Category Archives: Elections

Cindi’s column: ‘The two sides of Nikki Haley’

2 Replies

Just thought I’d bring to your attention Cindi Scoppe’s calm, rational, even-handed take on the Nikki Haleys we have come to know — the appealing, breath-of-fresh-air neophyte lawmaker (vestiges of whom we still see today) and the demagogic ideologue seeking to carry the Mark Sanford banner into South Carolina’s future (which we see far too much of these days).

The value in reading Cindi’s column is that it is rich in specifics, listing Nikki’s positions on quite a number of issues. That’s something you don’t get so much from me. I form a holistic impression of a candidate or an issue, and hold forth on the conclusions I’ve reached. Cindi shares her reporting, point by point. When we went into an editorial board meeting with a candidate, Cindi would have a list of specific questions, so that she could test the candidate against specific positions that we held. I would ask the candidate to start talking (telling us whatever he or she deemed most important), and I would ask questions suggested by what I heard. It made for good teamwork. Cindi made sure we touched all the important bases; I explored unanticipated territory to learn things we would not have learned taking the purely task-oriented approach.

So it is that I think it’s valuable for you, the wise reader, to set my own rambling gestalten observations beside Cindi’s businesslike approach as you move along your own journey in making up your mind about Nikki Haley.

So, without violating Fair Use (I hope), I invite you to go read Cindi’s entire column, which goes from the good…

… She is charming, engaging and smart. She is refreshingly passionate and energetic and not about to put up with the games at the State House. She can explain problems in a way to get voters fired up (“It’s just wrong; it’s wrong all day long,” she says of school administrators’ opposition to a bill that would cost them money by jerking the junk food out of schools). That’s no small thing in a state as apathetic as ours.

She’s all about comprehensive reform — of the tax code, of the executive branch of government, of the school funding system — and her support for those vital changes predates her campaign, and seems far more heartfelt than her GOP opponents….

… to the bad…

… These relatively minor misrepresentations are merely the ones that jumped out at me in a single meeting with our board, and this pattern is disturbingly similar to Mr. Sanford’s signature approach: Take a legitimate problem that’s a bit too complicated or wonky to appeal to the masses, and tart it up to make it look like something it’s not.

Ms. Haley is rigidly ideological. All the Republican candidates support taxpayer-funded “choice” for private schools, but only she would veto a bill expanding public school choice if it didn’t help prop up private schools. All opposed the federal stimulus, but only she opposed accepting the money that we’re on the hook to pay for regardless, because doing so blew the “opportunity” to force the Legislature to make structural reforms….

… to this conclusion:

…When I first met Ms. Haley in 2004, I found her a bit green. But she clearly had a good head on her shoulders and was one of the best new candidates we met that year. As I wrote in our first endorsement of her, she was “so focused on keeping an open mind and being persuaded by facts rather than personality, preconceived notions and party dogma that she’s bound to make smart choices,” and “what she calls a business-like approach strikes us as merely a commonsense, proactive approach that people of any political persuasion should be able to take for granted.”

I wish the Nikki Haley who’s running for governor reminded me more of that person and less of Mark Sanford….

Leventis sticks up for Spratt. Good for him…

12 Replies

Just got this release from our friend Phil Bailey:

Senator Leventis Condemns Attack on Spratt

Sumter, SC – South Carolina Senator Phil Leventis (D-Sumter) today condemned the National Republican Congressional Committee for their attack on Congressmen John Spratt. NRCC spokesman Andy Sere attacked Congressman Spratt by implying that his “memory must be failing him” and calling him “Amnesiac John” in a press statement on Monday.

Senator Leventis issued the following statement:

“Statements like that should have no place in our political debate. To denigrate a man who has committed much of his adult life to serving his state and his country is troubling. This type chicanery has no place in a public forum.  No one from the National Republican Congressional Committee lives here and none of them would call a family or friend amnesic just because they have a disease which is well controlled.”

“It’s not the dog in the fight, it’s the fight in the dog.   My good friend, Congressman Spratt, has one of the keenest minds in the Congress. His understanding of complex issues and ability to navigate the halls of government has served our state well. And disgusting comments like the ones from the Republicans are to be condemned.”

###

Amen to that.

This episode aside, I get really tired of John Spratt having strong opposition every two years, no matter what. That sounds really undemocratic of me; I know. Doug would say I’m defending perpetual incumbency, and it’s a good thing when these “career politicians” have opposition to keep them on their toes. But I say it for these reasons:

  • John Spratt is, and has been for as long as I can recall, the strongest member of South Carolina’s House delegation, both in terms of ability and service to the state and country. And he’s one of the brighter, soberest, least partisan members of Congress.
  • Other members of our delegation NEVER get the kind of strong, well-funded opposition that Spratt gets — certainly not Joe Wilson or Jim Clyburn. (And if you think Rob Miller constitutes strong opposition, you haven’t taken a close look at him. The fact that he has money just means that a stronger candidate can’t emerge.) It would be MUCH better for the state and country if hyperpartisan reps like them had strong opposition than Spratt.
  • The REASON Spratt always has this opposition is not because his district is dissatisfied with him, but because the national Republican Party always has him in their sights. The national GOP believes that district should belong to it, rather than to the people of the 5th District.

So that’s why I get tired of it. All that money spent, all that energy, every two years, just because Washington Republicans want another hashmark in their column.

On the other hand, these are NOT the kinds of ads you want to see from one who would be governor

10 Replies

Yesterday, I praised Henry McMaster for his latest campaign ad. Yeah, the praise was pretty damned faint, and I disagreed strongly with a great deal of what he was saying, but at least it was done with a tone and attitude that made you feel good about South Carolina — or at least got the impression that Henry felt good about South Carolina. And that’s too rare these days from our friends in the GOP.

Take, for instance, the pair of videos unveiled today by the Nikki Haley and Gresham Barrett campaigns.

We have Nikki labeling her rivals with the GOP cusswords “Bailouts,” “Stimulus spending” and “Career politicians” — about as neat a job of giving opponents short shrift as I’ve ever seen (as if those terms sum up the totality of who these men are) — before going on to say, in that hagiographic way she has, that SHE is the one true “conservative.” Whatever the hell that word means anymore. (It certainly doesn’t mean what it did when I was coming up.)

Then we have Gresham Barrett promising to be the meanest of all to illegal immigrants (the scoundrels!), and pass “a common-sense Arizona law.”

Sorry, folks, but neither of these glimpses of your values or your attitudes toward the world in general make me feel good about the idea of you being my governor. Not that you’re trying to please me, I realize; but that’s all I have to go by…

Yes, Henry, THAT’s the way you do it…

4 Replies

… you play the guitar on the M-T-V…

Oops, got off track there. Wrong video.

What I meant to do was applaud Henry McMaster for a positive campaign ad, which helps remove the bad taste from some of his Obama-and-his-allies-are-dangerous-radicals approach of late.

I don’t agree with everything Henry’s saying in this ad, titled “It’s time to show the world what South Carolina can do”:

I have a plan to put South Carolina back on the Path to Prosperity. We’ll grow small business with lower taxes and less regulation. Encourage innovation and recruit high paying jobs in emerging industries. Expand our ports and open our economic door to the world. Improve education with choice, accountability and higher standards. It’s time to show the world what South Carolina can do!

… especially the idea that “choice” is the very first thing our schools need. Or that “lower taxes and less regulation,” while laudable in themselves, will substitute for building the workforce that businesses want and providing the basic societal infrastructure they need. But what I like here is that Henry’s talking about SC presenting a positive face to the world (for a change), instead of making us look like the wacky extremists that too many think we are already.

He’s talking about what he’s FOR, rather than trying to resonate with negative people about what they’re against.

Good one, Henry!

An update from Steve Benjamin

Leave a reply

This just came in via e-mail:

Dear friends,

On June 30th, I will stand before the people of Columbia and swear the oath of office to become mayor.

I am thankful for all of your hard work that has led us to this moment and I remain humbled by the faith you’ve placed in me and my vision for our city.  I know that I would not be here if it weren’t for you.

That’s why I wanted to take a few minutes to give you an update on everything we have done and are doing leading up to July’s transition.

As you may already know, Mayor Coble and City Council have graciously invited me to attend and participate in all City Council meetings and work sessions. While I do not have a vote, I have accepted his invitation and have already attended several meetings and budget work sessions.

I have regular meetings with the city manager and have met with all assistant city managers and department heads in order to gain a full understanding of all the projects and initiatives currently underway as well as ask for their input on how the city can be run more effectively and efficiently.

We have some truly talented and dedicated public servants working for the City of Columbia and I am honored to be working with them.

I am confident that by working together, we can accomplish anything.

While it is vital to learn the ins and outs of City Hall, I remain convinced that the key to creating real and lasting change in Columbia lies beyond those walls in an honest partnership with our regional neighbors.

With that in mind, I have made it a point to meet with or reach out to every mayor in Richland and Lexington Counties as well as the Chairmen for both County Councils in order to begin fostering the regional cooperation and collaboration I campaigned on.

Whether leading the charge on fiscal accountability and transparency, standing up to support first responders, protecting our natural environment, or promoting the arts; our campaign was fundamentally about bringing people together and creating One Columbia.

Now, with the campaign over, I am reaching across the traditional boundaries that have divided us for too long and pulling together a transition team that represents the best South Carolina has to offer.

I will announce the leadership of the transition team this week and start finalizing dates for a series of community meetings across our city.

The One Columbia Listening Tour will give every citizen from every neighborhood a chance to voice your unfiltered ideas and concerns directly to me. But, more importantly, it will give us all an opportunity to find the common ground we share so that together we can start building the future our families deserve.

Look for more updates to find out how you can help as we move closer to the July 1st transition and beyond.

God Bless you and God Bless the City of Columbia.

How many Palin/Haley fans WERE there Friday?

16 Replies

Since the event on Friday, a number of people have raised the following question: How many people showed up for the Sarah Palin/Nikki Haley rally?

Well, gee, I don’t know. But I do think the published reports were off.

Here’s an e-mail I received from a reader:

Dear Brad,

It was good to read your post after you attended the Haley/Palin rally.  At a party tonight we were discussing the fact that the majority of us had heard on WIS TV and other TV news programs that 150 people attended the rally – none of us had.  But the State newspaper today said there were over 1,000 people at the rally – now that is a rather large discrepancy in the numbers.  Since you attended I am hoping you can clear up this question – the larger or smaller crowd?  I looked on Youtube but no video from the rally and The State’s video only shows a close up of Palin without a crowd shot.  Thanks for your time reading my e-mail.

Hope you are well.

We miss you at The State – we miss a lot from The State now.  Monday’s paper is laughable.

Here’s how I responded to that:

Thanks for reading. I think it was between those two numbers. I think 1,000 is too high, and I’m pretty sure 150 is too low. But I’ve learned from long experience that crowds are notoriously hard to estimate.

I told my wife last night that it was 300 or 400, but that was just a guess…

And that’s about as much as I know. All I know is that it was a very enthusiastic crowd. And from where I was standing, I couldn’t even see the protesters that featured so prominently in news reports. Others who were there were certainly aware of them, to the extent that Sarah Palin addressed them — but I couldn’t tell whether that was because they were actually so noticeable, or because she thrives on persecution by political opponents; it’s part of her idiom. Perspective — where one stands or sits and what can be seen or heard from there — is everything. I failed to do what I usually do at such events — get up on the steps and look down for an overview — partly because the people I was wedged behind had indicated that they would DEEPLY resent anyone who squeezed in front of them (some folks who had brought lawn chairs and camped out, and had a profound sense of entitlement as a result — they were, as Tea Partiers tend to be, very cranky about it).

Fortunately, Anne McQuary, a former photographer with the state, had done the usual thing, and had gotten a shot of a significant portion of the crowd. You can see it above. I asked Anne whether I could use it here, and she said yes, but only if I posted something else with it, because she regarded the crowd picture as boring. Hence the picture below. But for a better sense of Anne’s talents, check out her blog. I really liked some of the shots she got on the periphery of the crowd (including some of those protesters). Also, there’s her main business website.

By the way, Anne said she and her husband — whom she described as a “huge Palin fan” — estimated the crowd at between 300 and 500. I think they were right.

What’s the difference between ugly good ol’ boy populism and Palin/Haley populism? Lipstick.

78 Replies

Sorry not to be forthcoming with a post on the Sarah Palin/Nikki Haley event last evening. I’ve been too busy — my baby granddaughter spent the night with us last night, my youngest daughter came home from Charlotte and my wife and I had a lot of errands to run this morning (including, alas, taking her car in for several hundred dollars worth of repairs).

So I was living life instead of blogging. But I should add that I was glad I couldn’t post right away, because I’ve been… depressed… since that event. As I’ve turned over what to say about it in my minds (I almost corrected that to the singular after typing the S, but then realized that plural is correct; I am of several minds on all this), I’ve been unable to think of anything constructive to say. And even when I’m going to be scathingly critical of something, I want it to be for a purpose. I want there to be a constructive point in mind, something to add to a conversation that would help us all move forward somehow.

But I haven’t arrived. Instead, I’m feeling a level of alienation that would make Benjamin Braddock and Holden Caulfield seem happy and well-adjusted.

Part of it, but just a small part, is this problem I’ve been wrestling with of my increased sense of alienation from Republicans in general. I don’t like it; it runs against my grain. To react with constant negativity to Republicans and all their works suggest partisanship, an affinity for Democrats, to most people. Not to me — Lord knows, I still find the Democrats off-putting enough, and am still pleased not to identify with them either — but to other people. And when you write a blog, how you are perceived by others matters. But I can’t help it. While the Dems are merely no more irritating than usual these days, the Republicans have so aggressively, actively offended my sense of propriety and my intelligence as they have flailed about since the 2008 election, that even tiny things set me off now. I no longer have to see one of those maddening TV commercials — like the two I saw last night, Andre Bauer talking first and foremost about the need for smaller government (as if THAT were the main problem facing a state that’s laying off teachers left and right) and Henry McMaster talking about the “radicals” running Washington (as if that were any less crazy than the claims of the birthers). Now, just small things send me deeper into my funk. This morning I saw a sign for a candidate who had only one thing to say about himself, that he was a “Rock Solid… Republican” — as though that identification were sufficient, that reassurance that I am not one of them; I’m one of us. The sheer, obnoxious, impervious smugness of it…

(If I were a Democrat, I wouldn’t worry about this. They can console themselves with the fantasy that all they have to do is win the election, and their troubles are over. I’m always conscious of the fact that as many as 40 percent of voters would still be Republicans — just as between 30 and 40 percent are Democrats now, even with a Republican governing majority — and you’d still have to deal with them and reason with them if you really want to move our state forward. Especially in our Legislative State, you sort of have to build consensus to get things done. So when either party seems to be trying to drift beyond reason — say, when Dems were in the grips of Bush Derangement Syndrome — that worries me.)

But the alienation I’m feeling standing in that crowd of Haley and Palin supporters is different. Partly because these women aren’t positioning themselves as Republicans. On the contrary, they are relishing their animosity toward the people in their party who already hold a majority of public offices in this state. They are proud to antagonize and run against those Republicans with greater experience and understanding than they have. They turn their inexperience and lack up understanding of issues from a weakness into a virtue. Their fans cheer loudest when they hold up their naivete as a battle flag.

A little over a year ago, Nikki Haley was just an idealistic sophomore legislator who was touchingly frustrated that her seniors in her party didn’t roll over and do what she wanted them to do when she wanted them to do it. It didn’t really worry me when I would try to explain to her how inadequate such bumper sticker nostrums as “run government like a business” were (based in a lack of understanding of the essential natures not only of government, but of business, the thing she professes to know so well), and she would shake her head and smile and be unmoved. That was OK. Time and experience would take care of that, I thought. She was very young, and had experienced little. Understanding would come, and I felt that on the whole she was still a young lawmaker with potential.

I reckoned without this — this impatient, populist, drive for power BASED in the appeal of simplistic, demagogic opposition to experience itself. It’s an ugly thing, this sort of anti-intellectualism of which Sarah Palin has become a national symbol. This attitude that causes her to smile a condescending, confident smile (after all, the crowd there is on HER side) at protesters — protesters I didn’t even notice until she called attention to them — and tell them that they should stick around and maybe they would learn something. If a 65-year-old male intellectual with a distinguished public career said that to a crowd, everyone would understand it was ugly and contemptuous. But Sarah is so charming about it, so disarming! How could it be ugly?

Her evocations — echoed by Nikki — of traditional, plain values (and complementary exhibition of contempt for anyone who disagrees) seem so positive and good and right to the crowd that cheers such lines as Nikki’s about how good it is that traditional politicians are “afraid” (which, coming from different lips, would send a chill down spines). They don’t see the ugliness. After all, see how lovely the package is! See how they smile!

The thing is, I probably agree with these people about so much that they are FOR — traditional moral values, hard work, family, patriotism. And mine isn’t your left-handed liberal kind of patriotism (you know, as in “I oppose the war and criticize my country because I’m a REAL patriot,” etc.). No, in fact, my own kind of patriotism is probably even more martial and militaristic than that of these folks, if that’s possible, given my background. And I would never take a back seat to any of them in my belief in American exceptionalism. I may not like the smug way they talk about these things, but the values are there.

It’s the stuff that they’re AGAINST that leaves me cold. Paying taxes. Government itself. Moderation. Patience with people who disagree. Experience. Deep understanding of issues. They are hostile  to these things.

And their certainty, their smugness, is off-putting in the extreme.

But as I stood there in that crowd and listened to the cheers at almost every questionable statement those smiling ladies muttered, I despaired of ever being able to explain any of this to these folks, of ever having a meeting of the minds. It’s THEIR alienation that makes me feel so alienated…

And that’s what has me down. I hope it will pass. But it wasn’t a good way to spend a Friday evening.

My bad, Rob

6 Replies

Just now saw this e-mail from Rob Godfrey with the McMaster campaign:

Brad,

I realize you may not be in the loop, on top of the news or very well informed about the gubernatorial race these days, and that’s why I always hesitate to respond to anything that shows up on your blog. But I did want to point out that the Boiling Springs Tea Party endorsement of Henry was released both by the organization itself and our campaign before anyone knew anything about Sarah Palin’s trip to South Carolina. Thanks.

Rob Godfrey
McMaster for Governor

I immediately suppressed the irritation one would naturally feel at a complaint worded that way. I decided not to take his opening words as being deliberately insulting or anything like that.

Instead, I immediately acknowledged his point and promised to pass it on to my readers here on the blog. (Golly, I’m grown up — don’t you think?) Since I was seeing it all on Friday, I had failed to notice that the item on the campaign Web site and the Tweet that drew me to it were both dated the 13th — the same day as Nikki Haley’s announcement that Sarah Palin was coming to endorse her. I was certain, there for a moment, that he was wrong, because I was sure that when I saw that Tweet it was only one or two down on his Twitter account — but I guess they don’t post that often, because sure enough, it was the 13th.

So, sorry about that. Of course, it doesn’t change the fact that we’ve known for some time that Nikki has been pulling out all the stops to be THE Tea Party candidate.  Nor does it change my long-standing disappointment with Henry for refusing to distance himself from his party’s recent drift to the fringes — for, instead, pursuing them with his outrageous rhetoric about those “radicals” in Washington destroying our American way of life. And I realize that this would be most irritating to one in the trenches trying to get Henry elected. If I were on his campaign, I would be really ticked at someone like me. I would see that person as “out of the loop” to the extent that he was unrealistic about what it takes to get nominated in a Republican primary. I mean, doesn’t that washed-up, clueless Brad Warthen understand that Henry is the best of the Republicans, that he’s really a Graham Republican instead of a DeMint Republican, even if he dare not come out and say so right now?

Thinking about it, imagining that point of view, I almost get mad at myself.

In fact, I AM mad at myself for getting the sequence of events  wrong, and attaching importance to it. And I’m truly sorry.

Ah, Jeez, Edith! Now it’s a competition…

5 Replies

No sooner does Nikki Haley announce that she’s sewn up the backing of the goddess of the Tea Party movement than Henry McMaster has to weigh in with a “Me, too!”…

McMaster earns Upstate Tea Party endorsement

May 13th, 2010
Conservative group says attorney general is candidate Tea Party can trust
COLUMBIA, S.C. – One of South Carolina’s largest conservative grassroots organizations, the Boiling Springs Tea Party, today endorsed Henry McMaster for Governor. The Boiling Springs Tea Party has organized a network of thousands of Upstate conservatives since its founding last year and will encourage them to turn out voters for Henry McMaster in the June 8 Republican gubernatorial primary.

In a press release, the group praised McMaster’s “outstanding character, judgment, experience, Christian conservative values, understanding of the state’s needs and proven dedication to accountable public service.”

Boiling Springs Tea Party organizer Maria Brady said in part, “Our search for a gubernatorial candidate with conservative Christian values grounded in the Constitution led us toward Henry because he embodies the ideals of our Founding Fathers. [H]e is clearly a candidate Tea Party patriots can trust to fight President Obama” and “stop bailout-peddling Washington politicians…”

Oh, but get this next part:

Attorney General McMaster thanked the group for the endorsement. “Washington radicals threaten our very way of life,” he said. [boldface emphasis mine]

And to thing I was wringing my hands over whether I was engaging in extreme rhetoric. Guess I can relax, huh? I’m the very soul of self-restraint, by comparison.

Ah, Henry, we hardly knew ye…

Sarah Palin coming to SC to back Nikki Haley

22 Replies

OK, just in case you didn’t have enough reasons to worry about Nikki Haley — the Sanford endorsement, all that Sanford cabal money buying ads in her behalf, and so forth, here’s one more for ya, courtesy of our ol’ buddy Peter Hamby:

(CNN) – Sarah Palin will be in Columbia, South Carolina on Friday to endorse state Rep. Nikki Haley for governor.

This will mark the former Alaska governor’s first political visit to the early primary state. Jenny Sanford, ex-wife of current Republican Gov. Mark Sanford, will also campaign with Haley on Friday…

“It is a tremendous honor to receive Governor Palin’s endorsement,” Haley said Thursday in a statement. “Sarah Palin has energized the conservative movement like few others in our generation.”Palin’s endorsement of Haley puts her at odds with her running mate in the 2008 presidential election, Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona.

McCain has backed McMaster in the primary. McMaster chaired McCain’s South Carolina campaign in 2008.

Man-oh-man … like we didn’t have enough Crazy in South Carolina, we need to start importing it…

Hey, all that pandering to the Tea Party crowd Nikki’s been doing has paid off, huh?

Folks, I have a feeling that the GOP contest for the gubernatorial nomination just became an ideological knife fight. This is NOT going to be pretty.

On the bright side, this should be a settler for those ugly nativists who tried to trash Nikki in her first election — from whom I defended her, back in the days before she started going after the nativist vote (the only conclusion I can draw from her embrace of the TPs). Now they’ll have to face that she MUST be a “real American” — or else the self-appointed final arbiter of such things wouldn’t be coming to endorse her.

Jenny and Nikki to hit the trail together

17 Replies

You know what’s way, WAY more important, and more ominous, than how the governor spent his weekend? It’s this:

Jenny Sanford to Hit Campaign Trail with Nikki Haley Friday

Friends,

Exciting news!  Former South Carolina First Lady Jenny Sanford will be hitting the campaign trail with Nikki on Friday.

Jenny and Nikki will make stops along the South Carolina coast – Charleston, Beaufort County, and Myrtle Beach – and hold free, open-to-the-public town hall events in both Charleston and Myrtle Beach.  They will also appear at private receptions in both Charleston and Beaufort County.

Below are the details of the events – if you’re on the coast, we hope to see you there! …

We all like to admire Jenny in the one and only sympathetic and admirable character in this past year’s melodrama, but as voters we need to be hard-nosed and remember this: She did more than anyone else to bring us the disaster that is GOVERNOR Mark Sanford, and she wants to do it again, which is why she’s pulling out the stops for Nikki.

And South Carolina just can’t handle any more of that.

Yeah, what Vincent said (on cigarette tax)…

9 Replies

Dang, I wish I hadn’t posted that Sheheen video earlier, because now that I have a good comment from him on Sanford’s veto of the cigarette tax increase (the increase that only goes half as far as 70 percent of South Carolinians want it to go, but at least is better than the 30-cent we almost had to settle for), it looks like this blog is all Sheheen, all the time.

Anyway, here it is:

“Gov. Sanford’s veto of the cigarette tax is absolutely indefensible,” said Sheheen. He continued:

“I don’t know what world the governor is living in, but here in South Carolina, we’re facing unprecedented budget shortfalls — cutting vital medical services for many South Carolinians and laying off teachers, including my own child’s third grade teacher. Increasing our state’s lowest-in-the-nation cigarette tax will qualify our state for millions of dollars in federal matching funds for health care while reducing teen smoking and smoking-related health care costs. It’s the responsible thing to do.

It’s time for us to elect a governor who will be committed to the people of this state rather than committed to an unbending political ideology that ignores the basic needs of everyday South Carolinians.

Yeah, what he said. And yeah, this does illustrate why South Carolinians need to be really, really careful for once about electing a governor. And it’s why we can’t even consider Nikki Haley, and increasingly — and I hate this, because as you know, I like to have a dog in every party’s fight — ALL of the Republicans seem determined to disqualify themselves from being considered by rational independents (I discussed that previously back here).

And as soon as I get a good comment — heck, any comment — coming over the transom from someone else, I’ll post that, too.

By the way, it just so happens that my office door these days actually does have a transom. I don’t think it opens any more, though…

The actual transom over the actual door of my actual office.

You mean that’s NOT a Haley campaign ad?

9 Replies

Under the headline, “Is this even legal?,” Wesley Donehue shares the above ad being paid for by ReformSC.

Which makes me wonder — surely no one’s pretending this is anything other than a Nikki Haley ad… are they?

Well, maybe there’s one difference… I’m thinking Nikki herself might be embarrassed to pour it on THIS thick. Wouldn’t she?

Shocker: Sanford’s favorite club backs Nikki

7 Replies

Chad Walldorf at the SC Club for Growth is a nice, sincere guy, and I’ve always liked Nikki Haley. But both of them are so in step with Mark Sanford that there’s not a bit of surprise in this:

The S.C. Club for Growth has endorsed the Republican gubernatorial bid of Lexington Rep. Nikki Haley. Club chairman Chad Walldorf said Haley bets fits the group’s belief in limited government and free market principles.”We have seen Representative Haley’s incredible work in the South Carolina legislature and are thrilled to have a candidate with her track record running for our state’s top office,” Walldorf said in a statement. “As our governor, Nikki Haley will continue to make South Carolina more business friendly, protect our hard-earned tax dollars, and perhaps most importantly, shine a light on the darkest corners of state bureaucracy.”…

Bauer looking for “creative way to announce”

9 Replies

Andre

This morning Andre Bauer stopped by my table at breakfast, and while chatting picked up the Metro section of The State and glanced at the story about Jenny Sanford endorsing Nikki Haley.

“What do you think about that?” I asked. What he thought, he said, was that it would really mean something if Jenny could deliver some of the Sanford financial backing to Nikki. This led to some general remarks on what a shame it was that money meant so much in politics, and so forth, but then Andre shifted gears to say that he was proof that money could be overcome — “Your paper (a reference to a newspaper with which I was once associated) reported that Campbell outspent me three to one,” for all the good it did him. He also noted with satisfaction that Mike Bloomberg, despite outspending his opponent by significant margins, was barely re-elected.

I noted that Andre always seemed to overcome the odds by being a “hard worker,” which is true, and which he did not dispute, that being a large part of his public persona.

Then he said he was trying to think of “a creative way to announce,” which of course would give him some exposure he wouldn’t have to pay for.

“You got anything for me?” — meaning ideas. Nope, I said — and managed to hold myself back from begging him to give Sanford just a little longer to resign (not that any amount of time would be enough, of course) …

Nikki gets a Sanford endorsement that actually might help her

9 Replies

The brains of the Sanford outfit has sent out a letter endorsing Nikki Haley, which is of a whole lot more value than if the gov himself were to do so.

Of course, in terms of substance, it’s the same. Which is to say, an endorsement of Nikki is an endorsement of more of the same stuff we’ve suffered through for seven years. An excerpt from Jenny Sanford’s letter:

With many of our public schools shamefully underperforming, I dearly wish for better educational opportunities for our children. With a state government structure that rewards the status quo and stands in the way of change, I wish for vital government reforms. It’s amazing how much better off the people of our state would be if those things happened.
But they won’t happen by just wishing for them. They won’t happen without an enormous amount of hard work. And they won’t happen without making a lot of entrenched powers upset.
I’m proud of the work Mark and his Administration have done over almost seven years now, trying very hard to move the ball forward on all of those fronts. Little in life that is worth accomplishing ever comes without some setbacks along the way. While the Sanford Administration has had some defeats in its efforts to reduce out-ofcontrol state spending, reform archaic state government structure, and give children more educational choices, it has also had successes.

Jenny was always the brains behind Mark. So while her endorsement might generate more sympathy, in terms of political substance, it means the same.

Anybody agree with Barrett about the Navy brig?

29 Replies

Now to the substance of what Mullins McLeod was getting on Gresham Barrett about.

As I mentioned before in one of my last columns for the paper, Rep. Barrett didn’t seem to have a reason for running for governor. He could clearly state what he wanted to do, or anything special that he brought to the job (which is probably why he dodged talking to me for a couple of weeks, until I got really insufferable with one of his staffers — avoiding free media is just bizarre behavior in a gubernatorial candidate, and it really stood out), which was not good.

Now, he’s apparently decided he wants to grab attention and break out of the pack in the worst way — which is exactly what he’s done.

In the playbook of the kind of politician who has a very low opinion of the electorate, he’s doing everything right: He’s appealing to xenophobia, to the Not In My Backyard mentality, to insecurity, and sticking it to the administration that happens to be of the other party. He accomplishes all that by griping loudly and obnoxiously about the idea of the Obama administration bringing “detainees” from Guantanamo to the Navy Brig in Charleston.

Folks, I’d just as soon they stay in Gitmo, because I’ve always thought that was an excellent place to keep them, practically speaking. First, it’s off our soil, which keeps them in limbo as far as our legal system is concerned. You’ll say, “But that’s just what’s WRONG with Gitmo,” but the fact is that prisoners who are taken in such unconventional warfare, many of whom are sworn to do anything to harm Americans if given the chance, are different either from people arrested in this country under civil laws or captured in a conventional conflict.

And it’s secure as all get-out.

But… and this is a big “but”… as convenient as it might be for us to keep people whom we believe to be terrorists on a sort of Devil’s Island, as practical as it might be — it hasn’t been good for our country. Why? Because we’re not the 19th century French. We aren’t governed by a Napoleonic Code. We’re all about innocence until proven guilty. And while we may sound like damnable fools for extending such niceties to people who thought 9/11 was really cool and would like to see another, we do stand for certain things, and Gitmo has given this country a huge black eye that it can’t afford. We have to be better than that.

For that reason, even if John McCain had been elected instead of Obama, we’d be closing Guantanamo. (As Lindsey Graham says, we might have done it in a more organized manner, but we’d still be doing it.) And finding a secure place to put those people is part of that process. Guess what? Our allies don’t want them. So we’re stuck with them.

And that makes the brig down in Charleston as good a place as any. Hey, I don’t want them there, but sometimes, somebody besides our men and women in uniform has to put up with something they don’t like in our nation’s greater interest in this War on Terror.

And does anyone truly doubt the ability of the United States Navy to keep those people secure there? I don’t. I suspect we could always transfer up a few more Marines from Guantanamo if we think we don’t have enough security there. It certainly fits the brig’s mission, which is officially stated as follows:

The mission of the Naval Consolidated Brig Charleston is to ensure the security, good order, discipline, and safety of prisoners and detained personnel; to retrain and restore the maximum number of personnel to honorable service; to prepare prisoners for return to civilian life as productive citizens; to prepare long term prisoners for transfer to the Federal Bureau of Prisons or the United States Army Disciplinary Barracks; and when directed by superior authority, detain enemy combatants under laws of war.

So basically, Rep. Barrett’s attempt to score points on this issue is ugly, petty, and insulting.

Just for the sake of argument, does anyone agree with him?

Mullins grabs some attention, but fails on civility

17 Replies

You may recall that I haven’t been too impressed with Mullins McLeod. I’ve generally dismissed his campaign as being… what’s the word… trite, I suppose. His campaign releases have sort of struck a generic populist pose, trying to project him as a regular guy who’s tired, just as you good people out there are, of all them blamed politicians and their shenanigans.

That pose is tiresome enough when done well, but as I said, his populist pronouncements have been so vanilla, as that genre goes, so as to be easily forgettable five minutes later. As I said back here, Mullins just hasn’t been able to get a hit in his few at-bats.

Well, he made a concerted effort to get on base yesterday, when he told Gresham Barrett to “shove it” on the Gitmo prisoners issue. Well, Gresham certainly deserved to have someone call him on his really ugly NIMBY ploy for attention, but while it might be cool for, say, a Dick Harpootlian to say something like that (except that Dick would be more imaginative, and he’d say it in Dwight’s behalf, not Mullins’), that’s not the kind of language we need from one who would be governor.

So basically, Mullins has managed briefly to get our attention by passing first and running the basepaths, but he’s immediately alienated us by coming into seconds with sharpened spikes high, a la Ty Cobb. In other words, the first time he gets our attention, he fails the civility test.

Hey, if we wanted a guy who talks like this as governor, we could turn to Joe Wilson.

That guy’s a governor? You’re kidding, right?

12 Replies

SenatorJonCorzine

One thing you’ve got to hand to Mark Sanford — he  looks like a governor, even though he has generally not acted like one. This is a key to his electoral success.

I remember back before he was elected — I guess it was about this time in 2001 — he sent out Christmas cards with pictures of himself with his family. As soon as he received his, Sen. John Courson said to me (and you’ve got to imagine that booming bullfrog voice of his saying it), “Faaahhhn lookin’ family! Kennedyesque…” and said that on the basis of that picture, he expected Sanford to be our next governor.

Anyway, I’m reminded of that today, having just seen a picture of Jon Corzine for the first time (this was on the front of the WSJ). As I previously noted, unlike the national media, I don’t pay attention to state elections in other states because they have nothing to do with me. People elect their governors for their own reasons (sometimes things as superficial as how they look, although of course that’s not the only reason South Carolinians went for Sanford in 2002), reasons that I cannot infer meaningfully from afar, so I don’t try to do so.

Anyway, my reaction on seeing this guy for the first time as he was on his way out (having lost yesterday, for those of you who pay even less attention than I do), was this: “What? This guy is the governor of an actual state? You’re kidding. He looks like a college professor, and maybe not even an American college professor at that. He looks more like Leon Trotsky than a guy who could get elected in this country.” And what’s that he’s got in the back in this picture? Is that a ducktail?

I realize that standards of political pulchritude vary from state to state, that we would elect people in South Carolina that New Jerseyites (or whatever you call them) would never take a second look at, and vice versa. But if I had tried to imagine somebody who could get elected up there and not down here, I would have pictured a guy who would have looked at home hanging around in front of Satriani’s Pork Store with Tony Soprano. Yeah, I realize such stereotypes are the bane of New Jerseyians, who deserve better, but that I could have believed in. Whereas this Corzine guy … if Tony had shown up for his first therapy session and his shrink had looked like this instead of like Lorraine Bracco (and that’s the only role I could imagine a guy who looks like this filling on that show about north Jersey), he would have turned around and walked out.

No wonder this Trotsky-looking character lost. That Christie looks like a regular guy, a guy you might actually imagine being in the, uh, sanitation business.