Category Archives: Media

What would surprise you most on Saturday?

I’m doing a number of interviews these days. I was interviewed by Canadian public radio yesterday, and taped a segment for Jeff Greenfield’s show on PBS (to air Friday). Then I had a couple of beers last night with E.J. Dionne. This morning, before I left the house, I spoke with Tom Finneran (former speaker of the Massachusetts House) on his Boston radio show.

When I got in, I was interviewed by email, which is a twist. Karin Henriksson of the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet asked me two questions:

– how has the dynamics in the state changed compared to four years ago (I was here then, too)?

– what would surprise you the most on Saturday night after the votes are counted?

Here’s how I answered:

Question 1: This is the complicated one. After 2008, the GOP in South Carolina — and elsewhere as well, but I know SC best — was traumatized. Sen. Jim DeMint and others on the right said the party had lost the White House because, in nominating McCain, it had failed to be right-wing enough. This was the start of DeMint’s rise as a national power on the far right of the party. Then, in 2010, Nikki Haley — a small-time back-bencher — rode a populist, Tea Party, Sarah Palin-flavored tsunami right over more establishment Republicans to become governor. Ever since then, observers — and the GOP itself — have been left to wonder what it means to be Republican in this state. As 2011 arrived, many of the Republicans who usually backed the winner in SC lined up behind Jon Huntsman, while others went to Rick Perry. Almost none of them backed Romney. And throughout the last few months, we saw the GOP electorate bounce from Perry to Cain to Gingrich, and then, reluctantly, start to settle for Romney.

So… while the electorate that will vote Saturday is different from four years ago, it is expected to do what it usually does: Back the closest thing to an Establishment candidate, the candidate whose turn it is.

Question 2: What would surprise me most? A win by Rick Perry. Which is ironic, since several months ago he looked like the perfect candidate for South Carolina, like he was assembled according to a South Carolina recipe. But now he’s farther from the nomination than anyone still in it.

So what do y’all think? What would surprise you the most?

I want my, I want my, I want my Wikipedia

10 Replies

OK, so that doesn’t quite work, poetically speaking. What’s MTV? Is that a dactyl, or what?

My alternative idea for a headline was “Money for SOPA, money for dopa.” Which do you like better?

Anyway, I’m pretty ticked at somebody, I’m just not sure who, for the fact that I can’t use Wikipedia today. At least Google’s working (having opted for a purely symbolic “blackout”), but what good is it when the best source it keeps sending me to is Wikipedia?

Just a moment ago, trying to look up “dactyl,” I of course clicked on the first thing Google gave me, and for a split second saw the Wikipedia entry on “dactyl” before I got the above brick wall.

This would be OK, if I could just tell myself that Wikipedia isn’t available today, and not try to use it today. But I could hold my breath that long more easily. Using Wikipedia is an autonomic response. I think. I mean, I think that’s the term, but I can’t frickin’ check on Wiki!

At whom am I ticked? Jimmy Wales? Or the gigantic coalition of old-media companies lined up in favor of SOPA? For the last two days, I’ve been hearing in-depth reports on NPR from both sides, and I’ve heard all sorts of claims, but one thing I haven’t heard is an explanation of what on Earth the legislation does. This is the simplest explanation I’ve found:

Under the current wording of the measures, the Attorney General would have the power to order ISPs [internet service prividers] to block access to foreign-based sites suspected of trafficking in pirated and counterfeit goods; order search engines to delist the sites from their indexes; ban advertising on suspected sites; and block payment services from processing transactions for accused sites.

If the same standards were applied to U.S.-based sites, Wikipedia, Tumblr, WordPress, Blogger, Google and Wired could all find themselves blocked.

Such requests would need to be reviewed and approved by a judge. But accused sites would get little notice of a pending action in U.S. courts against them, and, once blacklisted, have little effective means of appeal.

But then, I heard advocates of the legislation this morning on The Takeaway (they were being interviewed by a woman who belongs to one of the associations backing SOPA, by the way) insist that it wouldn’t do that, that it had been amended to remove all objectionable characteristics, and that they’d be happy to have it amended further, etc., etc.

I just don’t know. But I do know this: Today, I’m inclined to cast my vote on Saturday for whichever candidate convinces me that he would keep Wikipedia up and running. SOPA or no SOPA, I don’t care.

(At this point, imagine Sting’s voice fading out, repeating “I want my, I want my…” At least I think it’s Sting. How am I suppose to check?)

Not that there’s anything wrong with that

6 Replies

Yesterday was so busy that I didn’t get around to this. Since then, I hear it was a subject of discussion on Morning Joe, having already appeared on Politico and other places.

You may have already seen it by now:

12.27pm: Our reporter Matt Williams has been on the phone to one of the senior editors at The State newspaper, which as we learned earlier, endorsed Jon Huntsman only yesterday. She was sanguine about his decision.

Cindi Scoppe, associate editor of The State, said Huntsman’s decision has left the newspaper feeling like a spurned lover.

Scoppe, who penned the endorsement piece on the former Utah governor that was published a day before he dropped out, said: “It is rather like having gone through a courtship for some period of time and finally making love with a man, for him to suddenly turn around and say, ‘you know what, I think I’m gay’.”

She said Mitt Romeny enjoyed South Carolina’s largest newspaper’s “implied endorsement”, now that Huntsman had dropped out. “We intended to make clear that Romney was our second choice. But whether we write a formal endorsement or not – we haven’t figured it out yet.”…

What’s really funny about this — painfully so — is that Cindi is not the sort of person to talk about her feelings. She’s all about thought. She’ll rattle off a logical explanation at the drop of a hat, and be perfectly comfortable doing so. But ask her about her feelings, and she’ll look at you with disgust, for bringing up a subject unworthy of discussion.

I guess the reporter from The Guardian caught her at a weak moment. So she gave him both barrels as to how it felt.

You know how Michael Corleone let Kay ask him, just this once, about his business? Well, just this once, Cindi let somebody ask about her feelings. I doubt that she’ll do that again, now that so many have been entertained by it.

Personally, I thought it was a good answer. The situation was SO absurd (Joe Lieberman at least waited until he got crushed in the SC primary before dropping out, three whole days after the endorsement) that you have to wonder: Huntsman has had staff here for months. You pay people all that time, you go to all those chicken dinners, and you don’t even stick it out until the primary?

Scuttlebutt has it that there was a deal. But what sort of deal? What would Romney, or whoever, have offered Huntsman that would be worth such a precipitous exit? And why would it have been worth offering ANYthing to such an adversary? Huntsman was barely registering in the polls, getting less support than Stephen Colbert.

It was all very odd. And Cindi captured well how odd, how disconcerting, it was.

3 SC state senators endorse Ron Paul, who talks about how great Nullification would be for SC

21 Replies

Ron Paul in the State House lobby today with Sens. Verdin, Bryant, Bright and Davis.

Which is not usually the kind of event I turn out for, but it was my first chance to see Ron Paul in person. This time around, anyway (and maybe ever; I’m not sure).

To end the suspense — he looks just the way he does on TV, like the cranky crazy uncle who sits in the corner and only occasionally says cryptic things.

Not to insult him. You can look like that and be a great guy; that’s just the way he looks. Lord knows how I’d get described if I were running for president. I’m often shocked at photos of myself.

Anyway, the news was that three SC state senators were joining their colleague Tom Davis in endorsing Dr. Paul. They were:

Danny Verdin from Greenville and Laurens counties, chairman of the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. He said he’d “never heard a message that… resonated in my heart more.”

Lee Bright of Spartanburg. I seem to recall him supporting Michele Bachmann earlier. “Dr. Ron Paul is conservative in all areas,” he said, unlike all those other candidates who are only “conservative” here and there, in spots. “… and he says what he believes.”

Kevin Bryant of Anderson, whom you may know as one of the first lawmakers to take up blogging. He quoted Goldwater: “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice,” and went on to say “We’re going to have to do some extreme things to turn around America.”

For his part, Dr. Paul expressed his gratitude. In response to a question, standing in the presence of a likeness of John C. Calhoun, he said that nullification is still a viable idea, at least academically. And he almost wistfully longed for it to be a fact. While he doubted it would be often used (he don’t know us very well, do he?), he thought it would be great for South Carolina to be able to exercise that power. This helps explain why Sen. Bright is backing him.

I want to go back and listen to my recording and get that verbatim for you, but I’ll have to do it later. Gotta go see Newt Gingrich and Mike Huckabee (yes, Huck!), and possibly others, at another event. The subject is foreign policy.

Seeking auxiliary reporters, photographers

Which candidate is more likely to go “boom!” in SC?

5 Replies

Maybe I’ve got my metaphors confused.

On a previous post, I likened Newt Gingrich to a hand grenade with the pin pulled. But I couldn’t remember what you call that clip thing down the side of the grenade that you have to hold in place manually after pulling the pin if you want to hold it without getting blown up. So I Googled “hand grenade parts,” and got this page, which told me it was called the “safety lever.” Fine.

But after I posted my metaphor, I noticed that there was a political ad on the hand grenade page — and it wasn’t for Gingrich. Yeah, it appears to be a Google ad, and therefore is showing up because I, a South Carolinian, went to the page, but still….

Yo, Lee: David Yepsen says “Hey”

2 Replies

Above you see David Yepsen and me, looking relieved and happy that we’re done with our panel presentation at the Senate Presidents’ Forum in Key West over the weekend, and that it went well. Funny how those kinds of things — just talking — can take a lot out of you.

It was an honor to meet David, the legend of Iowa political journalism. And of course when we met, he asked after another legend of political journalism, a man whom everyone knows — and, more remarkably, everyone likes and respects — my longtime friend and colleague Lee Bandy.

I’m lucky to have worked with both Lee and the Tennessee legend, John Parish. And while it was brief, I was honored to share the panel with David Yepsen, who is now director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute (he left The Des Moines Register about the same time I left The State), Saturday. And to get to know a couple of political pros I had not met before, who also served on the panel: First, John Marttila, longtime friend and ally of Joe Biden ever since he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1972. John continues to be a senior political adviser to the vice president. From the Republican side, we had Mike DuHaime, who ran Chris Christie’s successful run for governor of New Jersey in 2009.

We had a great discussion, both during the panel and at meals and events before and after.

What did I say during the presentation? Well, not anything I haven’t shared here. I essentially scrapped my prepared remarks, as mentioned previously — which is probably a good thing, because things flow better when I’m winging it. But preparing — not only the writing, but all the conversations I had with top Republicans in SC, right up to a couple of minutes before the program — did help me get my thoughts in order. Hey, if I hadn’t made all those panicked calls Friday night and Saturday morning after seeing those poll numbers, I wouldn’t have known to call Romney a “Plastic Banana Rock ‘n’ Roller,” which still cracks me up — the idea of Romney as ANY kind of rock ‘n’ roller, actually.

Anyway, I’m back from Key West. And it’s going to be a busy week…

Mike DuHaime (or the back of his head, anyway), David Yepsen and John Marttila, during the panel discussion.

In an interesting parallel, Tom Davis backs Ron Paul

24 Replies

Tom Davis signs on with Ron Paul.

Earlier this evening, Sen. Tom Davis put out this release:

SENATOR TOM DAVIS ENSORSES RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT“It’s easy to campaign on lower taxes, less spending and fewer regulations – it’s another thing entirely to stand up for these limited government principles when the entire Washington establishment is aligned against you. Yet for more than three decades Ron Paul has cast thousands of lonely votes in our nation’s capital based on the constitutional principles that this country was founded on – and that the Republican Party has promised to protect. Yet while generations of politicians – including far too many Republicans – were losing their way or caving to the status quo, Ron Paul was standing as a Tea Party of one against a towering wave of red ink.”
“2012 marks the fifth consecutive year in which the federal government is going to spend well over $1 trillion in money it doesn’t have. Each and every American taxpayer is now on the hook for $135,000 worth of federal debt – and last year’s debt deal adds another $7 trillion in deficit spending over the coming decade. Meanwhile the U.S. Senate hasn’t passed a budget in nearly 1,000 days.”

“I’m endorsing Ron Paul because enough is enough. Despite this wave of unprecedented government spending, our unemployment rate has remained above 8 percent for the last 34 months and 146.4 million Americans – one out of every two people in this country – are now classified as poor or low-income.”

“Government activism and government intervention clearly hasn’t fixed our economy – which is why the Republican Party needs a nominee who isn’t wedded to that failed approach. We won’t chart a path to fiscal solvency or victory in November by running toward the failed ideas of the left – we will achieve those victories by returning to the principles that the Republican Party once stood for.”

“That is why I am proud to endorse Ron Paul for president.”

“Ron Paul’s record matches his rhetoric, his fiscal plan matches the fiscal challenges that our nation is facing and his movement represents the taxpayers whose interests have been ignored in the political process for far too long.”

“I’m also endorsing him because unlike what the pundits have led you to believe, he is the candidate who gives the Republican Party the best chance to beat Barack Obama in November.”

“We have a choice: We can keep electing candidates who talk about change only during political campaigns as a way to get elected, or we can finally elect a candidate who will walk the walk and make that change a reality – restoring our bottom line, our individual liberties and our national pride in the process.”

To learn more about Senator Tom Davis visit www.senatortomdavis.com

My first thought was “Wow.” I’ve always liked Tom and have a lot of respect for him, and even though he worked for Mark Sanford all those years and was so close to him, I never regarded him as being nearly as much of a radical libertarian as the former governor. But with this move, he has exceeded his friend in that regard.

But you know what? In his own way, he has done much the same thing that The State did in endorsing Jon Huntsman. Yes, in one regard he did the polar opposite — Ron Paul is the last of the GOP candidates that The State, or I, would endorse. As Cindi Scoppe wrote:

Like any libertarian, Ron Paul embraces the worst positions of the far right and the far left: no social safety net, unregulated markets, an isolationist foreign policy and no moral standards. He is the candidate for those who refuse to accept that they are part of a society and can’t see how much their vision of a crippled government would hurt all of us, themselves included.

But in another sense, the two endorsements were alike.

Surely Tom knows that Ron Paul will never be the Republican nominee for president just as well as The State knew that this was not to be for Huntsman this year. But he went with the candidate he thought it should be, rather than the candidate that it would be. So good for him.

Oh, and lucky Tom. As hopeless as his candidate’s cause is, at least he won’t embarrass Tom by suddenly pulling out. Ron Paul’s candidacy is forever.

All in the family now.

Huntsman, the best man for the job, drops out

18 Replies

I was accustomed over the years to being interviewed by national media on the Sunday morning when a presidential endorsement came out in the paper. Today was no different, as a reporter with NBC called to ask me about The State and and its endorsement, prior to interviewing Jon Huntsman today.

I was happy to explain the Huntsman endorsement within the context of the ongoing consensus of the editorial board. I could well have written many of the words that appeared in the paper today. And I told her to remember the one thing I have said, more often than anything else, in explaining what an endorsement is not, and what it is: It’s about who should win, not who’s going to win. We all knew Huntsman wasn’t going to win, just as we knew Joe Lieberman wasn’t going to be the Democratic nominee in 2004. But he should have been.

And Huntsman was the man who should have won the Republican nomination, as well expressed in the editorial:

We need a president who can work within our poisonous political environment to solve our nation’s problems, not simply score partisan points. Someone who understands that negotiation is essential in a representative democracy, and that there are good ideas across the political spectrum. Someone who has a well-defined set of core values but is not so rigid that he ignores new information and new conditions. Someone who has shown himself to be honest and trustworthy. And competent. Someone whose positions are well-reasoned and based on the world as it is rather than as he pretends it to be. Someone with the temperament and judgment and experience to be taken seriously as the commander in chief and leader of the free world.

We think Mr. Romney could demonstrate those characteristics. Mr. Huntsman already does. And we are proud to endorse him for the Republican nomination for president of the United States.

Exactly. And Cindi’s accompanying column (Nina Brook years ago dubbed this sort of pairing “steak and steak”) went on to explain why none of the other candidates would do. All well reasoned.

And The State‘s reward for having done the right thing, and having clearly stated why, will be catcalls from detractors delighted that its chosen candidate quit only hours after the endorsement was published. (This will particularly thrill the ones who truly hate the newspaper, and maintain that its endorsement is the “kiss of death.” So seldom does anything happen to support their erroneous thesis — the newspaper’s chosen candidates win about 75 percent of the time in general elections — that I suppose we must indulge them in having their fun, eh?)

Have you seen the news? It just broke a few minutes ago:

Huntsman Says He’s Quitting G.O.P. Race

By JIM RUTENBERG, JEFF ZELENY AND MICHAEL D. SHEAR

CHARLESTON, S.C. — Jon M. Huntsman Jr. informed his advisers on Sunday that he intends to drop out of the Republican presidential race, ending his candidacy a week before he had hoped to revive his campaign in the South Carolina primary.

Mr. Huntsman, who had struggled to live up to the soaring expectations of his candidacy, made plans to make an announcement as early as Monday. He had been set to participate in an evening debate in Myrtle Beach.

Matt David, campaign manager to Mr. Huntsman, confirmed the decision in an interview Sunday evening. “The governor and his family, at this point in the race, decided it was time for Republicans to rally around a candidate who could beat Barack Obama and turn around the economy,” Mr. David said. “That candidate is Gov. Mitt Romney.”

Huntsman was right to back Romney, thereby seconding The State’s point that he would be the second choice.

But the nation is worse off for not having Huntsman as an option.

In the end, SC Republicans vote for the ‘boss’

11 Replies

Thought I should share with you this story by my friend and former colleague Aaron Sheinin, writing in the Atlanta paper. I think this is officially the umpteenth story about South Carolina to put “down and dirty” in the headline.

Here’s the good part:

Brad Warthen, who spent 22 years writing and editing political news at The State newspaper in Columbia, said South Carolina voters are typically “boring” when it comes to presidential contests.

“Even though we are the state that seceded first and would do it again and all that kind of stuff, there is this anti-establishment, anti-government, hyperindividualism thing, but when it comes right down to it, we kind of vote for the ‘boss,’” said Warthen, now a public relations executive who still writes about politics on his personal blog.

The 2012 cycle seemed different, though, until about mid-December, Warthen said. Perry leaped to the top of the polls after joining the race in August. Then it was Georgia’s Herman Cain who enjoyed front-runner status while Gingrich held that role from late November through mid-December.

“Finally, it’s like, ‘Oh, well, we know we’re going to nominate Romney, let’s just get on with it,’” Warthen said…

After I gave that “boss” quote to Aaron, I told him I had been about to say, “in the end we kind of vote for the massa,” playing a bit on our history. But I had decided against it, partly because people might have found the reference confusing. He said he thought that was a good call.

(Here’s what I was thinking when I thought of “massa.” I was thinking of all the poor whites who got suckered into fighting the Civil War by the massas back then. Nowadays, while those same whites’ descendants love to get excited about fringe candidates, particularly the ones who appeal to their sense of personal freedom — which was the same thing the slaveowners played on in 1860 — in the end they go with the candidate who looks most like the master of the plantation. See? People wouldn’t have gotten all that. They would have thought I was saying something about black voters, and gone, “Huh?”)

Ayn Rand is alive and well in the Club for Growth

8 Replies

It’s been really interesting to see his rivals tear into Mitt Romney for being some sort of heartless capitalist. And it’s been equally interesting to see the Mark Sanford wing of the GOP defend him.

I didn’t have time this morning to finish reading the front-page piece in The Wall Street Journal (which unfortunately is hiding behind the pay wall) about this phenomenon, but I can share with you this release from the Club for Growth:

Statement On Newt Gingrich’s Attacks On Mitt Romney And Bain Capital
Club for Growth President Chris Chocola: “Newt Gingrich should stop his attacks on free markets and apologize to Governor Romney for them”

Washington, DC – The Club for Growth PAC issued the following statement today in reaction to Speaker Newt Gingrich’s attacks on Governor Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital. Yesterday, Gingrich said “Those of us who believe in free markets and those of us who believe that in fact the whole goal of investment is entrepreneurship and job creation…we find it pretty hard to justify rich people figuring out clever legal ways to loot a company, leaving behind 1,700 families without a job.” (Source: New York Times, 1/8/11) Gingrich’s attack was echoed that same day that by the Democratic National Committee, which also attacked Romney for his job creation record at Bain Capital. (Source: Democratic National Committee YouTube Page, 1/8/12)

“Newt Gingrich’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital are disgusting,” said Club for Growth President Chris Chocola. “There are a number of issues for Mitt Romney’s Republican opponents to attack him for, but attacking him for making investments in companies to create a profit for his investors is just wrong. Because of the efforts of Bain Capital, major companies like Staples, Domino’s Pizza, and the Sports Authority now employ thousands of people and have created billions in wealth in the private economy. Attacking Governor Romney for participating in free-market capitalism is just beyond the pale for any purported ‘Reagan Conservative.’ Newt Gingrich should stop his attacks on free markets and apologize to Governor Romney for them.”

Ayn Rand, high priestess of the cult of Self, may be technically dead, but who needs her when we have the Club?

No word, by the way, on whether Chris Chocola is related to the Count. Probably not, given the spelling difference.

The legislative agenda? Same as it ever was

26 Replies

My ex-colleagues at The State did their annual laundry list of what the SC General Assembly should do in the session that convenes tomorrow, and as Cindi Scoppe acknowledged in her accompanying column, there wasn’t much new to see:

IF THE HEADLINE on today’s editorial provokes in you a sense of deja vu, that’s because it’s the same one we used last year to greet the annual return of the General Assembly. And it’s no different in substance from the year before that. In fact, the need to overhaul our tax code and spending policies and restructure our government have been among the top five issues confronting the Legislature for as far back as I can recall.

I’m not particularly fond of writing the same editorials year after year, but what choice is there? Our overarching problems are unchanged because the Legislature keeps tinkering around the edges or, worse, fixating on red-meat issues that satiate cable-news-engorged constituents but do nothing to nurture a state starved for a government that actually works. A government that provides the services that our state needs, in at least a moderately efficient way, and that pays for those services through a tax system that does not unnecessarily burden our citizens or undermine our values or give special favors to favored constituencies.

Yep, our state’s needs don’t change much from year to year. And neither do our lawmakers’ penchant for ignoring those needs.

If you’ll recall, my very last column at The State (“South Carolina’s Unfinished Business,” March 22, 2009) pretty much covered the same ground. That was almost three years ago. And after all that time, I would only need to reword one short passage:

Raise our lowest-in-the-nation cigarette tax by a dollar, bringing us (almost) to the national average, and saving thousands of young lives.

Actually, you wouldn’t even have to reword it — you would just have to add a parenthetical acknowledging that our state has taken a tiny baby step in that direction. Other than that, the column could pretty much run as-is.

Little wonder that I don’t get too excited with the new session rolls around each year…

Sheheen named as one of 12 to watch nationally

23 Replies

Vincent Sheheen in 2010 with his dad, Fred, and the last Democratic candidate for governor to do better than he did.

I was shocked, shocked, to see that Governing magazine named Sen. Vincent Sheheen one of its 12 legislators to watch in 2012:

Sen. Vincent Sheheen exceeded all expectations in his 2010 race for governor. Running in a strongly Republican state in a strongly Republican year, he lost to Nikki Haley — who attracted considerable national media attention — by just four percentage points. An effective legislator, he had sponsored 18 bills that became state law prior to his gubernatorial campaign.

Sheheen, whose father was a state education commissioner, served as a city prosecutor and a state representative before winning election to the Senate in 2004. “Sheheen represents the pragmatic tradition of South Carolina found in dynamic leaders such as former U.S. Sen. Fritz Hollings and former U.S. Secretary of Education Dick Riley,” says Andy Brack, publisher and columnist of StatehouseReport.com.

He is widely expected to run again for higher office. “Sheheen remains a public critic of Gov. Haley, which may help explain her rather extensive out-of-state fundraising during her first year in office,” says Jack Bass, a College of Charleston political scientist.

Why was I shocked? Because I thought it was some sort of physical law of the universe that national media were incapable of acknowledging Vincent’s existence.

Over and over, we heard (and still hear) about the terribly exciting miracle of the Indian-American woman who won the GOP nomination in our state, and then went on to be elected by the skin of her teeth, garnering a small percentage of the vote than any other statewide Republican in a huge year for Republicans.

Not once did I see even a hint of that sort of interest in the first Lebanese-American Catholic nominee in state history — who did better than any Democrat since Jim Hodges won, by hitching his star to a state lottery, in 1998.

Until now.

The Boston Globe’s endorsement of Huntsman

27 Replies

Huntsman in South Carolina in August.

The Boston Globe‘s endorsement of Jon Huntsman was strong, particularly in the way the paper set the scene and explained what was at stake (something most of the candidates have failed to do):

DISSATISFACTION WITH the economy, expressed in spasms of anger toward Wall Street and Washington; the dashed hopes of many who believed that Barack Obama’s election would create a new spirit of unity; and genuine uncertainty about Democratic health care reform – all of these have created an historic opportunity for the Republican Party. Just three years removed from a Republican administration that was roundly judged a failure, the party has a chance to renew itself – to blaze a path to bipartisan action on the budget, to introduce market-based solutions to health costs, and to construct a post-Iraq War network of alliances to promote global economic strength, knowing that true security comes from both peace and prosperity.

So far, Republican presidential contenders have shown little awareness of this opportunity. Far from promoting bipartisan unity, the GOP candidates have even abandoned Ronald Reagan’s “11th commandment” (“Though shalt not speak ill of another Republican”), shattering the party’s customary internal unity in an electric storm of name-calling and accusations. Rather than compare creative policy solutions, the candidates have vied for meaningless titles like “true conservative.’’ Rather than outline a vision for a safer world, they’ve signaled a return to Bush-era posturing and disdain for allies who don’t blindly serve American interests…

Then, there is the reasoning presented for Huntsman himself:

With a strong record as governor of Utah and US ambassador to China, arguably the most important overseas diplomatic post, Huntsman’s credentials match those of anyone in the field. He would be the best candidate to seize this moment in GOP history, and the best-prepared to be president.

Huntsman governed Utah as a clear conservative who nonetheless put the interests of his state ahead of ideology. He delighted right-wing supporters by replacing a graduated state income tax with a flat tax. Strong economic growth put Utah in the top five in job creation during Huntsman’s tenure, while he gave tax credits to companies developing solar energy. He offered a sweeping school choice plan, and joined the Western Climate Initiative, which set goals for reducing greenhouse gases.

When the national economy fell into recession, some Republican governors made a show of rejecting federal stimulus money on ideological grounds; sensibly, Huntsman took the money. While he endorsed the notion of a federal stimulus, he also offered a credible critique of the way the Democratic Congress had structured the plan. Then, when Obama offered him the post of ambassador to China, Huntsman accepted. Other Republicans, such as New Hampshire’s Judd Gregg, couldn’t bring themselves to accept entreaties from a Democratic president. Huntsman did. It attests to his sincerity when he vows to lead in a bipartisan spirit.

Serving as ambassador to China, the largest economic and military competitor to the United States, is a deeply meaningful credential. Notably, Huntsman’s nuanced foreign-policy vision of economic and strategic alliances stems from his time in Beijing. While other candidates point toward Cold War-style rejection and isolation of China, Huntsman promises deeper engagement. But he had the courage as ambassador to walk among protesters, drawing the ire of repressive Chinese authorities…

Now watch as Republican partisans dismiss the endorsement as worthless because it came from a “liberal newspaper.” Which to an intelligent person should be irrelevant, of course — either the endorsement shows wisdom or it does not. This one does, and that fact that partisans will dismiss it is further testimony, as if we needed any, to the distortions partisanship causes to the human mind.

A person free of such handicaps, an person with a penetrating, unfettered mind, can see that Huntsman has presented himself as the most serious, least desperate candidate. Even in small things: The Huntsman ad that I embedded here on the blog a few days ago shows a perspicacity, a discernment, a seriousness that no other candidate has either been able, or has dared, to show. A 30-second ad is a pathetic thing upon which to judge a candidate. But the tragedy of this nation is that so many voters base their judgments on so little. And it says a lot about Huntsman that he can pack more meaning into such a medium.

As The Globe says, Romney comes next in this regard, but his desperation to pander, to stoop to conquer, means he falls far short of Huntsman. And of course, The Globe knows Romney far better than I do.

OK, now, THIS really goes over the top

11 Replies

I told you that last post wasn’t about Nikki Haley. Well, this one is. Or rather, about the national media and Nikki.

I was almost done with the previous post before I clicked on the link from HuffPost to the Marie Claire piece to which it refers…

… and found myself confronted by what may be the most swooning, fawning coverage of Nikki Haley I’ve seen from national media yet.

Or at least in a while.

Wow.

I take it this breathless approach is sort of the style of this mag, but still… I, for one, am taken aback.

Good thing for Romney Joan Jett’s not running

16 Replies

Doug and Steven, if you’re counting, this post is not really about Nikki Haley. It’s about women. It’s about me having trouble figuring them out. Or having trouble figuring out how the world reacts to them. Or something…

HuffPost calls our attention to the following:

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R), in an interview in Marie Claire published Wednesday, discussed what lessons she has learned.

She named her role models. “Mine are my mother, Margaret Thatcher, Hillary Clinton, Martina Navratilova, Gabby Giffords. And Joan Jett. I tell you, Joan Jett is my idol. I would just love to meet her!”

Joan Jett’s pretty cool, I guess. Although I have to confess that I continue to get her confused with Pat Benatar. (Hey, gimme a break. By that time, I was an adult with a wife and kids and very busy running a newsroom.) And I’m sure the phrase “my mother and Margaret Thatcher” would fall easily from many Tory lips.

But you know, I’ll never get this chick thing about admiring people just because they share one’s gender.

I mean, really — Hillary Clinton coming right after the Iron Lady. I can see that they have a lot in common, but then I’m not a Democrat or a Republican.

Think of it this way: If Romney or Santorum or any of the guys running for president were asked to name his role models, and he named six, and one of them was Bill Clinton and another was a Democratic member of Congress, don’t you think he’d get in trouble with his base?

But if a woman does that, we don’t bat an eye. Because the gender bond is just supposed to be so profound that such differences don’t matter. In a way, that’s really cool (I certainly admire people from across the political spectrum). And good for Gov. Haley for being broad-minded. But in another way, it’s… I don’t know… either we’re condescending to women by not expecting consistency (like the Jack Nicholson character saying that to create female characters, “I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability“), or we’re being unfair to men. One or the other. Whatever it is, it ain’t equality.

Not being a feminist, I’ve got no objection, in principle, to double standards. Boys and girls are different, in important ways. But this is one difference that puzzles me.

“Chuckles!” Where you been at, man?

6 Replies

That's "Chuckles" Gidley in the background, during a 2006 editorial board meeting. See how he got his name?

I was delighted to see this passage in the paper this morning:

Santorum will boast of his focus on the Iranian threat to peace while other lawmakers were fixated on Iraq. He will brag that during his 12 years in the U.S. Senate, he never voted for a tax increase and pushed for a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

And he will note he did those things while representing Pennsylvania, a sometimes liberal state, without “giving up his conservative principles,” according to Hogan Gidley, Santorum’s national spokesman.“He did not have to morph and change himself to win elections,” Gidley said, a not-so-subtle jab at GOP front-runner Mitt Romney’s record while governor of Massachusetts.

Hogan Gidley! Chuckles! Where you been at, man?

My calling him “Chuckles” dates from when he was handling Karen Floyd’s campaign for state superintendent of education. I’ve seldom had a campaign aide glower at me in quite that way before. Karen hated the camera, but at least she smiled for it now and then.

All in good fun. Chuckles likes his nickname. At least, I think he does. Of course, I once forgot that he was executive director of the state Republican Party, so I might have forgotten his opinion of the nickname, too…

Welcome, Palmetto Public Record

11 Replies

It’s a new year, and time to spruce up my blogroll, tossing out any who haven’t posted in ages.

And I’ll be adding one, “Palmetto Public Record,” which has chosen an interesting time to launch.

It apparently is the work of one Logan Smith, who describes himself thusly:

Palmetto Public Record founding editor Logan Smith has been covering South Carolina politics for over half a decade as a reporter and online producer for WIS-TV in Columbia. A graduate of the University of South Carolina with a degree in Electronic Journalism, Logan also reported on the State House for the School of Journalism’s Carolina News program. When Logan isn’t glued to a computer screen or wandering around the Capitol complex, you can usually find him running or cycling on the streets of Columbia.

Sounds like a member of Boyd Brown’s generation. A major in “Electronic Journalism?” Do tell. When I started out, we were still using Linotype machines.

Here’s hoping Logan is made as welcome as I was by the nascent SC blogging community, back when I started in 2005.

I haven’t seen any ads on his site yet, so I can with an unconflicted mind offer him the same blessing as the Godfather did Sollozzo: “I know you’ll do very well; and good luck to you… as your interests don’t conflict with my interests.”

In the Des Moines Register tonight, Obama has the loudest voice

6 Replies

I’ve been checking the Des Moines Register website tonight, and I can’t help being struck by the way Obama bought up the front-page ad space so as to dominate coverage of the Republican caucuses tonight. No matter who is momentarily ahead as Paul, Romney and Santorum vie to break out of a tie, Obama’s message plays bigger than anything else, all night.

Interesting…

bradwarthen.com

All The News That Gives You Fits

Category Archives: Media

What would surprise you most on Saturday?

I want my, I want my, I want my Wikipedia

Not that there’s anything wrong with that

3 SC state senators endorse Ron Paul, who talks about how great Nullification would be for SC

Seeking auxiliary reporters, photographers

Which candidate is more likely to go “boom!” in SC?

Yo, Lee: David Yepsen says “Hey”

In an interesting parallel, Tom Davis backs Ron Paul

Huntsman, the best man for the job, drops out

Huntsman Says He’s Quitting G.O.P. Race

In the end, SC Republicans vote for the ‘boss’

Ayn Rand is alive and well in the Club for Growth

The legislative agenda? Same as it ever was

Sheheen named as one of 12 to watch nationally

The Boston Globe’s endorsement of Huntsman

OK, now, THIS really goes over the top

Good thing for Romney Joan Jett’s not running

“Chuckles!” Where you been at, man?

Welcome, Palmetto Public Record

In the Des Moines Register tonight, Obama has the loudest voice