Category Archives: South Carolina

Correction (sorta): I was wrong, but I was also right

1 Reply

Last night, Cindi Scoppe, who as long as I’ve known her has NEVER looked at e-mail or the Web on weekends*, shocked me by writing to make an observation on one of my blog posts.

She was writing to set me straight on Act 388, which I mentioned on the penny sales tax post. She said she wasn’t sure that it WAS 388; she thought it might me 488. And she said that it only raised the sales tax one cent, not two.

I wrote back that I was sure that I was right on the name of it, but was going by memory on the two cents; and was she sure?

I had the enormous satisfaction of knowing I was at least half right. It IS 388. But with her extensive files at hand, she was able to say I was dead wrong on the two cents.

So I was wrong. Sorry about that. I’m going to go fix it now…

* This is not to say she doesn’t work all weekend; she does. She takes home long, boring documents to read, the kind of documents that I would rather suffer several pokes in the eye with a sharp stick than read on a weekend.

I get off the sidelines, and take a stand: Pass the penny sales tax for transportation

28 Replies

Caroline Whitson speaks to the gathering at the Penny Sales Tax campaign kickoff.

You know that press conference that they had at the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce Thursday to support the sales tax referendum for transportation Thursday? I was there, and not as a blogger. I mean, I’m always a blogger — here I am writing about it — but that’s not why I was there.

I was there to support the referendum. Ike McLeese and Betty Gregory with the Chamber had asked a group of supporters (and I had told them I was willing to help) to show up so that the media people could see a nice cross-section of the community willing to stand up for it.

This would not be a big deal for most people, but it is for me. I’ve always been a professional observer, which is to say, I’ve always been on the sidelines. Sure, I’ve been telling people in writing where I stand on issues off and on since the early ’70s, when I was the editorial page editor of The Helmsman, the student newspaper at Memphis State. And ever since I joined The State‘s editorial board in ’94, I’ve not only written what I thought about all and sundry, but I’ve also always been clear about my views when I speak to groups in the community.  In fact, since we were SO strongly against the state lottery, and we were so committed to using any venue we could in trying (against all odds) to defeat it, I actually argued against it in some public debates in the months leading up to the referendum. My good friend Samuel Tenenbaum and I had a regular road show going — he would be “pro” and I would be “anti.” I had right on my side, but of course his side won.

But this is different. I have agreed, in writing, to be a public supporter of an issue before voters on the November ballot.

Why have I taken this stand? Well, I’ll tell ya…

In some ways, it’s an unlikely place to start being involved. If I’d tried to predict it, I would have said I’d save myself for something big, and statewide — say, helping Vincent Sheheen get elected. As y’all know, I have held for many years that THE most important electoral decision voters make every four years is choosing a governor. With our state being so dominated by the Legislature, and the Legislature by nature being extremely resistant to change, the only way our state is ever going to stop being last where we want to be first and first where we want to last is for someone elected statewide to use the bully pulpit (which is about the only tool the governor has) to exert a counterbalancing force for reform and progress. And it is especially critical that Sheheen be elected rather than the Sanford disciple he’s up against. But beyond what I write here, I’m not doing anything to help him. (Disclosure: ADCO Interactive did the new Sheheen Web site, but I was not and am not involved with that project.)

But I got involved with this instead. Here are some reasons why:

  • I believe public transit is essential for our community to grow and prosper (as J.T. McLawhorn said at the meeting, public transit is a vital part of a community’s circulatory system, and without that, “You’re dead.”), and next year the bus system — a rather poor, lame excuse for public transportation, but it’s all we’ve got — runs out of money.
  • Every other venue for keeping it going has been thoroughly explored. And I think you will notice that those opposing this referendum don’t present a viable alternative. A community group spent vast amounts of volunteer time two years ago studying all of Richland County’s transportation needs. $500,000 worth of studies were done. This was the only viable way to do it, given the straitjacket that the Legislature puts communities in when it comes to taxing and spending. Ask Columbia College President Caroline Whitson, who chaired that effort: This is the way to do it. The unpopular temporary wheel tax that’s keeping it going now is not a workable permanent solution.
  • That revenue would also pay for a number of other needed improvements to transportation infrastructure — bike and hiking trails, and road improvements — that were identified through that same wide-ranging community conversation two years back. This answers those who say “I don’t ride the bus” (as if taxes were a user fee, but let’s not go down that philosophical rathole right now). This plan has something for everyone in the county. And it’s not a wish list; there is considerable community support behind each of these projects.
  • Funding from other sources for the road projects is not any more forthcoming — from state or federal sources, or anywhere else — than is funding for the bus system. This is truly a case in which a community has come together to determine it’s needs, and identified a sensible way to pay for it without asking for a handout — a handout that, as I say, isn’t coming. This is something Richland County needs to do for itself, and this is the best way available to do it.
  • It’s a fair way to pay for this. Some may protest that I don’t live in the county, so who am I to speak out? My answer to that is that THIS is the way to get people like me — who spend almost all our waking hours in Richland County, and benefit from its roads and other services — to pay our share. I’m more than willing to do it. Richland County residents who pay property taxes should be twice as willing, even eager.
  • Like many of you, I’m concerned about putting too much stress on the sales tax. Nikki Haley and the other lawmakers who wrongheadedly supported Act 388, and adamantly refuse to repeal it, badly distorted our already fouled-up tax system. They eliminated school operations taxes on owner-occupied homes by raising the sales tax by a penny. They did this on top of the fact that they had forced local communities to turn to a local option sales tax by proscribing or restricting other revenue sources. Because of all that, this is the only option local communities have for such needs as this. And of course, it also has the virtue I mentioned above. A magnet county like Richland, drawing people from all over central South Carolina, should rely more on a sales tax than other counties.
  • This method has been used with great success in other communities across the state — Charleston, Florence and York counties have benefited greatly. For a lot of the business leaders who are lining up behind this, watching those communities improve their infrastructure and get a leg up in economic development while we continue to fall behind is a huge motivation factor in supporting this.

There are other reasons that aren’t coming to me at the moment as I type this, which I will no doubt write about in the coming weeks. In the meantime, you might want to peruse this summary of the proposal.

The folks who turned out for the kickoff Thursday were a pretty good group. As I stood in the crowd listening to the speakers, I could see from where I was standing: Ted Speth (the first speaker), Steve Benjamin, Joel & Kit Smith, Barbara Rackes, Samuel Tenenbaum, Rick Silver, Emily Brady, Col. Angelo Perri, Cathy Novinger, Bernice Scott, Jennifer Harding, Chuck Beamon, J.T. McLawhorn, Candy Waites, Paul Livingston, Greg Pearce, Lee Bussell, Sonny White and Mac Bennett.

Here’s a longer list of folks who pledged ahead of the kickoff to support the campaign. But I know it’s not complete, because my name isn’t on it.

More about this as we go along. This campaign has just begun.

Area man says he’s not Alvin Greene

5 Replies

My apologies to The Onion for using their “Area Man” gag, but since they stole it from those of us who actually used that lame, unimaginative, oddly comical construction many times without irony in the rush of getting a paper out every day, I guess I’m entitled.

Darrin Thomas

Anyway, even though this is from Rotary before last, I still wanted to share with you the story that Darrin Thomas shared with us when he did Health & Happiness Sept. 13.

Here’s the audio in case you’d like to listen to it.

Here’s a summary: First, he skilfully misdirected us by making us think this was another case of his being mistaken for Steve Benjamin. He’s had a real problem with that, and having confused white folks (at least, I assume it’s always white folks) repeatedly for that OTHER black man in a suit, we thought that was what this was about.

But it wasn’t.

It began with a trip to the supermarket, during which he noticed that an elderly woman standing near the turnip greens was staring at him with disdain — a look he hadn’t seen since he was in parochial school. He turned his attention to inspecting the produce, but when he looked up again, there she was, still staring at him “with this awful look.”

Finally, he decided to inquire. He said “Ma’am, have I done something wrong?”

She shook her head and said loudly, “You’re an embarrassment to our state!”

Flabbergasted, he said, “Pardon me?”

She repeated that he was an embarrassment to the state, and to everyone who had ever worn a military uniform.

He said, “Ma’am, I don’t understand, and I think you’ve mistaken me for someone else.” By this time, several people had gathered around to witness the exchange.

Then the old woman said, “I’m no Republican, but I hope and pray that Jim DeMint destroys you…”

He took a moment to regain his composure, then said “Ma’am, I’m not Alvin Greene.”

She replied, “Yes, you are. [This next part is hard to hear because of the laughter of Rotarians, but I think she goes on to say…] I’ve seen you on TV many times. I know who you are.”

He denied it again, and said, “I can prove it to you. I’m not Alvin Greene.”

She said, “I don’t want to hear it. Get away from me!”

He was stunned, embarrassed and frustrated. He concludes: “Unfortunately, my family won’t eat this week, because I left the entire basket, and simply walked out…” He then conducted a tutorial on “How to distinguish Darrin Thomas from Alvin Greene:”

  1. “I was never in the military.” The closest he got was when he wore a Boy Scout uniform.
  2. “My idea for economic development would never include the creation of an action figure in my likeness.”
  3. “While I did many things to procure dates while I was a student at the University of South Carolina, showing a young lady pornography was not one of them.”
  4. If he were unemployed, yet had $10,000 in the bank, “Please know I would not invest in a campaign.”
  5. “Thanks to my English teacher in high school, Darrin Thomas speaks utilizing complete sentences.”

He got a big round of applause. He deserves it, for being able to laugh at this.

Kennedy-Ayers affair holds lesson for Tea Party

11 Replies

I really hope that Nikki Haley, Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Joe Wilson and every adherent of the Tea Party reads that last post I shared with you. It contains an important lesson.

These people are fond of equating liberalism with dangerous radicalism. And they’ve pulled previously sensible Republicans along with them into this nasty habit of thought (if you can call it thought).

But the tale of how Bill Ayers honored Sirhan Sirhan for killing liberal icon Robert F. Kennedy, and how Bobby’s son, now a pillar in his community, led a board (likely chock full of liberals, although I don’t know that) to deny an honor to unrepentant terrorist Ayers because of what he did, is instructive.

It shows liberals as mainstream people who uphold fundamental standards of decency in their communities, just as real conservatives — in the traditional sense of the word; not the way Sarah Palin and her ilk use it — would do.

Dangerous radicals are beyond the pale. Sensible liberals, and conservatives, are the people who point out that fact.

Therein lies the difference. So knock it off with the demonization of people who are NOT beyond the pale.

Nikki and the “slush fund:” Belly up to the trough

31 Replies

Have you seen the latest Nikki Haley ad? As I said in a comment yesterday:

Wow. Did you see that incredibly weak, intelligence-insulting ad that Nikki released attacking Vincent?

It’s all about attacking him as a “liberal,” a “Columbia Insider” and a “trial lawyer.

So there you have it: Vincent criticizes Nikki for things that she — an actual, living, breathing woman actually living in South Carolina — has actually done. (You may have noted that the keyword here is “actual.”)

And her response is to throw some of the less imaginative canned, off-the-shelf, standard-issue GOP epithets at him — because, you know, since he’s a Democrat it must all be true, right?

How utterly pathetic. What total contempt she obviously has for the South Carolina electorate.

The only thing Nikki had to offer as a specific, relevant charge in her weak effort to paint Vincent as a tax-and-spend “liberal” was that he had voted to override the governor on the Orwellian-named “Competitive Grants Program” and Nikki had voted to sustain.

Of course, I take a back seat to no one in my disdain for the grants program. Sure, it’s not much money in the grand scheme, but it’s a textbook example of the wrong way to spend, with no regard for state priorities. The local projects the money tends to go to are sometimes worthwhile, but that money should be raised locally.

So bad on Vincent for going along with the majority on that. But Vincent’s voting with the Republican majority while Nikki voted with the minority says more about the fact that Nikki is one of Mark Sanford’s few reliable allies than it does about who is tighter with a buck.

Especially when you consider the following, which the Sheheen campaign was so thoughtful as to share today:

Nikki Haley’s Slush Fund Hypocrisy

Camden, SC – Nikki Haley’s credibility has taken another hit after she released a misleading advertisement yesterday criticizing Vincent Sheheen for supporting a “legislative slush fund,” a fund that she vigorously supported.  Haley requested over $1.5 million in legislative earmarks for her home district from the South Carolina Competitive Grants program but has campaigned boasting of her opposition to the program.

Nikki Haley has been a full-fledged participant in the program, requesting at least $1.5 million in earmarks for special projects in her district and county.  She has sponsored at least twenty-four applications for competitive grants including $90,000 for the Lexington Fun Fest.

After she ran for governor, Haley decided that she could score political points by opposing the program, claiming that she objected to state money funding her local Gilbert Peach festival.  Yet that same year, 2008, she requested at least $160,000 in other projects.

Kristin Cobb, Communications Director for Sheheen for Governor, had this to say: “Once again Nikki Haley has created an even greater level of hypocrisy with her recent attack ad against Vincent Sheheen.  Haley claims she voted against this program but apparently that was because her $1.5 million earmark requests were not approved.  She wasn’t against the program, she was just upset she didn’t get her share.”

“The more South Carolinians are learning about Nikki Haley the less they like.  If we can’t trust what she says on the campaign trail, how can we trust her to be governor,” Cobb concluded.

Here is a sample of Haley’s Earmark Requests:

West Columbia – Sewer Project $370,600
SC Parents Involved in Education $100,000
SC Office of Rural Health $100,000
West Columbia – Riverwalk Expansion $100,000
Newberry College – Nursing Program $99,000
Lexington County – Web-based Tourism $91,099
Lexington Fun Fest $90,000
Lexington County – Industrial Park $80,000
Lexington County – Clean Water Act $77,700
SC Philharmonic $69,274
Alliance for Women at Columbia College $60,000
Healthy Learners $50,000
Brookland Foundation $50,000
Outdoor Journalist Education Foundation $34,450
Killingsworth $30,000
Lexington Downtown Renovation $26,000
SC Office of Rural Health $25,000
Lexington Fun Fest $25,000
YMCA Adventure Guides Program $24,445
Girl Scout Council of the Congaree $21,520
Lexington County Museum $20,000
Lexington – Video Conferencing System $15,000
Lexington County Museum $10,000
Lexington Community Fun Day $3,500
TOTAL: $1,572,588

They also attached this PDF of supporting documents for your perusal.

That assertion about “She wasn’t against the program, she was just upset she didn’t get her share” reminds me of something. Nikki has a habit of being selectively principled — as in, principled when it serves her ambition. For instance, remember the Tweets Wesley Donehue put out a while back about Nikki’s effort to stop the Senate from passing a roll-call vote bill?

Wesley, who works for the Senate Republicans, was pretty insistent about making sure we knew how hypocritical she was on the subject:

Nikki Haley called me last year angry that the Senate filed a roll call voting bill.    about 1 hour ago  via TweetDeck
Nikki Haley told me that she didn’t want the Senate “stealing my issue.”    about 1 hour ago  via TweetDeck
Let me repeat – Nikk Haley asked me to get the Senators to pull the companion bill from the Senate.     about 1 hour ago  via TweetDeck

I haven’t heard Wesley mention this since the primary — since, that is, she has become his party’s nominee. I’m going to be with him on Pub Politics this evening, and will ask him about it…

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.

I’ll let Robert speak for me today…

2 Replies

Maybe I’ll get a chance to post something later, but so far it’s been on meeting after another (although in between, Lora from ADCO and I did manage to get lunch at Mojitos, which was awesome as always).

So for now, I’ll just give you an Ariail cartoon to enjoy and discuss…

Election shocker: The vote is actually tomorrow!

14 Replies

… if you live in Anton Gunn’s district, where Democrats are picking a nominee to go up against Sheri Few in light of Anton’s sudden decision to take a job with the federal gummint.

I got this today from Boyd Summers and the Richland County Democrats:

Let’s get ready!!!

A major decision will be made tomorrow regarding Rep. Anton Gunn’s seat in Northeast Richland and Kershaw Counties.

As many of you know, Gunn received a Presidential Appointment a few weeks ago to become the Director of Health and Human Services for the southeastern United States. Gunn was a rising force in South Carolina politics and had a proven ability to work on both sides of the aisle to get things done for his district.

The district includes the Sandhills region, the Summit, Lake Carolina, and many neighborhoods throughout Elgin and Lugoff. If you are not sure if you are in the district, check here!

The polls will be open tomorrow from 7am to 7pm.

There will be three candidates vying for the Democratic nomination. Check out this article featuring the candidates and their positions:

We encourage you to vote in this primary so that we choose a great candidate to run against Tea-Partyist Sheri Few in November.

Also, it is imperative that we get active! We must make calls, knock on doors, and host events for Vincent Sheheen, Matthew Richardson, Ashley Cooper, Rob Miller, Paige George, our House District 79 nominee, and our County Council candidates.  We are open for business and will work around your schedule so sign up to VOLUNTEER to bring progress to South Carolina. If you have any questions please call Joey Oppermann at (864) 934-7910 or Stanley Davis at (646) 322-5565.

For information on what’s happening around Richland County stay tuned to www.RichlandCountyDems.com!

I’m glad I don’t live in that Richland-Kershaw district, because I know zip about those candidates. If you DO live there, perhaps the above links will help.

Uh-oh — Sheheen has conceded Texas!

12 Replies

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

SHEHEEN CONCEDES TEXAS

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

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

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

For more information, visit:

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

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

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

Debates are more necessary than ever

42 Replies

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

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

I take keyboard in hand to answer the question:

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

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

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

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

Nikki knows this. Hence the two debates.

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

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

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 brad@bradwarthen.com. I’d like to chat with you.

Candidates owe it to us to debate, early and often

9 Replies

But which one would Nikki be?

This release from the Sheheen campaign…

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

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

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

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

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

###

… raises a question that is extremely easy to answer:

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

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

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

And other burning questions.

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

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

It’s “a great statement” all right, Senator

28 Replies

I found this photo on thestate.com, courtesy of Thomas C. Hanson. If either The State or Mr. Hanson has a problem with my running it, they should contact me at brad@bradwarthen.com. I just felt it was important to give y'all a chance to discuss it.

Glenn McConnell says the above photo is “a great statement as to how far this state has come.” It certainly is, Senator. It shows that in the past 147 years, South Carolina has advanced at least several days, perhaps even a week, past 1862. I look at this photo, and I know in my bones that in South Carolina, 1863 has finally arrived!

I’ll say one more thing. The issue to me isn’t whether re-enacting or “interpreting” history is a good or bad thing. The issue for me is how into this stuff the senator, who is arguably the most powerful politician in our state, is. He was really pumped, wasn’t he? He really does love dressing the part.

You may have other things to say.

Nikki vs. Vincent, by the ounce

24 Replies

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

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

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

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

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

An excerpt:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yeah, OK, I’ll help spread the truth

14 Replies

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

Dear Brad –

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks,

Trav

Trav Robertson
Campaign Manager
Sheheen for Governor

OK, all that is true.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fair or unfair? You be the judge

1 Reply

Y’all know I’m not overly enamored of TV “news” to begin with, so when a friend brought this to my attention, saying “Wow, very biased article…,” I sort of had a ho-hum response.

Is it simplistic? Yes. Superficial? Certainly. Irritating? Absolutely.

But biased? Well, obviously my friend was saying it was biased against John Spratt, so I get it to that extent. But almost anything that is simplistic and superficial is less likely to favor a thoughtful guy like Spratt. He’s not a bumper-sticker kind of guy. Throw in that infinitely irritating populist tinge (letting man-on-the-street interviews set the direction and tone of reporting, for instance) that is typical of TV “news,” and you have something far more likely to favor a TEA Party-style candidate than a Spratt.

So biased? Yeah, I guess. But the bias is sort of built-in, not intentional…

See what y’all think.

By the way, here’s the written report to which that kid refers on-air. An excerpt:

LAKE WYLIE, SC (WBTV) – Democratic incumbent John Spratt banned any video recording of the debate Tuesday night, but changed his mind when no media attended. However a member of a conservative group snuck a video camera into the room.

[Watch the videos on the right side of this screen]

It was the first debate for the two candidates in South Carolina’s 5th Congressional District.

Spratt and Republican Mick Mulvaney debated at the country club in Lake Wylie’s River Hills neighborhood.  The debate was sponsored by the River Hills Lions Club.

Spratt has represented the 5th District since 1982, but finds himself in the fight of his life against Mulvaney.

During the debate Mulvaney criticized Spratt, saying he’s not voting the way his district wants him to.

Mulvaney pointed out Spratt’s votes for President Obama’s health care bill and his stimulus plan.  Mulvaney says Spratt used to be more moderate but now is going along with whatever the national Democratic party wants.

“There was a time he would have stood up and said no to what’s happening in Washington,” Mulvaney said.  “Those times have changed and that’s why I think it’s time for a new congressman in Washington.”

Spratt said he always votes the way he thinks is best for the district…