)

The story is about the fact that, as things stand, there will only be two debates between Nikki Haley and Vincent Sheheen before the Nov. 2 vote.

I take keyboard in hand to answer the question:

No, they have not become “unnecessary.” In fact, in this election, it is more necessary than ever to have as many debates as possible. Having only two is unconscionable, tantamount to flipping a huge bird at the electorate.

One of two relatively little-known candidates will become our governor for four years. After having twice made the awful mistake of electing Mark Sanford — who as a congressman was much more widely known than either Haley or Sheheen before he ran — it is critically important that voters get as many unscripted opportunities as possible to hear them questioned, and compare them side by side.

This would not be for my benefit. I’m not the typical voter. I’ve known them both for years, well enough that there is not the slightest question in my mind: Vincent Sheheen would be a far better governor than Nikki Haley.

I believe firmly that if voters had the opportunity to observe and/or interact with them as much as I have, the majority of them would reach the same conclusion. Multiple, in-depth, face-to-face sessions with each voter is impractical. The best we can do would be to have multiple debates — 10 (the number that Sanford and Jim Hodges had) would not be too many. Far from it — 10 would merely be a good start. While Nikki, who is a very charming and presentable person on first acquaintance, will likely come through a couple of debates all right, each additional debate makes it more likely that voters will know her, and her opponent, a little better. And that would be a very good thing.

Nikki knows this. Hence the two debates.

Yes, I understand the conventional wisdom, and it’s correct as far as it goes. But the fact that she leads in the polls as her motivation for resisting more debates distracts us from a deeper, more strategic motive. You may have noticed that the more information that dribbles out about Nikki Haley, the more she is shown to be something other than what she lets on to be. That’s a far better reason for avoiding debates than her poll numbers.

But as I say, let’s not have more debates for me — or for Vincent, or for Nikki. Let’s have them because the people deserve more information about these young people than they currently have. And the more information they have, the more likely they are to make a decision that they will not regret later.

OK, that’s ONE I’ve seen. Any others out there?

14 Replies

Today I saw my first actual “Republicans for Sheheen” bumper sticker on an actual vehicle.

And this was on an SUV, so it was definitely a real Republican, right? (Just kidding, GOPpers — can’t you take a joke?)

I’ve heard, privately, from a lot of folks whom you might otherwise expect to vote Republican who are backing Sheheen — both because they like Vincent, and because Nikki worries them a great deal.

And anyone who pays close attention will note that Henry McMaster sort of stands out these days, because there aren’t many other leading Republicans going out of their way to be seen with Nikki. (What we have is lots of people who don’t really know Nikki backing her in polls, while state business and political leaders who’ve actually dealt with her and know a thing or two about the issues generally aren’t too thrilled with her.)

But aside from the Chamber of Commerce endorsement, you don’t see a lot of visible, public demonstrations of intent to vote for Sheheen from traditionally Republican quarters.

At least, I haven’t.

Alas, I didn’t get to talk to this person, to get an elaboration on why he or she is taking this stand. This was in the drive-through queue at McDonald’s today. A couple of times I almost jumped out of my truck to run up and hand the driver my card and urging him or her to call me, but each time I put my hand on the door handle the line moved forward again.

So then I decided I’d follow the vehicle when it left Mickey D’s, and if it stopped anywhere nearby, try to cop an interview there.

But then, it happened again. I ordered a double quarter-pounder, without cheese (you know, because of my allergies). When I paid for it, I checked with the lady taking the money: “Without cheese, right?” “No cheese,” she said. Then when my food was handed to me in the bag at the next window, I said, “No cheese, right?” She said that was right. So I pulled up a few feet, and opened it up to check, and sure enough, each patty had welded to it one of those things that looks like a square of orange, molten plastic.

So I got out, walked back, squeezing between the car behind me and the window, knocked on the window and said, “THIS is with cheese.”

And then I was asked to pull over to the side and wait for what I had ordered, and had been assured twice I would get.

This happens to me roughly a third of the times that I go to McDonald’s. But McDonald’s isn’t special; I have similar problems at sit-down restaurants. That’s why I always check. It beats finding out five miles away (which has happened). What really gets me, of course, is when this happens after I’ve been assured, repeatedly, that it won’t.

Anyway, that’s why I didn’t get an interview with the Republican for Sheheen.

Do you have one of these stickers on YOUR bumper, or know someone who does? If so, send me your contact info at [email protected]. I’d like to chat with you.

Candidates owe it to us to debate, early and often

9 Replies

But which one would Nikki be?

This release from the Sheheen campaign…

Why won’t Nikki Haley agree to debate Vincent Sheheen?

CAMDEN, SC — Seventeen days ago, Vincent Sheheen challenged Nikki Haley to five substantive debates on five important issues in five different South Carolina locations. She did not respond. Six days ago, the Sheheen campaign called Representative Haley’s campaign and left a message, requesting a return call. No response. Four days ago, the Sheheen campaign called Haley headquarters again but were told that the appropriate staff could not be reached.

In a letter sent to Representative Haley on August 30th, Sheheen stated, “I challenge you to debates on jobs and the economy in Greenville, education in Columbia, governmental reform and transparency in Charleston, comprehensive tax reform in Rock Hill and infrastructure and tourism in Myrtle Beach. I propose the debates follow the Lincoln Douglas format as prescribed by the National Forensic League, the oldest and largest interscholastic forensic organization in the United States.”

“Voters, with such an important choice at such a crucial time, want the chance to fully know the candidates for governor,” he concluded in the letter.

Sheheen Communications Director Kristin Cobb had this to say: “Why is Nikki Haley afraid to debate Vincent Sheheen? She is hiding her record from a public debate like she hid her tax problems and her income. Maybe she would return our calls if we offered to debate her in Iowa or Arizona.”

###

… raises a question that is extremely easy to answer:

If she doesn’t debate, we’ll know its because she believes she’s more likely to win without doing so.

But you know what? There’s no way South Carolinians should allow anyone to become our next governor without hearing the competitors in multiple debates. Debates would allow us to hear:

Who would be the more credible and effective leader in building our state’s economy.
Who can more persuasively make the case for genuine governmental reform, beyond the soundbites.
How Nikki, as the “Transparency” candidate, justifies her repeated failures to transparent in even the most elementary ways.
Whether Vincent is really committed to being governor, or is just a nice guy with good qualifications who will agree to be governor if we really want him to.

And other burning questions.

We deserve this. While it was kinda geeky and wonky, we would be well-served if Nikki would go along with the Lincoln-Douglas idea. Or if she’s got a better idea for multiple debates, let’s hear it NOW, so that we can make sure these things happen.

We’ve bought enough pigs in pokes lately. Let us get a really good look at these two.

Nikki vs. Vincent, by the ounce

24 Replies

As I occasionally have to clarify here, I’m about commentary, not reporting. You want reporting, go someplace else. I haven’t been a reporter in 30 years. You want an opinion writer who’s primarily a reporter, see Cindi Scoppe. She’s one of the best. (Her column today is a good example of that quality; I may post separately about that later.) Sure, I “cover” events from time to time, just so I can get my own first-hand impressions. But mainly what I do is make observations based upon the existing body of available information.

Now Corey Hutchins with The Free Times is a reporter. You’ll recall that he was the only media type to go out and track down Alvin Greene before the primary. Too bad more people didn’t read his report at the time.

Now, he has a facts-and-figures report comparing the legislative records of Nikki Haley and Vincent Sheheen. One way to characterize what he found is in this observation he posted on Facebook:

If one were to print out the list of legislative bills in the past five years primarily sponsored by the two lawmakers running for governor in S.C., Dem Sen. Sheheen’s would weigh 9.5 ounces and GOP Rep. Haley’s would clock in at 2.4 give or take a botched staple.

Of course, that doesn’t tell you much. Maybe Vincent is just wordy. You’ll get more to chew on reading his full report headlined, “Legislative Records: Sheheen More Active, Successful Than Haley,” with the subhed, “Since 2004, Sheheen Has Sponsored 96 Bills, Haley 13.”

An excerpt:

There are several ways to detail the disparity, but the easiest might be to look at the number of bills for which each candidate was listed as a primary sponsor and how far along each piece of legislation made it through the sausage maker.

Sheheen was elected to the state senate in 2004, the same year Haley was elected to the House. (Sheheen served in the House for four years before being elected to the Senate.) The difference in their legislative accomplishments since then is staggering.

According to state House and Senate records, during the 2005-2006 session, Sheheen sponsored 35 bills and was able to get eight of them passed. That same session, her first in office, Haley went zero for one.

The following session Sheheen went six for 30. Haley scored one out of seven.

During the latest legislative session that took place from 2009 to 2010, Gov. Mark Sanford signed two out of the 31 bills that Sheheen primarily sponsored. That year, the governor didn’t put pen to paper on any of the five bills backed by Haley.

Given these numbers, it would be hard to overstate the extent to which Sheheen — a Democrat in a Republican-dominated chamber —was able to navigate the legislative process in a more effective fashion than Haley. But from a philosophical standpoint — Haley being a candidate who wants government to do less — her rhetoric is at least somewhat consistent with her legislative record…

That’s a bit simplistic, a measure of Corey’s reportorial wish to be as fair to her as he can. What her record really underlines is the problem that I keep pointing to. In terms of accomplishing ANYTHING in dealing with the people who write the laws of the state (and in a Legislative State like ours, that thought could almost be framed as “accomplish anything, period”), Nikki Haley’s record indicates that, if anything, she’s been less successful even than Mark Sanford. Which is a very low standard indeed.

And remember, Sanford started out with a honeymoon, with a legislative leadership eager to work at long last with a governor of their own party. Those same leaders already know they don’t like Nikki.

Doug, of course, will turn that around into an attack on the legislative leaders themselves, which is satisfying to him but gets us nowhere. When you and I walk into the booth on Nov. 2, for the overwhelming majority of us, those leaders won’t be on the ballot (and the few of us who do live in their districts will find they don’t have viable opposition). What we get to pick is the governor. That’s how we get to affect the future course of our state.

Yeah, OK, I’ll help spread the truth

14 Replies

Just got this from the Sheheen campaign under the headline, “Help Vincent Fight Back with the Truth:”

Dear Brad –

This week, the race for governor changed. Vincent Sheheen’s second week of television ads have introduced him to a statewide audience and voters are impressed. We learned that Nikki Haley, who claims her skills as an accountant qualify her to be governor, had even more problems paying her taxes, this time for her business. The onslaught of bad news has the Haley campaign on the defensive.

Having already misled the public on her record, her positions and her business acumen, Nikki Haley has now resorted to false attacks on Vincent Sheheen rather than answering tough questions about her positions and her business problems.

In the last week, she falsely accused Vincent of wanting to raise taxes to solve the budget crisis but she is the only candidate who wants higher taxes; Haley wants to raise our grocery tax.

She claimed: “Vince Sheheen will kill our state’s competitiveness” but the Sanford-Haley philosophy of the last eight years has already left our job recruitment efforts in dismal shape and more of the same won’t improve them.

She even blamed Vincent for the fiscal problems of Washington DC and border security in Arizona. Vincent responded that maybe Nikki Haley was running for governor of the United States that the last thing we needed was another governor focused on national office and not our state.

Then she called him “slippery.” Her tactics are desperate and an embarrassment. We need your help to fight back with the truth. Donate today so South Carolina can elect a governor we can trust.

Thanks,

Trav

Trav Robertson
Campaign Manager
Sheheen for Governor

OK, all that is true.

But here’s some more truth: Nikki’s not on the ropes. She’s not on the defensive, even thought she should be, since every supposed strength she’s touted (transparency, business acumen) has turned out to be a weakness. She’s on a roll.

Today, I heard two different accounts of the appearance of the two candidates before the Palmetto Business Forum yesterday. Both said Vincent was fine and said the right things, but was low key and seemed to lack the fire in the belly.

Nikki, they said, was ON. She was in the zone. She had obviously been superbly prepared by her handlers, and recited everything perfectly. My witnesses knew, as I know, that Nikki’s understanding of issues is at best skin deep, generally not going beyond a bumper-sticker message. But she delivers the bumper sticker well.

This is a continuation of what I saw at the Sarah Palin event a couple of months back. I saw something that is unmistakable to me after my decades of observing politics and politicians closely: A candidate who was peaking, who was confident, poised, energetic and on message. She was ladling out stuff that that Tea Party crowd was lapping up, and she’s still doing it. Knowing that the business community doesn’t trust her, she has worked hard at learning key things to say to win them over. And that, according to my witnesses, was what was on display last night.

It is extremely important to South Carolina that Vincent Sheheen win this election. He is THE reform candidate, and the governor our state needs. But unless something happens to change the game, he’s not going to. Win, that is. And the business community, and the rest of us, are going to suffer another four years of a governor who fundamentally does not understand or appreciate economic development, and can’t work with key players to help move our state forward.

And we can’t afford that. But right now, that’s where we’re headed.

Apparently, the government had a really, really HARD time taking a dollar from Nikki

32 Replies

Alert reader J brings our attention to this AP story, which shows that not only can Nikki, the accounting whiz (just ask her; she’ll tell you), not pay her personal taxes on time, but neither could the business for which she acted as bookkeeper:

COLUMBIA, S.C. — A business owned by the family of South Carolina Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley has been penalized for failing to pay taxes three times since 2003, according to records obtained by The Associated Press.

Haley has frequently cited her experience as an accountant for her family’s clothing store, saying the state needs such business knowledge at its helm.

Records show the store’s taxes were at least 19 months past due each time the state filed a lien.

Two of the tax liens were for failing to pay corporate income taxes and one was for not turning over taxes withheld from employee checks. The company paid nearly $4,000 to remove the liens.

In response, Haley’s campaign said Thurday she is running for governor in part because she wants to cut red tape and taxes that are too burdensome. Her campaign declined to discuss the specifics of the liens.

“As a family, we saw how hard it was to make a dollar and how easy it was for government to take it,” Haley, a state House member, said in a statement. “I’m committed to making government friendlier to the people and businesses it serves.”

A key part of Haley’s economic plan is to eliminate corporate income taxes, an idea the Legislature rejected earlier this year….

Run that nonsense by us again, Nikki:

“As a family, we saw how hard it was to make a dollar and how easy it was for government to take it…”

Yeah, right! Where, precisely, did y’all SEE that? Obviously, in the case of your family business, the gummint had a heckuva hard time taking it.

And this is, apparently, what Nikki means when she says she wants to run government like her business.

Differences between Haley, Sheheen on education spending

It’s not Clapton, but Sheheen’s “Crossroads” is a good start on the fall campaign

10 Replies

Above is the TV ad just released by the Sheheen campaign, entitled “Crossroads.”

I like it. It hits the right notes for going after the people who decide elections — us independents, and the Republicans who are smart enough not to want another four years of Sanford. And there are a lot of such Republicans, no matter what some Democrats might think. It’s good to see that Vincent is starting out trying (honestly and candidly, without a single note of artifice) to appeal to them, as well as to the sensible folk in the middle.

This is a good start on the fall campaign. But we need to see a lot more good stuff if he’s to avoid another defeat for South Carolina.

Oh, and just for fun, here’s the Cream electrified version of the Robert Johnson classic below:

Haley wants to drop one thing Sanford did right

5 Replies

I’m with Mark Sanford on this one:

Last week, Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley said she would do away with detailed executive budgets, which were typically ignored due to the acrimony between Sanford and lawmakers. Instead, Haley said, she would set a small list of priorities and work with lawmakers during the process.

In a message sent to Sanford’s campaign e-mail list, the outgoing governor argued his successor should also draft a detailed budget.

“These Executive Budgets have been vital in creating a budget blue print that showed how we could fund core services of government without raising taxes,” Sanford wrote, encouraging recipients to read a Post and Courier editorial on the subject. “They were important in showing the savings that might come from restructuring and consolidating government.”

Sanford does not mention Haley, a political ally who shares many of Sanford’s positions, by name in the e-mail.

Even with our weak-governor system, the governor is the one elected official with the closest thing to a governmentwide perspective — and has the broadest responsibility to voters. He (or she) should at the very least propose a budget setting priorities for spending, which lawmakers are then free to ignore the way they have since Carroll Campbell started the practice a couple of decades back. Campbell was right to go ahead and ACT like a governor, at least in advocacy terms, by submitting a budget, rather than waiting around to actually be put in charge of the executive branch.

Nikki Haley is on the right track looking for ways to antagonize lawmakers less. (Although it’s a bit late for that. Unlike Sanford, who started with a honeymoon, she’s already alienated legislative leaders to such an extent that if elected she would start out in a hole with them, and she knows it, and knows we know it, which is why she’s talking about this.) But this is the wrong item to start with. An executive budget, theoretical as it is, is a useful tool.

And while Mark Sanford went out of his way to alienate lawmakers so that they would ignore his budget proposals, along with the rest of his agenda, he put a lot of work into his budgets. And while they had their flaws, they were worth considering.

So would be Nikki Haley’s, were she elected. And so would Vincent Sheheen’s, which is why I hope he would continue to submit them. We need governors to actually take an interest in governing.

It’s great that Nikki wants to signal that she’d be different from Sanford. But this is the wrong way to start.

Time for good people to stand up and be counted

78 Replies

GEORGE BAILEY: We’re all excited around here. My brother just got the Congressional Medal of Honor. The president just decorated him.

MR. CARTER, BANK EXAMINER: Well, I guess they do those things… Well, I trust you had a good year.

— “It’s a Wonderful Life”

I’m guessing that like George Bailey, Vincent Sheheen expected a bigger reaction to the release he put out yesterday about his latest endorsement:

Today Vincent Sheheen, candidate for governor, will join the South Carolina Education Association for a press conference at 4:30 PM at the SCEA Headquarters, where they will be announcing their support of his campaign.

WHAT: SCEA Endorsement of Vincent Sheheen for Governor

WHEN: TODAY, TUESDAY, September 7, 2010 at 4:30 PM

WHERE: SCEA Headquarters, 421 Zimalcrest Drive, Columbia, SC

####

But like Mr. Carter, I’m underwhelmed. I didn’t even bother to show up. I suppose Sheheen did, but I haven’t checked.

The SCEA endorsed the Democrat for governor? Well, I guess they do those things… now let’s look at your books, so I can get back to my family in Elmira… (And if you know me, you know I’d just as soon drill a new hole in my head as look at anybody’s books.)

And I say this as a guy who really, really wants to see Vincent Sheheen elected governor.

For that reason, and knowing what it takes to win, I want to hear about more endorsements like the one from the S.C. Chamber of Commerce.

And I’m not just putting this on the Sheheen campaign. I’m saying that some of you business leaders and independents and community leaders who could actually exert influence in Republican and swing voter circles — including some who have shared with me off the record their fervent hopes that Vincent (and NOT Nikki) get elected — need to get out of your comfort zones, and stand up and be counted.

Yeah, standing up for something might cost you something. But not as much as it will cost South Carolina to waste another four years the way we have the past eight.

There are a lot of good, smart people in South Carolina who want the best for our state. But you know what I’ve noticed over the last couple of decades about good, smart people who want the best for South Carolina? They tend to be spineless. Whereas the demagogues and peddlers of negativity never rest, and aren’t a bit shy. (I’m not saying the SCEA aren’t good people. I’m just saying that they’re the usual suspects. Statewide elections in SC can be won by Democrats only when they can demonstrate support far beyond the usuals suspects.)

Vincent Sheheen is a good guy who’s standing up. So should you. And you know who you are.

This must be Labor Day

7 Replies

The way I can tell is that the election-related interview requests have started coming in at a brisk clip.

Last week there were three. I meant to tell you about them because one of them was New Watch on WIS, which aired Sunday morning. So unless you’re some kind of heathen who sits around watching TV on Sunday morning (and I say that without meaning any aspersions upon the heathen community), you missed it, because I forgot to tell you about it.

Ex-Mayor Bob Coble saw it, and sent me a note to say “Good job on Newswatch,” which I appreciate. Not to say Mayor Bob is a heathen. He’s just way into politics; he can’t help it.

I taped that Thursday afternoon. Then I also taped a segment over at ETV on Friday, also about the election. That won’t air until sometime in October. (It was broader, big-picture stuff, not as pegged to the news of the day.) I’ll get the date and try to remember to let you know.

Back on Thursday, I got an e-mail from Chris Haire with Charleston City Paper, to the following effect:

Just wanted to see if you have time to talk. I’m working on a story on the ongoing Nikki Haley rumors. Here’s the angle: With no proof out there, the only way to truly address this is as a smear. And, what’s particularly odd here, is that it’s such an ongoing smear — and truth be told, arguably the most ineffective smear in history. The question here is why it’s still happening.

I found that cryptic. I assumed it was a reference to this. But it wasn’t. It was a reference to something else, something I hadn’t heard about (and wish I still hadn’t), specifically this. (Which led later to this.)

I talked with him, and tried to say something coherent, but what are you supposed to say? Frankly, I’m just like most folks in South Carolina — uncomfortable as hell talking about this stuff. Which is why I sort of doubt it will emerge as visibly as it did back during the primary. At least, I hope it doesn’t.

Anyway, I asked Chris to let me know when that is published. If and when I see it, I’ll give y’all a link. If I forget to look, and y’all see if first, remind me. I want to keep y’all in the loop. I just forget sometimes.

The Fatties vs. the Fantasists: A hypothetical rematch with the Japanese

31 Replies

Last night, by way of explaining to my daughter more fully why Roger Sterling was so abominably rude to the guys from Honda in last week’s “Mad Men” I popped in the first episode of “The Pacific.” (As I’ve mentioned, since I’m currently reading the books that series was based on — I’m on Eugene Sledge’s With the Old Breed now — that theater is much on my mind.)

For most of us, buying Hondas and Toyotas, and even, most improbably, Mitsubishis (as in, the Zero) comes fairly naturally. There is probably less conflict in the national psyche over those than over, say, Volkswagen. But for those who fought in the less-understood Pacific war, the stress of fighting a suicidally aggressive enemy with seemingly superhuman commitment to his cause, would be something that would mark you forever.

But if we had a rematch with the Japanese, it might go differently.

Did you see the NYT story on the front page of The State today, about how Army training has been “walked back” a bit to make it less stressful on recruits who grew up playing video games instead of baseball? An excerpt:

FORT JACKSON, S.C. — Dawn breaks at this, the Army’s largest training post, with the reliable sound of fresh recruits marching to their morning exercise. But these days, something looks different.

That familiar standby, the situp, is gone, or almost gone. Exercises that look like pilates or yoga routines are in. And the traditional bane of the new private, the long run, has been downgraded.

This is the Army’s new physical-training program, which has been rolled out this year at its five basic training posts that handle 145,000 recruits a year. Nearly a decade in the making, its official goal is to reduce injuries and better prepare soldiers for the rigors of combat in rough terrain like Afghanistan.

But as much as anything, the program was created to help address one of the most pressing issues facing the military today: overweight and unfit recruits…

Now, I’m not about to call today’s war fighters wimps. Especially not the tip-of-the-spear types like the Marines, or the Airborne divisions, or the Rangers or other elites. They are, if anything, tougher than ever, and certainly more lethal.

But that story gives us a hint of what it would be like if the Army ceased being so selective because it was handling a mass mobilization such as that of 1941-45. Imagine soldiers who had never done a pushup in basic trying to make their way through a fetid jungle in 100-degree-plus temps.

But fear not, because in today’s WSJ, we have evidence that they would not be met with shrieking madmen eager to die for their emperor. Get a load of this:

Since the marriage rate among Japan’s shrinking population is falling and with many of the country’s remaining lovebirds heading for Hawaii or Australia’s Gold Coast, Atami had to do something. It is trying to attract single men—and their handheld devices.

In the first month of the city’s promotional campaign launched July 10, more than 1,500 male fans of the Japanese dating-simulation game LovePlus+ have flocked to Atami for a romantic date with their videogame character girlfriends.

The men are real. The girls are cartoon characters on a screen…

Love Plus+ re-creates the experience of an adolescent romance. The goal isn’t just to get the girl but to maintain a relationship with her.

After choosing one of three female characters—goodie-goodie Manaka, sassy Rinko or big-sister type Nene—to be a steady girlfriend, the player taps a stylus on the DS touch-screen in order to walk hand-in-hand to school, exchange flirtatious text messages and even meet in the school courtyard for a little afternoon kiss. Using the device’s built-in microphone, the player can carry on sweet, albeit mundane, conversations.

Wow. Get those guys charged up on saki, and they’re not going to be screaming “banzai,” but drooling over decidedly unwomanly avatars, hoping for a pretend peck on the cheek.

So maybe a nation of fatties could take them. But probably only in a virtual war, fought on a virtual playing field. At least our video games are tougher than theirs, if this is an example.

Maybe Harry Turtledove will take on this topic.

Because, um, because he’s a DEMOCRAT, right?

19 Replies

First, let me apologize that I’ve been missing in action all day. Some kind of horrific stomach bug. I’m somewhat better now, but then I haven’t eaten since breakfast.

But just to say I’ve posted something, let me share this…

Back on this earlier post, a reader named Rose wrote:

I don’t know why Republicans think Democrats don’t own guns. Most of my family members are moderate Democrats (although we do unfortunately have a few loony Tea Party cousins) and we own guns. Shotguns, rifles and handguns. We hunt. We shoot targets. And I guarandamntee you that I’m a helluva better shot than Haley.

So I don’t understand why Southerners think only Republicans like guns.

Well, as it happens, Rose, Vincent Sheheen is a regular Southerner, as he noted in a story by Yvonne Wenger:

Sheheen said he also supports gun rights.

“As chairman of the South Carolina Sportsmen’s Caucus and gun owner, I have repeatedly worked with the NRA to protect the gun ownership rights of South Carolinians,” Sheheen said in a statement. “There is no candidate that is a stronger supporter of Second Amendment rights and as governor, I will make sure the rights of citizens to own guns are never infringed.”

So how come this “Gun Owners of America” (of which I had never heard before Nikki touted their endorsement; had you?) didn’t endorse Vincent? Yvonne wondered, too, and asked. Here’s what she didn’t learn:

The group’s director of communications Erich Pratt said Monday that the reason why Sheheen did not receive the endorsement wasn’t immediately available.

Don’t you love it? “Wasn’t immediately available!” Of course, the answer most likely is that the folks making this decision probably didn’t know squat about Vincent Sheheen or his positions on issues, and didn’t care. They just went with the Republican who mouths extremist slogans. So, if she’s one o’ US, he’s gotta be some gun-hatin’ hippie liberal weirdo, right? Stands to reason…

This kind of reminds of the national media’s ecstasy over the idea that South Carolina might elect an “Indian-American woman.” It never occurs to them that as a Lebanese-American Catholic, Vincent would also score two firsts as governor. As if that sort of thing mattered. And like the “Gun Owners of America,” they don’t care, either.

Maybe they’d care if Will Folks claimed to have had an affair with him.

Uh-oh. I shouldn’t have had that thought when my stomach was already queasy…

Nikki wants us to know: She’s packin’ heat

19 Replies

Or at least, she’s authorized to pack heat, and wants to make sure we know it. This release was sent out today:

Gun Owners of America endorses Nikki Haley for governor

Grassroots organization praises Republican candidate for protecting 2nd Amendment rights

COLUMBIA, S.C. – State Rep. Nikki Haley, Republican candidate for governor, has earned the endorsement of Gun Owners of America, a grassroots organization with over 300,000 members that supports candidates in South Carolina who are committed to protecting 2nd Amendment rights.

“Gun Owners of America is proud to make this endorsement,” said GOA Vice-Chairman Tim Macy. “Nikki Haley stands 100% behind the rights of South Carolina’s gun owners and sportsmen. In particular, Rep. Haley strongly supports concealed carry of firearms by law-abiding citizens and will work to ease unreasonable restrictions on CWP holders.”

Rep. Haley thanked Gun Owners of America for its endorsement and said, “Few things are as clearly defined as the right of individual Americans to own and use firearms. The right to bear arms was deemed so critical by our Founders that they spelled it out in absolute terms, and it is my belief that any governmental action that undermines that right is in turn undermining the very freedoms that built our great nation. I hold a Concealed Weapons Permit myself, and as governor, I will continue to fight against any government infringement on the 2nd Amendment.”

-###-

The boldfaced emphasis is mine. So now you know. Make of it what you will.

Over the weekend, I went up to visit my relations in Bennettsville, the place of my birth. My uncle told me that my aunt recently finished qualifying for her own concealed-carry permit. When she got home, he asked her how she had done, and she showed him a silhouette target with a cluster of holes in the upper left center of the torso. He then asked, “What would you like for supper, dear?” True story. Or true according to my uncle, who is an accomplished teller of stories.

I wonder how Nikki did when she qualified?

But who gets to be Lincoln?

29 Replies

This came in today from the Sheheen campaign:

SHEHEEN CHALLENGES HALEY TO LINCOLN DOUGLAS DEBATES

“ …issue oriented debate like Lincoln Douglas would explain the differences.”

CAMDEN, SC—Today, Vincent Sheheen challenged Representative Nikki Haley to five Lincoln Douglas debates on five different topics in five different regions of South Carolina.

In a letter mailed to Representative Haley last week, Vincent Sheheen wrote, “I challenge you to debates on jobs and the economy in Greenville, education in Columbia, governmental reform and transparency in Charleston, comprehensive tax reform in Rock Hill and infrastructure and tourism in Myrtle Beach. I propose the debates follow the Lincoln Douglas format as prescribed by the National Forensic League, the oldest and largest interscholastic forensic organization in the United States.”

The guidelines for Lincoln Douglas Debate are:

(Speaker A) Constructive 6 Minutes

(Speaker B) Cross Examination 3 Minutes

(Speaker B) Constructive 7 Minutes

(Speaker A) Cross Examination 3 Minutes

(Speaker A) Rebuttal 4 Minutes

(Speaker B) Rebuttal 6 Minutes

(Speaker A) Rebuttal 3 Minutes

Prep Time 4 Minutes per debater

“These debates will provide South Carolinians with a comprehensive and thorough evaluation of both of us so that they won’t have to make such an important decision based on a thirty-second sound bite. I believe voters need a series of robust examinations of our positions to not only understand our governing philosophies but also begin to rebuild the trust that elected officials will act in ways consistent with their stated beliefs,” Sheheen concluded.

“ Voters, with such an important choice at such a crucial time, want the chance to fully know the candidates for governor. They deserve to know who will chart a new course for this state starkly different from the last eight years and who will attempt to carry on the failed legacy of Mark Sanford.”

###

The question is, who gets to be Lincoln? Nikki, who in spite of her contempt for many of her fellow Republicans managed to capture the nomination of what was once the Party of Lincoln, or Vincent, who if nothing else is taller?

Then again, you might not want to be Lincoln — who actually lost that election, if I recall.

Read Cindi’s latest column about Nikki’s “whoppers”

3 Replies

Since I griped about the lede headline in The State today (and I wasn’t picking on John there, it was just the headline that got me), I want to direct you, with my warm approval, to Cindi Scoppe’s latest today.

The subject: Nikki Haley’s habit of misleading, and just generally saying stuff that isn’t true. After taking Vincent Sheheen to task for HIS misleading question, “When will she release her tax returns?,” when she sorta kinda had, Cindi went on to demonstrate how such misstatements are a regular thing with his opponent.

I’ll excerpt here the last few grafs of the column:

The day after her WLTX interview, Ms. Haley appeared on Greta Van Sustern’s cable talk show and stepped up her usual attack on Mr. Sheheen for “making $400,000 as a trial lawyer” by calling him “a trial lawyer that makes $400,000 a year off the state.”

It’s pretty audacious, in a state with a median household income of $42,000, for someone who made $196,282 last year to castigate someone else for making $372,509. But the more serious sin here is the total fabrication about where Mr. Sheheen’s money came from.

Contrary to what you’d think if you listened to the Republicans’ drumbeat for Mr. Sheheen to reveal the sources of his income, legislators already have to report all the money they receive from state and local governments. In addition, attorneys must report the money they receive representing clients before the Workers Compensation Commission and other state boards.

As our news department noted on Sunday, last year Mr. Sheheen reported receiving $29,000 in salary and expenses as a senator, and his law firm received $13,000 from the Kershaw County Medical Center, $4,700 from the Cassatt Water Co. and $2,400 from the S.C. Guardian Ad Litem Program. That’s a total of $49,100 “off the state.” I suppose it’s possible that he made money that he didn’t report on his economic disclosure statement — you know, like that $40,000 in consulting fees that Ms. Haley didn’t report from a state government contractor who hired her for her “good contacts.” But since there’s no gray area in state law about reporting government income, I seriously doubt it.

Mr. Sheheen also reported that his law firm made about $170,000 in workers comp fees last year. Now, I would like more details about where the rest of his income came from, and I think he probably could provide them without violating legal ethics, say by telling us how much he received in contingency-fee awards, in retainers, in hourly fees. But it’s more than a little misleading for Ms. Haley to demand more transparency from the candidate who has been far, far more transparent than she has about his income as well as his communications on the taxpayers’ computers and e-mail accounts. Unfortunately, that sort of thing is becoming commonplace.

Cindi, by the way, is about the last person in the MSM you’ll ever see mistake feeling for thought. Always has been. Here, she has demonstrated that laudable trait once again.

By the way, you may want to read her previous column, which she links from this one, on the disturbing Jekyll and Hyde quality Mrs. Haley has demonstrated over time.

THAT’s what she means by transparency (or is it?)

13 Replies

On a day when the state’s largest newspaper leads with a second-day story about Vincent Sheheen answering questions that he shouldn’t be asked, about GOP inside-the-Beltway shouting points (the headline, “Sheheen takes on the issues,” was baldly out of sync with the story, since those are NOT “the issues”), it was shockingly refreshing to see another medium report on the gubernatorial candidates talking about an ACTUAL gubernatorial issue — South Carolina’s economy.

Here’s an excerpt from the end of the Columbia Regional Business Report story:

[Nikki Haley] said South Carolina could build upon being a right-to-work state by being a “no corporate income tax” state.

[Vincent] Sheheen said South Carolina has one of the lowest corporate income tax rates in the nation.

“That proposal specifically will help very few businesses in South Carolina because the vast majority of businesses in South Carolina pay no corporate income tax,” he said. “If we are going to keep doing the same things we’ve been doing over the past eight years, we all as citizens of South Carolina better get used to very high unemployment rates.”

Sheheen spoke of a government that doesn’t divide, but unites. South Carolina needs to increase funding to its higher education system, invest in alternative energy initiatives and expand the port system, he said.

“If we are going to brag about our port, we have to be committed to improving our port,” Sheheen said. He supports a designated earmark in the federal budget for dredging at the ports. “That’s how we dredge ports in this country. I’m willing to go to bat for this state to get our port expanded.”

Haley spoke of reforming the property tax system, supporting school choice and enacting term limits for legislators. She also vowed to make government more transparent.

“You’ve got attorneys that turn around and serve on these committees that affect workers’ comp, work the system all the way, but when they get to the floor, they recuse themselves,” Haley said. “It’s not that they recuse themselves on the floor; they shouldn’t be able to serve on those committees. That’s a direct conflict of interest.”

Reading that, the scales fell from my eyes. I now understand — I think. I had been confused that Ms. Transparency was so reluctant to BE transparent when given the chance. But she never meant her. When she says, “Transparency,” she means, “Legislators who are lawyers should be transparent. In fact, they should shut up and not participate, because being a lawyer is a conflict, in ways that being paid $40,000 for nothing but one’s influence is not.”

At least, that’s what I gather from that passage. In Nikki’s defense, it’s highly likely that if I heard that quote in context I’d get a different impression. I’m sure Nikki has a more nuanced explanation of exactly what she means when she touts transparency. And I remain eager to hear it. Perhaps I will, and perhaps I’ll learn more about the candidates’ stances on economic development and education and the state budget and law and order and environmental protection and other relevant issues — if we can stop talking about abortion and immigration and … what was the other one? Oh, yeah , the federal health care bill that was a big national issue last year. (All of which is a long way of saying, “Talking about our feelings about Obama.”)

Maybe.

An “ad homo-nem attack” on Sheheen?

55 Replies

First, I’ll admit that I got the “ad homo-nem” joke from my elder son, who said that when he saw the same thing I’m reacting to here:

@TreyWalker: Effeminate sounding non-answers by @VincentSheheen on ObamaCare won’t cut it in this cycle. From the Post and Courier: postandcourier.com/news/2010/aug/…

Say what? Effeminate-sounding? And this from one of your more sensible Republicans, Trey Walker, a McMaster and McCain kind of guy…

Here, for the record, is what Yvonne Wenger wrote on that subject:

Sheheen said he has answered questions throughout his campaign about his national policy stances, such as abortion rights.

“My answer is the same: I support life. I have always supported life and my voting reflects that,” he said.

Likewise, Sheheen said he has laid out his position on the new federal health care law, including his concerns about the expense and the burden to small businesses. But the new law has components that will remedy long-standing issues in the country that only a “bitter partisan” would find fault with, such as denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.

“I think it’s the next governor’s job to stand up against things that aren’t helpful to South Carolina within the health care law,” he said, adding that he would do just that if elected.

It is unclear where Sheheen stands on the individual mandate that Americans have health insurance and whether he supports the court challenge on the new law by the state Attorney General Henry McMaster, a Republican. Sheheen’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to questions Tuesday on the matter.

On thing that astounds me is that MSM types will actually go along with the Haley strategy of distraction by asking questions about inside-the-Beltway GOP litmus tests of a candidate running for governor of South Carolina. Abortion? Immigration? Obamacare? (This kind of mindlessness — the phenomenon whereby reporters exercise no judgment whatsoever about what matters, slavishly going along with any idiotic topic that gets brought up by either of the two “sides” you’re falling all over yourself to be fair and impartial to, whether it’s relevant or not — is why I gave up news and switched to editorial in 1994. In editorial, you’re allowed to think, and call B.S. “nonsense.” Unfortunately, we still couldn’t call it “B.S.” Not in a family newspaper. Or on a family blog.)

There is no frickin’ way I would expect a governor of SC to have an overall opinion on Obamacare. Hey, I don’t have an opinion on Obamacare (if I did, you’d have read it here). But maybe that’s because I sort of quit paying attention to Obama on health care way back during the primary campaigns back in the Year Seven, when it became clear that he was too timid even to suggest doing what ought to be done. (Seriously, folks, have you seen any effects from this massive health care “reform” yet? Neither have I.) Since that’s my position, I tend to look at these Republicans who keep wetting their pants about their imagined “government takeover of health care” as though they were recent arrivals from Venus. (Which, in case you missed the implication, is an “effeminate” planet. Your more masculine delusionals come from Mars.)

Another thing that astounds me is that Vincent stays cool and doesn’t get totally ticked off about it. I certainly would.

Maybe that — the fact that Vincent stays cool — is what Trey thinks is “effeminate.” Maybe Vincent should take a swing at reporters when they ask stuff like that. Not at Yvonne; that wouldn’t be manly. How about Tim Smith of The Greenville News? He’s the one who always wears the cowboy hat. It’s always manly to hit a guy in a cowboy hat. In fact, I’m pretty sure there’s a codicil in the unwritten Guy Code that if a guy’s wearing a cowboy hat, you’re allowed (and perhaps required) to hit him, whether he’s done anything to provoke you or not. OK, that should be Vincent’s strategy from now on: Whenever anyone in the MSM asks a particularly stupid, irrelevant or irritating question, Vincent should just take a big swing at Tim Smith. After a few times of doing this, the TV cameras would be ready and watching for it, and reporters would be making up stupid questions just to see Vincent pop Tim a good one. The voters would all see this on their boob tubes, and that would lay this “effeminate answers” non-issue to rest for good.

Anyway, I was standing there during the exchange that Yvonne was writing about, which you can see pictured in this image from a previous post (that’s Tim in his cowboy hat, and Yvonne at the left). You can also see Yvonne with me back on Episode 2 of “Pub Politics,” the one entitled “Wesley Sounds Like Crap.” But that’s sort of a digression, isn’t it? Although not nearly as much of a digression as asking candidates for governor of SC about abortion, immigration and national health care policy.

Vincent can stay cool in such absurd moments, because his staff gets all ticked off for him — the way I would. Below, you can see Campaign Manager Trav Robertson intervening to tell the reporters in no uncertain terms to can the stupid, irrelevant questions — and to arrange a time for an extended interview if they want to talk about irrelevancies. Good for you, Trav. Go get ’em…

bradwarthen.com

All The News That Gives You Fits