Category Archives: Republicans

Graham becomes incoherent when he tries too hard to sound like DeMint

23 Replies

Just got this release from Lindsey Graham:

Graham Continues Push for Repeal and Replace of Obamacare

WASHINGTON – Continuing his commitment to the repeal and replace of Obamacare, United States Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) has introduced legislation to repeal another major provision of the recently-passed health care law – the Community Living Assistance Services and Support (CLASS) Act.

“The CLASS Act is a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff blush,” said Graham.  “It’s billed as an insurance program for long-term care, but really it’s just a huge and very costly government accounting trick.”…

“To help build momentum for repeal and replace of Obamacare, we should continue holding up all the individual pieces of this monstrosity – like the CLASS Act – to the light of day,” said Graham.  “The more Americans learn about the details of this health care bill, and provisions like the CLASS Act, the less they like it.  The sooner we can repeal and replace Obamacare, the better off our nation will be.”

And so on and so forth. The rest is the usual nonsense.

Why “nonsense?” Because it is patently, objectively ridiculous to be talking about repealing an incremental, half-baked mishmash reform that hasn’t had ANY appreciable effect yet (have YOU felt or seen any effects? I certainly haven’t). I think that as health-care reform this was pretty lame (can you tell?), but for the sake of all that’s logical, give it a chance to see if it does anything. Unless you’re prepared to pass REAL reform (which would be awesome, and worth upsetting a few apple carts), hush up and observe for the next few years, THEN weigh in — when you know something.

Personally, I don’t know whether the CLASS Act in particular is well-designed or not. But that’s of secondary consideration in light of the senator’s assertion that he’s only talking about it in order to accomplish the goal of “repeal and replace of Obamacare.”

Did anybody proof this release before it went out? Did anyone say that line out loud before putting it in the lede and hed (and yes, “lede” and “hed” are spelled correctly in this context, you ignorant pedantic lubbers), and then saying it a third time later in the release? Is he really pushing for “repeal (a noun, within the context of following “for”) and replace (which cannot, in this or any other context, be anything but a verb)” of Obamacare?

Is this some crazy new mangled-English construct currently in vogue with a certain kind of Republican (the kind who says abominable things such as “Democrat Party”)? Because I’m telling ya, it makes zero sense to the rest of us. Did you mean to say you are pushing TO repeal (this time a verb) and replace (still a verb) it? If so, why not say so?

Lindsey Graham was a fairly eloquent opponent of what is termed “Obamacare” before it passed. He made his case, and explained his reasons in a respectable manner. But he lost the argument. But when he tries to fulminate about that as though he were a Tea Party ranter, all his coherence is left behind. Which is a shame.

I eagerly await the return of the real Lindsey Graham, because he’s a guy I greatly admire. Let DeMint be DeMint. One of those is too many. Don’t try to be what you’re not, senator.

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

6 Replies

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.

Negative Nancy? She’s negative? SHE’S negative?

20 Replies

Wow. Wow. Wow.

Just got yet another release (it’s a daily ritual) from Joe Wilson that is all about Nancy Pelosi rather than the 2nd Congressional District race.

And this one calls her “Negative Nancy” in the head:

Help Send “Negative Nancy” A Message

What would you do if the policies you cherish and forced on the country caused mass unemployment and economic despair?Chances are, you would admit defeat, apologize profusely to the public, and then proceed to jump in a hole so deep that you would land in China (where your liberal agenda may actually be popular, so everybody wins).

However, Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends lack the humility to retreat quietly into the night. Instead, “Negative Nancy” constantly barrages voters with tired rhetoric and liberal talking points. She would rather attack conservatives who voice your opinion than admit defeat.

Since we know that this is the way liberals operate, it should come as no surprise that Nancy Pelosi is coming to Charleston this weekend to make a speech. She is absolutely committed to punishing true conservatives like Congressman Joe Wilson, who have the integrity to stand up to her job killing liberal agenda.

“Negative Nancy” is planning on coming to our state from her lofty perch to energize her liberal allies. She thinks that with enough money and tired rhetoric she can defeat conservative ideals.

Help Joe Wilson stop the barrage of negativity coming from Pelosi and her liberal friends. Please click here now to support Joe and help him reach his goal of $25,000 this week!

Sincerely,
Dustin Olson
Campaign Manager
Joe Wilson for Congress

Wow, again. Release after release calling her every bad name you can think of, and you call HER “negative.” Wowee.

I think you might want to go back to calling her “liberal” over and over and over and over and over. At least that’s true, for whatever relevance it has.

Witches as a neglected demographic

15 Replies

Just to give you a smile, I thought I’d share an excerpt from a WSJ op-ed piece this morning (“Toil and Trouble in Delaware“), in which Aaron Kheifets, “a comedy writer whose work has appeared on The Onion News Network and Comedy Central,” explained why Christine O’Donnell should embrace, rather than run from, her witchy past.

After all, he asserts, Wicca is “a high-visibility, fast-growth demographic.” An excerpt from his advice:

She must demonstrate that she is willing to fight for their interests. She could start by proposing farm subsidies for sage and lilac to stabilize prices and reduce dependence on foreign sage and lilac.

Many witches have also been clamoring for public schools to begin teaching Wiccan alternatives to evolutionary theory, such as the possibility that the world was created from the dream of an omnipresent life-force that likes flute music.

Ms. O’Donnell could score further points by advocating for mandatory time off for special events in the life of your World of Warcraft character or by demanding an official apology for the Salem Witch Trials, which would include reparations. Above all, she must focus on community outreach such as busing Wiccan voters to polling stations in case their parents won’t let them borrow the car.

The level of interest generated by merely the mention of witchcraft is a testament to the power of the political juggernaut of Wicca. With witches willing to put Birkenstocks to pavement, going door-to-door for her, Ms. O’Donnell could even set her sights on the White House.

Of course, I particularly enjoyed it because of my own strong sense of the absurdity of Identity Politics. But even without that, you’re likely to find the piece to be a hoot.

GOP (and Dems, don’t forget) hurtling toward madness

10 Replies

Back on a previous post, Bud writes:

… (S)omehow Brad manages time and time again to confuse the idiot GOP with political parties in general. It really is pretty disgusting to have the Dems, who are at least attempting to address the nation’s problems in a meaninful way, with the imbecils who continue to distort, lie and weasel their way to power.

And what do they use this power for? For the good of the American people? Hell no. The bastards are merely trying to rule in order to feather their own nests. The GOP is about wealth creation for the super rich. And it’s worked. The poor and middle class have gotten nowhere for 30 years while the elitists in the GOP fool and fear their way into making the gullible believe there is a boogeyman behind every rock. And, inexplicably, they fool some poor school bus driver into thinking it’s in his best interests to give a billionare’s son his parent’s fortune TAX FREE! Unbeleivable.

But until the press gets it and starts calling the GOP out for the liars and scoundrels that they are we will continue to read about GOP idiocy in the name of political party partisanship. It’s NOT political party partisanship, it’s GOP fear mongering.

Bud, um… I’m pretty sure, without actually setting out the mathematical proof, that the set “political parties in general” DOES include the Republican Party. I’m not confused on this point. In fact, pretty much anyone who compiled a credible list of “Political Parties in the U.S.” would almost certainly list the GOP among the first two. I’m very confident in this assessment.

That’s why it’s such a problem that the GOP seems to have lost its frickin’ mind since Nov. 2008. Sensible Republicans are sort of walking around in shock as the screaming meemies take over.

Any other election, and Sarah Palin would have been relegated to the ranks of “unpersons” on the day after the last election, her name never, ever to been mentioned by any Republican who ever wanted another Republican to speak to him again. Instead, she is THE most mentioned Republican nationally, and it is widely accepted — among Republicans, and others — that her endorsement can make or break candidates running in races that have nothing to do with her. Yes, I’m speaking of the woman who as governor of Alaska repeatedly embarrassed the GOP ticket by how little she had learned from the experiences in her life about world affairs, and who since then has only added to her resume by… well, resigning as governor of Alaska. This is now the party’s queenmaker.

Any other election, and every Republican who ran against Nikki Haley for governor would have meekly lined up behind her on the day after the primary in a show of solidarity, all acting as though she was the one they really wanted to unite behind in the fall all along. This election, the GOP gubernatorial field is nowhere to be seen, with the exception of Henry “Good Soldier” McMaster, who’s doing his best to back her in spite of the vacant, confused look on his face. (He just doesn’t know what hit him, and is sufficiently dazed that he thinks this election is like other elections, and is acting accordingly.)

You may notice that the two examples I just cited describe OPPOSITE phenomena: One describes how the GOP is gravitating TOWARD its loonier, least credible fringes, while the other indicates how they’re moving AWAY from candidates they don’t trust, candidates who are trying to ride the Tea Party’s unfocused resentments right past the GOP into office.

Well, that’s just how crazy things are in the GOP these days. They’re about to win big nationally in November, and yet they don’t know whether they’re coming or going. That is to say, the sensible Republicans, the traditional core of the party, doesn’t know what’s happening. The Jim DeMints of the party know exactly where they’re trying to take the nation, and they keep confidently explaining it to us, but unfortunately what they say makes little sense.

Now you, Bud, may take solace in thinking that there’s a place for sensible people to run to amid the madness — the Democratic Party. I know no such solace, because I know better.

As Bart pointed out this week:

POINT: According to a recent Newsweek poll, “Some people have alleged that Barack Obama sympathizes with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world. From what you know about Obama, what is your opinion of these allegations?”……52% of Republicans polled think that statement is either “certainly true” or “probably true.”

COUNTERPOINT: According to a Rasmussen poll taken in May 2007, …”Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure.”

In other words, BOTH parties are rapidly rushing toward their crazier extremes. People who identify themselves as “Democrats” or “Republicans” have surrendered their abilities to think to their respective sides to such an extent that they no longer stop to ask, “Does this make sense?” If someone who identifies himself as one of THEIRS says it, there must be something to it. And if someone on the other side denies it, well then it MUST be true.

And the members of BOTH factions are being pulled, with increasing acceleration, toward those loony poles as though they were in the grips of the gravitational fields of black holes at opposite ends of the universe. (Yes, I know the universe doesn’t have “ends,” but THEY obviously think it does. Besides, it’s a metaphor. Sheesh.)

The only hope for the country lies, of course, with the UnParty. But we already knew that, didn’t we?

Waiting for Nancy, and trembling in anticipation

24 Replies

The last couple of days, I’ve been getting a flurry of releases from SC Republicans that I haven’t stopped to read, because they all seem to be about Nancy Pelosi, which doesn’t interest me since my area of concern is South Carolina.

But the headline on this one was just SO over the top, so indicative of a party (the GOP) just quivering in anticipation at the advent of an individual. You’d think this was the second coming of Ronald Reagan, or some other partisan messiah.

Here’s a sample:

NEWS RELEASE

Victory launches daily reminder of why

Palmetto Values don’t fit with Pelosi Values

(Columbia, SC – September 17, 2010) When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s jet touches down in Charleston a week from Saturday, you probably won’t see any South Carolina Democrat candidates welcoming her. When America’s most wildly unpopular official comes calling, it’s good to have something else on your agenda that day, because a political embrace from Nancy Pelosi is like getting kissed by Typhoid Mary.

Pelosi puppet-in-waiting Rob Miller and fellow liberal Democrat John Spratt, who juggles the books for Pelosi as chairman of the House Budget Committee, would prefer it if Pelosi’s visit went unnoticed.

But they don’t need to worry about that. Starting today and continuing every day next week, SC Victory 2010 will countdown until Pelosi arrives with a daily reminder of why her views are at odds with the majority of folks here in South Carolina…

… and so forth and so on… But I’ll give you a hint: At no time are we told WHY the woman is coming here, or in what way it bears upon our lives. Maybe she’s coming to see Jim Leventis, the godfather of her daughter, or for some other personal reason. I don’t know, and I don’t care.

Hey, ya got me convinced: This Pelosi woman is not popular in SC.

Good thing she’s not running for anything here, huh?

Now, do you have anything to talk about that’s worthy of my attention? You know, something having to do with South Carolina… If you have something critical to say about these Democratic candidates in SC, something about THEM, please share it. Or — if you can manage it — something persuasively positive about your OWN candidates. But don’t bore me talking about somebody from frickin’ San Francisco. I don’t vote in San Francisco. I don’t intend EVER to vote in San Francisco. Believe it; I wouldn’t kid you about this.

Political parties are just so unbelievably insufferable. They just get worse and worse and worse. Just when you think they couldn’t possibly insult our intelligence any more, they go a little lower…

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.

Howard Dean’s Scream will now be forgotten

8 Replies

For one thing, ex. Gov. Dean is really a pretty calm, well-behaved guy most of the time. At least, that’s the way he impressed me both times he came in to see our editorial board. The Scream, in his case, was but a momentary aberration.

But not so with this guy.

The first thing I thought as I watched the above clip was, “Everybody who sees this will forget about ol’ Howard’s indiscretion.” The second was, “This makes all of our candidates here in SC look good. Even Alvin Greene, who only howls when provoked.”

NPR characterized him as the “Craziest Stump Speech Ever Candidate,” which pretty much captures what I see when I watch it.

You’ll be relieved to know Phil Davison did NOT get the nomination for treasurer in Stark County, Ohio. The GOP has been moving toward the angry fringe this year, but thank goodness, not quite this far…

Editorial in The State explains Wilson ethics case well

8 Replies

I’m going to shock my ex-colleagues at The State by saying “nice job” on today’s lede editorial, “Joe Wilson’s goblets.”

This would be a shock because, as former military writer Dave Moniz (who now works at the Pentagon) once observed when I was his editor in the early 90s, praise from me doesn’t go higher than “pretty good.” (Dave’s on my mind because, not knowing my current situation, he passed on a tip about a Defense-related job this week, a gesture which I appreciate.)

But this was better than that. The piece accomplished several things:

  • Gave a clear sense of what little is known about the investigation, which was handy to have. I feel I have a slightly better grasp of what we’re talking about now.
  • Called Wilson to task, in no uncertain terms (essentially saying him, “You lie!” but without the shouting), for his bogus response and misrepresentation.
  • Called Rob Miller to task for his equally bogus and untrue assertions in trying to capitalize on the case.
  • Explained clearly just what is wrong with Joe Wilson in general, not just in this case: He sees EVERYTHING in the universe as a partisan struggle against “liberals.” Nancy Pelosi is his Great White Whale. And I’m sorry, Ahab, but that Unified Field Theory simply does not always apply.
  • Showed just how irrelevant such a worldview is to this situation, since the ethics panel investigating him is “composed entirely of people outside the Congress, four Republicans and four Democrats,” in in this particular case is investigating two Republicans (Joe being one) and three Democrats. Of course, we knew that latter part, but I had not yet seen a clear explanation of the Office of Congressional Ethics. After reading this, one can only be outraged by Wilson’s attempt to play on voters’ ignorance by claiming this is a a partisan, personal attack on him for being a self-styled hero of the angry right.

And while it was sort of an afterthought, I particularly appreciated this summary of just how totally screwed we, the voters, are in this situation:

Unfortunately, these two are the choices voters in the 2nd Congressional District have in November. Oh how we wish that were a lie.

Oh, wouldn’t it be lovely if we could?

The South won’t rise again, but it will keep on making head fakes in that direction

17 Replies

Imagine the irony! I was listening, via Pandora, to an excellent live version of Levon Helm singing his masterpiece, “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down.” It opened with a little horn riff on “Dixie” itself. The song is simply magnificent, capturing everything that was noble and tragic and horrible and epic and personal in our ancestors’ fall into defeat.

So imagine how it was ruined for me by, even as I was listening to it and appreciating it, reading this low farce from Karen Floyd:

Dear Subscriber

An unprecedented event recently occurred, where the president of the United States issued a report to the U.N. Human Rights Council that bashed a state law. In a desperate attempt to gain the awe and admiration of global elitists, President Obama sounded off about the many “sins” in America’s history, including Arizona’s new illegal immigration bill.Obama writes, “A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.” He also went on about how he is seeking to offer free health care to illegal immigrants.

The context of this U.N. forum is to discuss human rights in the United States. Apparently, Obama thinks that Arizona’s law is in violation of human rights, which is why he is not only suing the state, but also reporting it to the U.N. council.

Lesson learned everyone: a liberal will always seek the praise and respect of foreign powers over the rights of the American people or the Constitution.

As a direct result of Obama’s ridiculous report to the U.N., the Arizona law will come under formal review on November 5 by the three member countries of the UN Human Rights Commission: France, Japan, and Cameroon. The U.N. Commission will then issue directives on what they recommend the United States do in response to the Arizona law.

This is simply outrageous! How can an American president sell out his own countrymen to a foreign entity over a state law that simply enforces existing federal laws? Our president should be bowing to the people’s demands, and NOT the whims of an international organization.

Folks, it is time to fight back. We desperately need trusted conservatives like Mike Mulvaney, Nikki Haley and Jim DeMint to fight for our liberties and state sovereignty. The elitists in Washington are trying to allow a foreign power to dictate your life and safety. Will you allow this to happen?

Click here to help fund conservative change and individual rights! Let’s help elect individuals who will enforce the Constitution and stand up for our rights and sovereignty.

Sincerely,

Karen Floyd

SCGOP Chairman

P.S. Let’s take the battle to them and send Obama a message! Please click here to donate now.

Just as elites conned the poor white population into being their cannon fodder in a lost and bankrupt cause in 1860, this new strain of Radical Republicanism keeps playing on the same resentments and sensitivities and inferiority complexes to manipulate the great mass of white voters in the South today.

They just keep on driving Dixie down.

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…

Randolph and Mortimer Duke, redux

11 Replies

This afternoon at Rotary I found myself seated next to Boyd Summers, Richland County Democratic Party chairman. (Just to be ecumenical and UnParty, I also chatted with Richland County Republican Chairman Eric Davis after the meeting, so there.)

It was noted that he and I were wearing essentially the same tie, although mine was bow and his was not. Sort of a Palmetto variation on the old Brigade of Guards regimental stripe.

Anyway, having arrived way early for the meeting (I rode with Lanier Jones from ADCO, and as an ex-president of the club, he goes early), I had time for a digression. So I noted that we were like the Duke brothers, Randolph and Mortimer. I had to explain that the Duke brothers were the partners in Duke and Duke, the fictional Philadelphia commodities brokers in “Trading Places,” and that in every scene, they were wearing ties made from the same material, only Randolph (you know, Randy, like Randy Jackson of the Jackson five) wore a bow and Mortimer wore the more boring sort of tie.

When I was done with the explanation, John Durst said wow, you really notice detail, don’t you? I allowed as how I did, but that’s not really true. I mean, how could anyone NOT notice something like that — especially when one has seen the flick a certain number of times?

After the meeting, I got John to use my Blackberry to shoot the above photo, to record the moment. Aren’t you glad I did?

By the way, Joe Wilson noted to me that he, too, was wearing a similar tie. I nodded, but I was humoring him. His was like Boyd’s, except silver (as in, “Silver Elephant”) in the places where it should have been dark red. Obviously, Joe misread the memo.

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…

A closer look at Nikki’s idea of fiscal responsibility

32 Replies

Turning from Nikki Haley’s foot-dragging on transparency regarding her taxpayer-issued computer and e-mails, let’s take another look at her problems with paying her taxes on time.

This is particularly relevant because of her oft-stated wish that government be run like a business, and her touting of her proven skills as an accountant.

Let’s take a look at Cindi Scoppe’s column Sunday. Cindi, a meticulous reporter if ever I’ve met one, didn’t think much one way or the other about Nikki’s failure to pay her taxes on time until she looked into it further herself. Here’s an excerpt from what she found, going well beyond what had been previously reported:

The problem wasn’t that the Haleys sought and received extensions. It is in fact quite common for people to get a six-month extension to file their tax returns. But as the IRS makes clear, the extension applies only to the return, not to the tax payment itself. Taxes are always due by April 15 — at the latest. The Haleys have not paid their taxes by April 15 in any of the past five years…
Even more significantly, the extension gives people only until Oct. 15 to file. The Haleys filed their 2005 tax returns on July 30, 2007 — eight months after the extended deadline. They filed their 2006 tax returns on July 23, 2008 — also eight months after the extended deadline. Their 2007 returns were filed Nov. 5, 2008, just a few days after the extended deadline. (Their 2004, 2008 and 2009 returns were filed after April 15, but before Oct. 15, so the IRS doesn’t consider them late.)
Now, in my book, anytime you have to pay the government a penalty, you’ve done something wrong, and the Haleys have paid the IRS $4,452 in penalties in the past five years — $2,853 for filing late, and $1,599 for paying late…
Still, the idea that paying your taxes late, and waiting eight months after the extended deadline to file a return, is doing “nothing wrong” is more of a stretch.
But the biggest stretch is the way Ms. Haley has sought to spin her income tax problem into a virtue. She talks about how she and her husband fell upon tough economic times and cut back on their spending and learned to live within their means, which she says demonstrates what a fiscally responsible governor she would be. It seems to me that her actions demonstrate just the opposite.
The Haleys didn’t pay their taxes late once or twice, when things were bad; they paid their taxes late in every one of the past five years — not just in 2006, when their income dropped by half, but also in 2005 when it was going up, and in 2007, 2008 and 2009, when it was going up substantially, topping out at nearly $200,000 last year….
… the fact is that part of her strategy was to avoid paying her bills on time, by essentially giving herself a loan from those of us who paid our taxes on time. A bailout if you will, albeit temporary, for the candidate who deplores federal bailouts. And since she failed to pay her taxes on time five years in a row, it raises questions about her stewardship of money….
I questioned Ms. Haley’s campaign several times to make absolutely sure that the Haleys had not somehow managed to get an additional extension, and her spokesman never attempted to give any sort of justification for their missing the extended deadlines. I’m not sure what the repeated delinquent tax filings suggest: Poor organizational skills? Inability to delegate authority — or, if delegated, to choose trustworthy people to whom to delegate? A disregard for the laws the rest of us have to obey? What I am sure of is that if it were me, I wouldn’t be bragging about it.

DeMint’s idea of ‘great video’ and mine differ

1 Reply

A couple of days ago, I saw this Tweet from Jim DeMint:

Great new video from @RepTomPrice at the Republican Study Committee http://bit.ly/cxC3WT10:59 AM Aug 17th via web

Above you can see his idea of a “great… video”…

Such is the aesthetic sense of a thorough, 100 percent, ideology-saturated partisan. Me, I prefer to share with my peeps such videos as this one and these two and this one and this one and this one and this one and this one….

But that’s me. I have broad interests.

And if Reagan is what you want, personally, I much prefer the video below. See if you agree…

Nikki Haley’s ‘limited hangout’ (This is what she means by ‘transparency,’ when it’s applied to her)

66 Replies

First, for you youngsters who’ve only been alive for five minutes or so, here’s a definition of “limited hangout.” Or perhaps we should refer to what Nikki has done as a “modified limited hangout,” the extra-special version invented by Richard Nixon and his droogs.

In any case, this passage from The State‘s story today pretty much tells you all you need to know about what Nikki means by the word “transparency” when it is applied to her. To be helpful, I’ve boldfaced the most important parts, in this passage and subsequent ones:

Sheheen released his legislative e-mails, copies of his hard drives and campaign receipts two weeks ago in response to identical open records requests The State sent to both campaigns. Haley released her e-mails, but said she would not release any other documents or allow reporters to review her state-issued computer hard drives. A hard drive keeps a permanent record of e-mails.

Then there’s this little elaboration, which I suppose Nikki put out for the benefit of the technological Neanderthals among the electorate:

“I think 10,000 sheets of paper is a lot,” Haley said, referring to the volume of e-mails in defending the decision not to match Sheheen’s disclosure. “I’m comfortable with how transparent we have been. I’m not going to get into this tit for tat about whether that’s enough sheets of paper.”

Ahem. Nikki, if you’d just go ahead and release the hard drives — you know, the public hard drives that belong to us, the taxpayers whom you allegedly love so much — nobody’s asking for so much as ONE “sheet of paper.” This is the 21st century. Give us the frickin’ hard drives, and we’ll have all that we need. Your good faith will have been demonstrated. Those “sheets of paper” you’re touting are the emblem of your refusal to just go ahead and be transparent, the physical manifestations of your selectivity. And you say there are 10,000 of them. Ten thousand documents attesting to your refusal to simply open up access to a public resource.

Then there’s this:

The Haley campaign emphasized she is exempt from state open records laws as a lawmaker, and all compliance is voluntary.

Wow. Yeah, Nikki, lawmakers ARE exempt, because they write the laws, and refuse to abide by the openness they have statutorily imposed on the rest of government, from the governor to the guy who sweeps up in the offices of our bureaucracy. This is an exemption they carved out for themselves, and themselves alone. This is the very cult of stonewalling that someone we know constantly berates her fellow legislators about. That someone’s initials, in the spirit of limited hangout, are N.H. And I’m not talking New Hampshire.

And you want to hide behind THAT? Really?

Amazing.

Prominent Indian-American politicians in the South — all 2 of them

7 Replies

Salon has a piece on how our own Nikki Haley and Bobby Jindal work to carve out a place for themselves in the GOP of the South. An excerpt:

There’s no doubt that the religious conversions of Haley and Jindal, the two most prominent Indian-American politicians, have powerful personal and spiritual roots. But it’s also inarguable that being Christians with Anglicized names has made it easier for them to create bonds with the overwhelmingly white and deeply religious voters who dominate Republican politics in the South.

That basic imperative, to project an identity that voters aren’t threatened by, is one that all minority candidates in all regions of the country can relate to. But for Indian-Americans, who are only now stepping into American politics in sizable numbers, figuring out how to do so is still a work in progress…

Find the whole piece here.

More on Rod Shealy, from his sister Sherry

8 Replies

Photo courtesy of Nathan Ballentine...

The former Sherry Shealy has put up a couple of blog posts about her brother Rod, which you can find here and here.

An excerpt:

Rod was a gift to many people. He ran winning campaigns for lots of candidates who probably wouldn’t have won without him…
Two years ago, he had a cancerous brain tumor. He had surgery in August 2008; one hour after the brain surgery, he was on the cell phone doing business as usual. Rod quipped: “I can see the headlines now: ‘Shealy Survives Surgery; Dies of Boredom’.”
That surgery removed the tumor – totally – and he was fine.
At least for a while.
Some time during the summer of 2009, he learned that the cancer was in his lungs.
This year, we learned it was back in his brain.
Rod had maintained a very positive and upbeat attitude. Sometimes he said things like, “The folks at the hospital like me ‘cause everybody else is sick.”
I first ran for office in 1970; he helped me in that campaign and then ran every campaign of mine after that one. He ran my campaign for lieutenant governor in 1990; it’s was my first loss and I believe he took it harder than I did. …
When I asked him several years ago if it was too late to throw my hat in the ring for a particular race, he replied, “Yep. By about 34 years.”
Whether it was politics, family, or anything else, Rod enjoyed life to the fullest. He had a dry wit, a keen sense of humor and a heart of gold. He loved to play the guitar and sing. He loved being creative.
Other than in the hospital bed, I can’t remember the last time I saw him without a bright floral Hawaiian shirt. That was one of his trademarks. In fact, he went to an inaugural ball; like others, he wore a tuxedo – but with the Hawaiian floral print bowtie and cummerbund, along with tennis shoes, I believe.

The News Corp. contribution to the GOP

5 Replies

Last night at the dinner table my wife was reading The Wall Street Journal, and on the side toward me I noticed the headline, “News Corp. Gives $1 Million to GOP.” Personally, I wasn’t interested enough to read the story (I’d already seen stuff about it earlier in the day), but I was curious about one thing — what page was I looking at? In other words, how far back in the paper would the WSJ, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., play the story.

It was page A4, she told me. OK, fine. I filed that away and went back to my dinner.

But I was reminded of it this morning when I saw these two Tweets from Jason Zacher:

So if GE (NBC), Disney (ABC), and Viacom (CBS) give tons of political money with no headlines, why do we care about Murdoch’s donation?about 1 hour ago via TweetDeck

OH! That’s right. It’s because the rest of the media hates FoxNews for being #1.about 1 hour ago via TweetDeck

To that, I had to respond, “Because it’s NEWS Corp — mainly about journalism, not making toasters. I don’t care much, but that’s why it gets attention.

Jason said back:

Sure, but a ton of its profits come from 20th Cent, HarperCollins, Fox Television, and several dozen other properties.

Yes, Jason, but the fact remains that Rupert Murdoch is mainly seen as a “press lord.” It’s a matter of image. Like my distant relative William Randolph “Citizen Kane” Hearst delving into politics.

Oh, y’all didn’t know Hearst and I were related? Yep. The Hearsts were originally from South Carolina, you know — way back. Another distant relative who was into genealogy once told us that my Dad was Patty’s fifth cousin. Which means we didn’t exactly come in for a piece of San Simeon.

Anyway, where was I? Oh, yeah. While it doesn’t interest me very much that Murdoch wants to make a political contribution, if it DID, I’d mainly be ticked that he whips out his checkbook so readily for them, when it took him months to send me a measly amount when I had covered one of the hottest political stories of the year for him. But that would be petty of me, wouldn’t it?

I did arch an eyebrow when I read this passage in the WSJ story:

News Corp. spokesman Jack Horner said the contribution was intended to promote the company’s core beliefs. “News Corporation has always believed in the power of free markets and in organizations like the RGA, which have a pro-business agenda and support our priorities at this most critical time for our economy,” he said.

He added, “The corporate donation has no impact on the reporting activities of our newsgathering organizations. There is a strict wall between business and editorial and the corporate office does not consult with our newsgathering organizations … before making donations.”

But for a very esoteric, inside-baseball kind of reason. Basically, the passage is unclear because of the terminology. “Editorial,” used by a business-side guy, is a vague term meaning “news,” and only peripherally, “editorial” in the editorial-page sense. He’s trying to say that the NEWS side is unaffected. And I believe that’s true, aside from the fact that they’re no doubt embarrassed at having to report this, even on Page A4.

But what about the wall between news and editorial (one that is rhetorically erased by using “editorial” to refer to both), or the wall between editorial (as I use the term, meaning the opinion folks) and business side? Obviously, neither of those critical divisions is important to Mr. Horner.

Of course, at the WSJ, the point is rather moot. That paper’s editorial board was totally on board with “the power of free markets” LONG before they were owned by Rupert.

Requiescat In Pace, Rod Shealy

4 Replies

Rod Shealy, in a photo from his Facebook page.

John O’Connor of The State tweets that the “Family of S.C. political consultant Rod Shealy says he died this afternoon at MUSC.”

This sad news has already provoked a suitably quirky tribute, as follows:

PhilBaileySC

Tomorrow will be Hawaiian Shirt Day on Pub Politics to honor our friend Rod Shealy.

Mr. Shealy

As I was pulling this together, John posted the following at thestate.com:

Influential South Carolina political consultant and newspaper owner Rod Shealy died this afternoon at the Medical University of South Carolina, according to his sister Lorri Unumb. He was 56 years old.
Shealy died of bleeding on the brain, Unumb said, possibly related to the brain cancer he was diagnosed with in 2008. Unumb said Shealy had fallen and broken his hip over the weekend, but was optimistic the cancer treatments at MUSC were working.
Shealy specialized in advising long-shot candidates to victory, such as longtime friend and client Lt. Gov Andre Bauer. Shealy – a protégé of Lee Atwater — also had a penchant for pushing the limits of campaign law in search of an advantage.
The Irmo resident pled guilty in 1992 for failing to report a campaign contribution after he was accused of hiring a black fisherman to run for office to help drive Lowcountry turnout for his sister’s bid for Lt. Governor.
Unumb has a son with autism, and said Shealy helped her draft and find legislative support for a bill requiring autism insurance coverage that is now law. A big Jimmy Buffet fan, Shealy was instantly recognized by the Hawaiian shirts he wore.
“Politics was a profession and a passion, but it was also a fun game,” Unumb said, referring to Shealy enjoying the intellectual challenge of elections. “Intuitively he just understood people. He was just one of them. He identified with the common folks.”
Rod was a guy much loved by his allies, and disparaged by others — including yours truly at times, although I had developed a fairly cordial relationship with him in recent years. He may have done some highly questionable things and associated with some unsavory types — which I’m sure he himself sometimes had occasion to regret — but he certainly added some color to local politics. And he was very good at his job.