Category Archives: Uncategorized

Never fear, our gov is on the job

Not sure what to make of our governor appearing on Season 5, Episode 2 of “Army Wives” last night, except to say that she certainly stays busy, writing memoirs, pestering the president about health care, appearing on TV shows, and… probably other highly relevant governing-South Carolina stuff, too, but I just can’t keep up.

No word yet (unless I just missed it) on what this appearance means in terms of the governor’s position on this actual state issue:

The show’s producers say it contributed more than $120 million to the local economy when they threatened last year to move production elsewhere if economic incentives for filmmakers were not renewed by state lawmakers.

No, wait — there’s this from Politico:

Though Biden’s “Army Wives” cameo came and went last August without controversy, Haley’s appearance is causing some buzz. As a South Carolina state rep, Haley voted against taxpayer-funded incentives for the film industry. Incentives were put into place in 2005, and since “Army Wives” began filming in the Palmetto State, the show has contributed more than $120 million to the local economy, according to producers.

Despite then-Gov. Mark Sanford’s veto, which Haley supported, South Carolina lawmakers voted in June to keep the film incentives program intact.

Still, according to Haley spokesman Rob Godfrey, the governor was happy to appear on the show. He told the AP, “The governor absolutely enjoyed the opportunity—any chance to showcase our great state and highlight military families is a reason to get excited.”

OK, so I still don’t know where she stands on the incentives — now. Perhaps that will be forthcoming…

No, hold on… it looks like The Post and Courier approached this as an actual news story, and had the following:

Haley’s Press Secretary Rob Godfrey said the governor was happy to make the appearance. She was not paid for the cameo, which was filmed in Charleston on Jan. 7 before she was sworn in as governor.

“The governor absolutely enjoyed the opportunity to appear on Army Wives — as she would any chance to showcase our great state and highlight our military families on national television,” Godfrey said in an e-mail. “The governor has said she will do whatever she can to showcase the great things going on in our state, especially those things that aren’t and shouldn’t be on the public dime.

“As is the case in any economic development situation, the governor will always look at film incentives from a cost-benefit perspective. If incentives going forward cost the state more than they bring in — as they have in the past — then she won’t support them.”

Phil Bailey, spokesman for the Senate Democratic Caucus, said Haley’s appearance on the show is an example of her “hypocrisy.”

“She votes against the economic incentive package to keep this show here in South Carolina — which is a vote against the show — but then she makes an appearance on the show,” Bailey said. “It’s obviously only an attempt to increase her own celebrity.”

Yep, that’s the Phil Bailey from Pub Politics. I mean, that’s what’s important, right — our media profiles? Oh, I saw her on TV; I think I’ll vote for her…

No word as yet on whether Phil Bailey will appear on “Army Wives,” but I’ll let you know if I hear anything.

Graham wants spy chief sacked

Just catching up on e-mail (lots of meetings today), I find this:

Graham Calls For President Obama to Replace DNI Director

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today said President Obama should replace General James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence (DNI).  In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee this morning, Clapper said the Gaddafi regime in Libya would “prevail” over Libyan rebels.  Clapper had previously called the Muslim Brotherhood a “secular” organization and was unfamiliar with a major anti-terror raid in London to foil an Al-Qaeda inspired attack.

Graham said:

“The situation in Libya remains tenuous and the Director’s comments today on Gaddafi’s ‘staying power’ are not helpful to our national security interests.  His comments will make the situation more difficult for those opposing Gaddafi.  It also undercuts our national efforts to bring about the desired result of Libya moving from dictator to democracy.

“Some of his analysis could prove to be accurate, but it should not have been made in such a public forum.  If he felt the need to say what he did, then they should have moved into closed session.

“Unfortunately, this isn’t the first questionable comment from the DNI Director.  However it should be the final straw.”

######

Hmmm. That does sound rather indiscreet. And did he really not know that other stuff? Hard to believe. Sort of reminds me of the SNL spoof in which John Belushi played a CIA station chief in Tehran who couldn’t speak Farsi, and kept telling everybody the Shah wasn’t in trouble.

Maybe the DNI should get a Twitter account and follow a few news feeds…

As for what the senator requests, Politico reports:

Carney said Graham’s reaction was a “real misinterpretation of what Director Clapper said” and that Obama has “full faith and confidence” in the intelligence adviser. Donilon said the president is “very happy with the performance of Gen. Clapper.”

Get ready to read a book, y’all — One Book

Belinda Gergel called me — and 150 or so other people — a week or two ago and asked me to be part of the effort to get Columbia to read a book together.

She called me because I’d been there before. Way back at the end of the last century, I read something about the Seattle librarian who came up with this idea to get everybody in the city to read a book together. The idea caught on, and other cities started doing thesame. I asked why not Columbia as well (or did I ask why not South Carolina? I forget, and can’t find my columns about it)? The idea appealed to my communitarianism. I’m all about reading, and books, and ideas, and when I’m reading a book I like to talk about it, and I could think of few things cooler than reading a really good book, and wanting to talk about it, and then having the satisfaction of everybody else I ran into having read it, too. Y’all are familiar with my frustration that it’s hard to find anyone other than Mike Fitts who is as into the Aubrey/Maturin universe as I am — Tolkien fanatics have their support groups, but what about those of us who want to read O’Brian over and over? Confession here — I’m now progressing (if one can call such “Groundhog Day” repetition progress) through my fifth reading of Desolation Island. Anyone want to talk about the charms of Mrs. Wogan, or the horror of seeing the Waakzaamheid go down with all hands in the Roaring Forties? Anyone? Anyone? That’s what I thought.

But I digress, as usual.

Claudia Brinson and I, with the help of some nice folks over at the SC Arts Commission, then launched an effort to get everyone to read Fahrenheit 451. My choice, of course. And it was moderately successful — I spoke to some book clubs that joined in the effort. Then we were going to do it again, but we couldn’t agree on a book (the committee wanted to go in one direction, I wanted to go in another), and it just sort of petered out.

But now Belinda, and the Richland County Public Library, are launching the effort on a grander scale. The above picture is from a reception at the library Thursday night, where Belinda addressed the core group she had assembled so she could send us out as book missionaries. We got buttons to wear and everything (I still have a bag full of buttons with the numbers “451” in flames, which I ran across when I was cleaning out my office at The State.) The reception was nice, although I didn’t see any beer. Just wine. Belinda urged us to enjoy ourselves but to be in by 2 a.m. That got a good laugh, as everyone imagined this bookish crowd running riot in the streets into the wee hours.

Here’s some info Belinda sent out after the reception:

What is One Book, One Columbia?

The City of Columbia and Richland County Public Library (RCPL) have joined forces to launch their first citywide reading adventure, One Book, One Columbia, and all residents of Columbia and Richland County are invited to read the book between April 1 and May 15 then share their experiences with friends and neighbors. Numerous discussions and programs centered around the book will take place during the reading period.

What book has been selected?

The first selection for this annual occurrence is Having Our Say: The Delany Sisters’ First 100 Years by AmyHill Hearth, Elizabeth Delany and Sarah Delany. This best-selling book tells the story of two remarkable sisters, career trailblazers, who charted their own path in the world, guided by the strength they gained from faith and family. The incredible stories of “Queen Bess” and “Sweet Sadie,” as they were known to their family, were captured by one-time Columbia resident and author Amy Hill Hearth. Upon its publication in 1993, The New York Times said of Having Our Say: “The Delany sisters were taught to participate in history, not just witness it, and they have the wit to shape their history with style… they make each memory vivid…they are literature’s living kin.”

How can I participate?

Read the book

The book is available at RCPL locations, or is available for purchase at Barnes and Noble and other retailers.

Talk to your family, friends, and neighbors about the book

Get your friends and family in on the act! An important aspect of the One Book experience is talking about what you read with others. Be on the lookout for residents wearing a One Book, One Columbia button around town – these Reading Advocates will definitely be ready to talk Having Our Say!

Participate in a One Book, One Columbia book club or event

RCPL will have special One Book, One Columbia book club meetings and events throughout April and early May at their branches. Other community organizations are getting creative with their plans: discussions, art, historic tours, and activities for kids are just a few of the ways the community has embraced the One Book, One Columbia effort. Visit www.myrcpl.com/onebook for full details.

Get connected

Visit the One Book, One Columbia page on Facebook and “like” to get all of the latest news.

I invite all of y’all to get involved, especially if you’re in a book club or something.

Now, before you say, “But that book doesn’t interest me,” allow me to be brutally honest, or perversely contrarian, or whatever: I wouldn’t have picked this book, either. It’s the kind that most modern book-clubby people would pick. It’s definitely the kind Belinda would pick — hey, it’s the kind of book Belinda would write. But it’s not exactly the first thing I’d grab off the shelf.

How should I put this? There’s a cultural divide here, perhaps effectively symbolized by the fact that there was wine at the reception, but no beer. I’m not saying that to be critical, far from it. I’m just… well, I’ll get to my point in a minute. I’m just saying, different strokes and all that.

This is related to the trouble we had coming up with a second book back when I tried to start a movement like this. I wanted to read another book like the Bradbury one. I wanted something else from the modern canon, the kinds of books that were required reading when I was in high school: 1984, The Sun Also Rises, Brave New World, Crime and Punishment if we wanted to get heavy, Catch-22, Steppenwolf, Stranger in a Strange Land, or if we wanted to be more modern, High Fidelity. I definitely would have been up for Huck Finn. The rest of the committee wanted … something by a contemporary author, someone one could invite to come speak and participate, preferably Southern, probably a woman. Hey, I was willing to read a book by a woman — but the committee rejected To Kill a Mockingbird, probably because they thought it too obvious or trite or whatever.

Thing is, there aren’t many books by living authors that interest me enough to want to read them with a group and discuss them. And I’ve also got this thing of wanting to read books I like over and over. (How about that Mrs. Wogan, huh? Anyone?) But there’s also the problem that I’m not that interested in the kinds of books that book clubs read. The last time I knew of a book club reading a book I wanted to read (aside from the Bradbury book, and I instigated that), it was James Fallows’ Breaking The News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy, which I had reviewed in the paper and a Heathwood book club asked me to address them about. That was 1996. Mostly, book clubs want to read, well, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother or some such.

This book that Columbia is going to read isn’t exactly that, but it isn’t exactly the sort of thing I usually read, either. It’s… social history, judging it by its cover. I’m an old-school Great Men Fighting Wars kind of history buff, and that’s what I tend to read when I read nonfiction.

Which is why — and this is where I come to my point (remember, I promised I would) — it’s probably a good idea for me to read this book. And why you probably should, too. Broaden our horizons.

Also, I’ve promised I would. I’ve been wearing the button and everything. I’d best go get a copy. I’ll keep you posted — and we can discuss it. Which will be cool.

The kind of biographies I USUALLY read...

There should not BE public-employee unions

At Rotary today, I had grabbed my food (kielbasa today, with peppers and onions, which I love) and was looking for a seat and Jack Van Loan waved me over to his table. He wanted to get my thoughts on this Wisconsin situation.

I sort of had to disappoint him. I explained about my person idiosyncrasy, about how little stock I put in Other People’s Politics (Down With O.P.P., indeed), which in this national-media saturation era (in which partisans across the country see every local controversy as another battle in the titanic war between Good and Evil — with their end of the spectrum being good, of course), we hear WAY too much about. Except that I hear less than others, because I block it out.

That is, I block out all but what I can’t help picking up through osmosis. And on this, the only thing I had picked up was that it had to do with public employee unions.

So all I could offer Jack was this:

I don’t think there should be public-employee unions. So I guess, on this issue, that sort of puts me on the side of that Walker guy. But that’s about all I know.

To me, working for the government — local, state or federal — is PUBLIC SERVICE, and you should have no loyalties except to the public. You know, like those “permanent government” civil servants in Britain, who serve as well as they can the elected officials of whichever party happens to hold power. Or, come to think of it, every employee below the political appointments in this country.

Private sector unions are one thing. I’m not crazy about them, and never wanted to belong to one. I never wanted a third party between me and my employer. (And yep, I still feel that way after being laid off — so much for those of you who think political positions inevitably arise from personal experience. Although, of course, as a vice president of the company I wouldn’t have been in the bargaining unit anyway.)

But at least in the private sector, we’re talking about people being out for themselves and trying to gain some leg up in a disproportionate power arrangement.

With public service, there should be no being out for yourself and whatever advantage that you, or people like you, can gain. It should be about the public service. It shouldn’t be about serving oneself, or a political party, or a union. It should be about serving your community, state or nation — which means serving the people, who ARE the community, state or nation, properly understood.

And to me, unionization gets in the way of that, big-time. It’s kind of an alien concept to me, as a South Carolinian. I was really taken aback when I ran across the historical plaque pictured below in Pennsylvania. Wow. A state that celebrates that. It surprised me. (I was about to make the categorical statement that we don’t HAVE public employee unions in SC, but it seems like I ran into some exceptions to that recently. I just can’t remember where. It was someplace really obvious… Dang it, I’m ALMOST sure there are no such unions here, but…)

And that’s all I’ve got to say about that. (Unless y’all provoke me into saying more.)

They may be right proud of public-sector unions in Pennsylvania, where I shot this, but we don't hold with 'em down heah.

They may be right proud of public-sector unions in Pennsylvania, where I shot this, but we don’t hold with ’em down heah.

Mubarak Steps Down; Crowd Goes Wild (this is what history looks like)

Well, the world just changed.

Hey, I told you it would yesterday. Then I told you never mind, it wasn’t changing quite yet.

And now this

CAIRO — President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt resigned his post and turned over all power to the military on Friday, ending his nearly 30 years of autocratic rule and bowing to a historic popular uprising that has transformed politics in Egypt and around the Arab world.

The streets of Cairo exploded in shouts of “God is Great” moments after Mr. Mubarak’s vice president and longtime intelligence chief, Omar Suleiman, announced during evening prayers that Mr. Mubarak had passed all authority to a council of military leaders.

“Taking into consideration the difficult circumstances the country is going through, President Mohammed Hosni Mubarak has decided to leave the post of president of the republic and has tasked the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to manage the state’s affairs,” Mr. Suleiman, grave and ashen, said in a brief televised statement.

Even before he had finished speaking, protesters began hugging and cheering, shouting “Egypt is free!” and “You’re an Egyptian, lift your head.”

“He’s finally off our throats,” said one protester, Muhammad Insheemy. “Soon, we will bring someone good.”…

Here are other versions of the story: BBC, WSJ, Washington Post, The Guardian, NPR, Jerusalem Post, Al Jazeera (English version, that is) and more

There’s a bunch more I could say, and probably should say, but I’ll go ahead and get this up so y’all can discuss it, and maybe I’ll add my thoughts within the comments thread.

Just call me Forrest Gump

Well, I enjoyed this… I asked y’all to watch me on WACH and tell me how it went, and I ended up having the following text exchange with Lora Prill of ADCO:

LORA: Did you see wach?

ME: Nope. Still at the office.

LORA: They quoted you in the VoiceOver.

LORA: But they didn’t show you saying it, drinking a cup of coffee. An ADCO cup turned the wrong way?

LORA: I mean they just showed you drinking a cup of coffee.

LORA: Not talking. It was bizarre.

LORA: Although they showed your blog and they called you one of s.c.’s most respected journalists.

ME: Sounds kinda Zen…

Then, I was about to get back to finishing up some stuff so I could go home, when the Blackberry rang, and it was Lora, and she was laughing. “They just showed you again!” she cried. Only this was during the NEXT story, about Ken Ard getting fined. Apparently they showed a clip from the lieutenant governor debate I moderated back during the fall, and there I was standing behind Ard.

So the pattern is established: Whenever news — any kind of news — is reported, I will be in the picture, irrelevantly. Like Forrest Gump.

I’ll bet you’re thinking what I’m thinking: How can I monetize this?

Lindsey, fill yer hands; I’m a-callin’ you out

Did you get the “True Grit” reference? I do try to be topical (although I have no idea whether that line is in the remake)…

Back on this post, Doug Ross said, “So will Brad call out Lindsey for wasting resources?”

That kind of stuff makes me tired. You know why bloggers and sure-enough journalists avoid ever saying anything nice about anybody in public life? Because they never hear the end of it. They’re constantly getting this Well I hope now you see what a jerk your buddy is, and see the error of your ways stuff.

Let’s be clear. There is no one I respect in the U.S. Senate more than Lindsey Graham, so stuff that in your pipe and smoke it, you cynics. There are good men in public life, and Graham is highly intelligent, principled and hard-working. He has proved this time and time again. He is good for South Carolina, and good for the country. I am proud that he is our senior senator. Now that John Spratt is gone, I think Lindsey is clearly the best member of the SC congressional delegation.

But you know what? Sometimes, even on an important issue, he’s dead wrong. That happens. It happens with the best of men. (Women, too, probably, but far be it from me as a gentleman to reflect negatively upon the ladies.) And there’s one that he and two of my other favorites in the Senate, John McCain and Joe Lieberman, and that’s the one Doug and I were talking about — national health care policy.

He’s really, really wrong on it. I mean, Jim DeMint just wants it to be Obama’s Waterloo, but I get the feeling that Lindsey Graham really means it. He really wants to gut Obamacare. And he doesn’t just want to vote on a purely symbolic “repeal;” he want to hang it, draw it and quarter it, slice and dice it, by passing legislation that deprives it of its central elements, the only things that give it any chance of having a good effect on the health care crisis in this country.

Here’s the release he put out today:

Barrasso, Graham Introduce Legislation Allowing States to ‘Opt-Out’ of Obamacare

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) today introduced S.244, The State Health Care Choice Act, to repeal and replace Obamacare by allowing states to ‘Opt-Out’ of its major provisions.  Under the legislation, states could choose to ‘Opt-Out’ of:

  • Individual mandate – the requirement to buy government-approved health insurance coupled with a financial penalty for not doing so.
  • Employer mandate – the requirement for businesses to provide government-approved health insurance coupled with financial penalties for not doing so.
  • Medicaid mandate – the forced expansion of state Medicaid programs.
  • Benefit mandates – defines what qualifies as a health plan as well as new federal requirements for regulating health insurance.

“As a doctor in Wyoming, I witnessed regularly how Washington simply didn’t understand the needs of the people of our state,” said Barrasso.  “After Obamacare, Washington is more out of touch than ever.  Instead of requiring states to follow Obamacare’s one-size-fits-all health care policy, our bill lets states decide what works best for them.  We will fight to repeal the President’s bad health spending law and provide states with flexibility, freedom and choice.”
“Our legislation opens up a third front in the fight against Obama health care,” said Graham, noting the other ‘fronts’ include legal challenges moving through the courts and the House-passed repeal.  “Our bill takes the fight out of Washington and puts it back in the states.  I would hope every Senator, regardless of party, would give the people of their home state a chance to be heard.  I’m confident that if given the chance, a large number of states would opt-out of the provisions regarding the individual mandate, employer mandate, and expansion of Medicaid.  As more states opt-out, it will have the effect of repealing and replacing Obamacare.”

“Medicaid expansion under Obama health care will be devastating to many states, including South Carolina,” continued Graham.  “We are already facing a severe budget shortfall this year.  The future expansion of Medicaid – which adds an additional one billion dollars of state matching funding requirements and will result in nearly 30 percent of South Carolinians being eligible for Medicaid – only adds to our budget problems.  This combination of Medicaid expansion and increased state funding makes it virtually impossible for South Carolina to pull out of her economic woes.”

The Senators noted the Obama Administration has already issued 733 waivers to businesses allowing them to continue offering insurance to their employees and questioned why states should not have the same ability to obtain relief.

#####

To read the text of the bill, click here.

Note that this masquerades as a substitute for Obama care — not mere repeal, but replacement. What a mockery. It is most certainly nothing of the kind.

The absolute worst thing you could do to last year’s health-care bill — which is deeply flawed, but would at least take a step or two in the direction of real reform — would be to let anyone opt out of it, much less entire states.

Either we’re all in it, or it will not work. It may not work anyway. I still firmly believe that simple, straightforward single-payer is the way to go. But hey, critics of Obamacare say it’s a back-door way to get us there, and maybe they’re right. One thing I know for sure is that there isn’t a plan in the wings to replace it. I mean, if this is the best that a smart guy like Lindsey Graham can come up with, we’d better cling to Obamacare as though it were our last chance to avoid drowning.

And this fantasy that states can in any way affect this mega-economic hole that we are in — or that they would (especially if they are South Carolina). Again, either we come up with a national solution and we’re all in it — a risk pool of 300-plus million people — or there’s not much use talking, because you really don’t get the problem. Sen. Barrasso says Washington doesn’t get it. He may be right; I can certainly point to one guy in Washington who doesn’t get it. No, make that two. (And for that matter, the Dems don’t either, or they’d have gone for single-payer. So I guess he’s right; it’s a majority.)

This is just sad. So sad, that I marvel at it.

I’m going to issue another invitation to Sen. Graham to join me on “The Brad Show” and explain this. He always has good explanations for what he does, and I’d love to hear this one.

In the meantime, satisfy yourselves with this video of him and Barrasso talking about this abomination…

Here’s a fun high-res photo to play with

The other night when I was looking for the obligatory photo of Joe Wilson yelling “you lie,” I ran across some conspiracy-oriented speculation about how it came about that someone had a camera focused on Joe, of all people, at that moment.

One site debunked the “It was planned, so they were ready to get a picture” school of thought by speculating that what it was was a blowup of a super-high-res digital photo of the event.

Well, I don’t know whether that version is correct or not. But I DO know that the site he referred me to, giving an example of what he was talking about, was VERY cool.

It had an interactive super-high-res image of the Obama inauguration, which you could zoom in and out on at will. It’s fun; you should go try it. It’s like “Where’s Waldo” (did you know that in England, it’s “Where’s Wally?” I saw that in a bookstore in Charing Cross Road). You can zoom in on the pres himself, or on the people way in the back across the reflecting pool.

I did stuff like that, and thought you might, too.

Sorry I couldn’t put the actual image here — as an embed or something — but I couldn’t figure out how. But it’s worth going there to see for yourself.

Everybody looks at me and sees Jethro

Here I come, y'all -- watch out! I'm fixin' to PILLAGE ya!

When I first heard, years ago, of the concept of “jumping the shark,” I immediately thought of that stretch of several episodes of “The Beverly Hillbillies” in which the show’s writers, dissatisfied with the absurdity of the show’s original premise, took the Clampetts to England. As in Merrie Olde. As in Jethro dressing up as a knight, riding over to the next castle and threatening to bring back his rabble and pillage the neighboring lord.

A synopsis of one of those shows:

In the third episode of a five-part story arc, the Clampetts have returned to their castle in England. Hoping to gain an audience with Queen Elizabeth, the hillbillies are laboring under the misapprehension that Elizabeth I is still on the throne. To keep the Clampetts happy, banker Drysdale orders his secretary, Jane Hathaway, to pose as the 16th century monarch. Meanwhile, Jethro gears up for a jousting tournament with a neighboring landowner. Filmed on-location in England, “War of the Roses” first aired on October 9, 1968…

And here’s video.

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about those shows a good deal lately because it seems to me that everyone who has, unlike me, been to the U.K. has been offering me advice, trying to prepare me for what it will actually be like when I’m there next week.

They’re trying to manage my expectations as a lifelong Anglophile who’s never actually been there.

My daughter tells me it’s NOT like Patrick O’Brien or Jane Austen.

While we were ringing the bell for Salvation Army in front of Green’s last week, Kathryn Fenner explained, like a friend carefully breaking bad news, that certain parts of London were more “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels” than Merchant Ivory. Or even Merchant and Gervais.

Basically, it’s like everybody’s looking at me and thinking, “Jethro.”

I think they think I’m going to be shocked to find Pakistanis walking the streets or something, instead of everyone looking like Andy Capp. Or they think I’ll go into a curry shop and get upset when they won’t serve me fish and chips. Or confuse some poor fellow (preferably, one who looks like Andy Capp) by offering him “a half a crown, my good man” to carry the luggage.

I wouldn’t be surprised if, were I to tune in a production of “A Christmas Carol” on the tube over the next week, it would be preceded by a disclaimer:

“ATTENTION, Brad Warthen!

When you go to England, it won’t really be anything like this!”

I mean, what do they take me for? For that matter, I liked “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.” (In fact, I prefer it rather markedly to Merchant Ivory.) But you know what? I’ll bet it won’t be anything like that, either! It will be… the way it is. A real place. With characteristics I couldn’t possibly anticipate, because real life is too complex and subtle. Except, of course, when I take the wife to tea at Fortnum’s or some such.

Give me some credit, people…

I know, I know! It'll be just like THIS...

Is this weather amazing, or what?

To elaborate on something I Tweeted last evening:

So yesterday morning it was 16 degrees, and now it’s 61 (according to my car)? What is this, the End Times or something?

Then, just a few minutes ago, I opened the window to my office. Set aside the miracle that for the first time in my adult life I actually work in a building where you CAN open a window — I had never before experienced that blessed freedom — but what about this weather?

It’s weird…

Spurrier: “It’s the first time we’ve ever had a game like this.” No kidding…

Wow.

A little while ago, feeling like a wise guy, I Tweeted:

Hmmm… 35-0… I don’t want to get carried away with optimism or anything, but it looks like the Gamecocks might win this one… #adco

But mere moments later, the half arrives, and… it’s 56-7.

Fifty-six to seven. At the half.

I find myself wondering — if the second half is like the first… does the scoreboard go that high?

On his way off the field at the half, Steve Spurrier said, “It’s the first time we’ve ever had a game like this.”

Yup.

Wow.

Strom is probably smiling, and so am I

I don’t know Lisa Murkowski from Adam… OK, I could probably tell her from Adam, so let’s say Eve. As y’all know, I don’t put much stock in people who represent other states.

But I’ve got to think that somewhere Strom Thurmond is smiling, since she is the first person elected to the Senate on a write-in since he did it back when I was a baby. He would probably be particularly please that “a gal” did it, because he liked gals. Never mind that his way of congratulating her would probably have been to pat her on the bottom.

It pleases me as well because, while I know nothing about this woman or her positions, it’s another blow to the hegemony of the two parties. Yeah, I know it’s more widely seen as a blow to Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, yadda-yadda, but the main thing to me is that it’s a victory for the UnParty. Just like Joe Lieberman’s big win back in 2006. Yeah, we had a setback with Crist down in Florida, but you can’t win ’em all.

The reticence of heroes, and the nearest political equivalent

If any man aspires to any office, he is sure never to compass it…

— Utopia, St. Thomas More

I was reading something the other day about heroes, and it got me to thinking about politicians. Odd juxtaposition, I realize, but bear with me…

There was a piece in The Wall Street Journal earlier this week about the first soldier since Vietnam to live to receive the Medal of Honor, Staff Sgt. Salvatore Giunta. It was the first thing I read about him; the column ran the day before the president presented the medal. And the columnist touched upon a common phenomenon we see with REAL heroes, as opposed to those who boast and brag of their exploits:

Not that he’s ready to be called a hero. “I’m not at peace with that at all,” he said on “60 Minutes” Sunday night. “And coming and talking about it and people wanting to shake my hand because of it, it hurts me because it’s not what I want. And to be with so many people doing so much stuff and then to be singled out . . .”

Sgt. Giunta’s words, of course, remind us that he does not need this ceremony. The ceremony is for the rest of us. It reminds us of the sacrifices made so we can sleep easy at night—and of the kind of fighting man our society has produced…

I know of little of war heroism beyond what I’ve read in books, but it’s interesting how often a true heroes’ story features his reluctance, even pain, at being singled out for praise and honor. He did what he did, and he’d do it again. But he really, really doesn’t want civilians who weren’t there making a fuss over him. Part of this is that he didn’t do it for THEM; he did it for his buddies who were there. But part of is a special kind of grace and nobility that few of us know. He didn’t feel heroic when he was doing it, and the memory doesn’t evoke good feelings of any kind. He was just, if you’ll excuse my language, dealing with the shit as well as he could.

He didn’t want the medal; he wanted his friends back.

And this reminds me of another sort of person that our society singles out for special recognition: political officeholders. And I think about how the very best candidate for any position would be a fully qualified person who would have the attitude toward service of a hero — someone who would be conscientious in the job, and do it well, but who wouldn’t want it.

Trouble is, we seldom get an opportunity to choose people like that. Most candidates who have any kind of chance are people who really, REALLY want the job, to an off-putting degree. Thomas More’s notion of people who seek offices being barred from holding them — or at least that’s the way I read Utopia — is indeed the stuff of fantasy.

Once, it was fashionable for candidates for high office to at least let on that they didn’t want it. It was unseemly to pursue overtly the office of, say, president of the United States. I seem to recall from my history that we were well into the latter part of the 19th century before presidential candidates personally went about asking people to vote for them. I wish we could return to such times, but we never will. Voters have grown accustomed to being begged to vote for candidates, and too few of us will even consider a candidate who doesn’t beg and plead and curry and pander harder than the others.

But you know what? On a certain level, Vincent Sheheen was that self-effacing, unassuming, almost reluctant sort of candidate — an accomplished, qualified, able individual who projected an air of being WILLING to serve as governor… but it wouldn’t be the end of the world to him if he lost. If you wanted him in the job, fine, he’d do his best. But if not… well, one got the impression that he was happy to go back to being the senator and small town lawyer and family man that he is.

That impression — a very subjective, hard-to-put-your-finger-on kind of thing, to the point that I never really spelled it out out loud — sort of bugged me during the campaign. I kept wanting him to run HARDER. To get the proverbial fire in the belly.

But in the end, I’d prefer to be governed by the kind of guy who ran the kind of campaign that Vincent did. Which is why I didn’t write a bunch of posts saying, “Run HARDER, Vincent!”

Trouble is, how does a guy like that ever get elected? Of course, he DID come close, so that’s something… Maybe there’s hope…

Yeah, this may seem far afield from the Medal of Honor winner. But my mind wanders like this…

Another Sheheen plus: He digs irony

Catching up on my e-mail, I just got to this one from this morning:

SHEHEEN CAMPAIGN WELCOMES FATHER OF MANDATED HEALTHCARE TO SC

Camden, SC—Today, the Sheheen for governor campaign welcomes former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney to South Carolina, where he is campaigning with Nikki Haley.  Romney, who has contributed over $60,000 to Haley’s campaign, is “the intellectual father of national health reform” after he enacted “Romneycare” in Massachusetts.

If any one person in the world deserves credit for where we are now [with the passage of the new federal law], it’s Mitt Romney. He designed the structure of the federal bill.” –Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2010.

In 2006, then-governor Mitt Romney signed a sweeping health-insurance overhaul in Massachusetts into law. It relied on subsidies, exchanges, and mandates to extend coverage to the uninsured.” –Newsweek, April 19, 2010.

The Massachusetts law, which was championed by former GOP Governor Mitt Romney, imposed an individual mandate, requiring nearly all residents to buy health insurance or else pay a penalty,” –Wall Street Journal, July 11, 2009.

As President Obama himself has pointed out, Romney is the guy who created the prototype for Obamacare,” –David Boaz, vice president of the libertarian Cato Institute.

Sheheen for Governor Communications Director Kristin Cobb had this to say:  “Nikki Haley has spent months misleading the voters on Vincent Sheheen’s position on mandated healthcare, but brings in the father of mandated healthcare to campaign with her.  She claims to be against healthcare mandates but I guess $60,000 will make her ignore the facts.

Fortunately, South Carolinians are not ignoring her continued hypocrisy, her dishonesty, and her attempt to purchase the governor’s office with Washington special interest money,” she concluded.

Mitt Romney video: “I like mandates.”
###

If GOP leaders don’t have the guts to speak up now, they deserve to lose their positions

I’ve written here before about how such GOP legislative leaders as Speaker Bobby Harrell keep putting out the word, sotto voce, that the things that Nikki Haley and her allies say about them are untrue.

But he and the other top elected officials who know what a mistake it would be for South Carolina to elect Rep. Haley won’t break ranks and stand up and oppose her openly. They know that the things Cyndi Mosteller’s group says are true. But they just won’t take the risk.

As a result, they are not likely to hold their leadership positions for long.

If she wins on Tuesday, it will be like a shot of adrenalin straight into the heart of the Tea Party movement to overthrow the real conservatives in the Legislature:

Conservative activists are stepping up their efforts to oust legislative leadership, launching a petition drive to replace the House speaker and change Senate rules for seniority-based chairmen.

The effort raises questions about where Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley’s allegiances lie — with the insurgents with whom she is politically aligned or with legislative leadership with whom she has pledged to work?

The focus of the conservative activists is House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, Senate Finance Chairman Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence, and the State Budget and Control Board, a five-member financial panel that approves contracts, state property sales and bonds, among other decisions. Leading the effort are the Campaign for Liberty and other Tea Party-minded groups looking to reduce legislative influence, who are collecting voter signatures to ask lawmakers to replace Harrell and change Senate rules…

And you know what? If they don’t have the guts to speak up and oppose her now — when it might make a difference, when it might move some rank and file Republicans who are on the fence to vote for Sheheen or stay home — then they don’t deserve to stay in power.

This is a situation that calls for boldness. And while you could find good things to say about each of these leaders, they are not bold men.

So it would serve them right to lose power in a state that needs bold reform. Trouble is, the rest of us would have to suffer with them.

Join me at the lieutenant gov debate

Well, I’ve set the DVR for the second debate between Nikki Haley and Vincent Sheheen, as I have a conflict.

I’ll be moderating the debate between the lieutenant governor candidates at 7:30 p.m., as reported by The State:

AARP is holding a candidate forum tonight for the candidates for lieutenant governor tonight.

Republican Ken Ard of Florence and Democrat Ashley Cooper of Charleston will appear at the Brookland Baptist Conference Center in West Columbia to discuss senior related issues.

The state’s lieutenant governor runs the S.C. Office on Aging.

The event starts at 7:30 p.m.

Brad Warthen, former State newspaper editorial page editor, will moderate the event.

AARP’s Create the Good effort will collect non-perishable food items for local food pantries.

If y’all want to comment on the gov debate while I’m gone, go ahead and start here. I’ll watch it later and respond to your comments.

Meanwhile, if you’re so inclined, there’s just time to make it to the AARP debate. Perhaps I’ll see you there.

Who knew white guys were so dumb?

How do y’all like the recent header photo that was on my main page (until I replaced it with the Fair one)? I call it “Kathryn and the White Guys.”

The “Kathryn” is our own Kathryn Fenner, and the White Guys are several who were sitting with Vincent Sheheen at Rotary last week, including Crawford Clarkson, John Lumpkin, Jim Smith and Rep. James Smith (the latter two being father and son). They are all listening to Sheheen’s speech last week.

But apparently these are not typical White Guys, although I would have sworn they were.

No, the typical White Guy actually continues to support Nikki Haley, against all reason and evidence that indicates she is not, on any level thus far excavated, what she says she is. According to The State, anyway:

A new poll by Winthrop University shows Haley leading by nine percentage points, 46 percent to 37 percent.

To win, Sheheen will have to make up the ground among white men who, roughly speaking, prefer Haley by a 3-to-1 margin, according to the poll of likely voters.

Sheheen has attempted to close that gap by likening Haley to Gov. Mark Sanford and touting his endorsement from the state Chamber of Commerce.

Is it working?

Not really, say white men interviewed by The State.

What are they thinking? Or are they just not thinking. Discuss.

Meanwhile, I’m on the way to Rotary again, where our speaker will be … Nikki Haley.

By popular demand, another TIP missive

I’m way behind on e-mail — yesterday was a real bear, and I’m trying to catch up on everything today — and I had missed this message (it came in yesterday) until someone asked me about it on Facebook:

TIP calls for a Full Airing of the Truth

COLUMBIA– This afternoon Conservatives for Truth in Politics announced their call for the chair of the South Carolina Republican Party, Karen Floyd, to give a full detailed explanation of her role and other party officials’ role, in authorizing convicted felon, Jim Hirni, be allowed to raise money for the republican party.  The call comes following a State newspaper report of a scandal in which the SCGOP was found to be partnering with a convicted felon and former deputy to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.  This revelation, along with the public admission that a SCGOP consultant employed Mr. Hirni and received $34,000 from the party casts serious doubt on the judgment of Ms. Floyd and we believe fellow conservatives and republicans deserve the truth of how this was allowed.

“It is absolutely essential to our democracy that voters are able to trust their leadership,” said Cyndi Mosteller, Co-Chair and former 1st Vice Chairman of the SC Republican Party.  “Yet it appears until a more forthright explanation is given, that the SCGOP consciously decided to embrace the corrupt politics that have defined Washington, D.C. for a generation.  Karen Floyd should address this issue immediately, and our party should take the necessary steps to disassociate itself from Mr. Hirni.”

“Dr. Woodard and I took the podium last week to announce the formation of Truth In Politics because we were concerned about many questions that have arisen in the media concerning our nominee.  We are just trying to find answers to some very serious questions.  Ms. Floyd and other party leaders quickly denounced us.  This is the same person that objected to us standing up for our convictions and try to do what we feel is right–yet appears to think its perfectly fine to authorize a Washington DC convicted felon to raise money for the republican party,” said Mosteller.

In addition to asking for Ms. Floyd to explain to the people of South Carolina, TIP also asks that Ms. Haley’s campaign manager, Tim Person, make a detailed public statement on whether Mr. Hirni has worked with him on the Haley campaign since it was reported the two worked together in the past.  “This is not the same Republican Party that I got involved in 20 years ago.  It makes me recall the famous quote from John Dalberg-Acton in the 19th century, ‘power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.’  I hope the leadership of the party will move swiftly so we can put this behind us immediately,” said Dave Woodard.

###

So there you have it.

Virtual Front Page, Tuesday, September 21, 2010

I’m running late, but here’s your briefing for this evening:

  1. Move to End ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Stalls in Senate (NYT) — Another slow news day. This story sounded more definite in other versions, but the NYT just said “stalls.” They’re probably right. By the way, I read an interesting column on the subject in the WSJ this morning. Evidently, GOP senators didn’t read the piece. Or else they just couldn’t handle Reid’s unrelated shenanigans…
  2. Iranian President Defends Record (NYT) — I like the part in the story where it says Ahmadinejad rejected “the idea that Tehran deserves anything less than a gold star for its nuclear inspection record…” That Mahmoud is a card.
  3. Twitter scrambles to block worms (BBC) — This kinda freaked me out this morning. Fortunately, I was too busy to Tweet anyway, except on Ubertwitter, which was safe. I think.
  4. S.C. unemployment rose to 11% in August (CRBR) — Yet another thing voters should THINK about…
  5. Lawrence Summers to leave economic council, return to Harvard (WashPost) — Wow. He must REALLY have not liked working for Obama to go back there after they practically rode him off-campus on a rail.
  6. Gamecock great Kenny McKinley found dead (The State) — I was sadly not familiar with the young man, and this is sort of old now (having been in the paper this morning) but judging by the reaction I’ve seen all day, this tragedy is definitely still worth the front.

New Sheheen ad, appropriately called “THINK”

Picking up on the theme that I was sorta hitting on back on the anniversary of D-Day (“Don’t vote with your emotions, people. THINK!“), the Sheheen campaign has released an ad entitled “THINK,” urging voters to do just that with regard to Nikki Haley.

My overall impression is that the ad is too soft, too diffident, too uncertain. It concludes with average-voter types saying “Makes me think… Nikki Haley isn’t who she says she is.”

Well, duh. Of course she isn’t.

I realize Vincent’s campaign is trying not to be shrill. I realize it’s trying to take voters who may NOT have been, well, thinking, or even paying attention, by the hand and walking them oh so gently toward an inescapable conclusion.

Back when I urged voters to THINK (as opposed to going all touchy-feely over the chance to elect the first woman as governor) before doing what they were bound and determined to do in the GOP primary, we didn’t know what we know now about her dismal record as a taxpayer and as an accountant. Now that we do know these things, I’m more in the mood to grab and roughly shake back and forth (figuratively, of course) any voter who would even consider still voting for her. But that’s me. Vincent’s taking the kinder, gentler approach, which is more his style. In fact, it’s the South Carolina way. Shows the boy was brought up right in Camden. (I’m a South Carolinian, too, but I suppose growing up in Florida, Virginia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Ecuador and gasp! New Jersey, not to mention those years I worked in the newspaper biz in Tennessee and Kansas, coarsened me. I’m more direct.)

So good for him, I guess. Whatever gets the job done. IF this gets the job done.

FYI, here’s the release that goes with the video:

Brad,

If the last eight years have taught us anything, it is that we cannot afford to elect anyone else to high office that lacks two basic qualifications: integrity and competence.

Representative Haley claims she should be elected governor because she’s a champion of transparency and because she’s an accountant.  But, she is not credible on either.

Not once in the last five years has Representative Haley paid her personal income taxes on time.  Twice it took her over a year to even file her tax returns.  Representative Haley boasts about keeping the books at her family business, but twice it failed to pay corporate income taxes and also kept its employees’ money, rather than forwarding it as employees’ withholding tax.  Now we learn that in 2008, she was also penalized for failing to pay her property taxes.

She has been forced to pay thousands of dollars in fines and penalties because she has consistently violated the law.  These are not insignificant amounts and these are not isolated oversights.  This is a troubling pattern of behavior.  Representative Haley has consistently refused to meet her obligations and appears unable to exercise the basic standards of her profession.

I would expect someone with an accounting degree to be competent enough to pay her taxes.  I would expect someone running for governor to have the courage to accept responsibility for her mistakes.  But like her mentor Mark Sanford, Representative Haley believes the rules should not apply to her.  Mark Sanford advocated saving state government money but liked to take personal trips with tax dollars.  Representative Haley argues for government accountability but makes excuses when her own actions are called into question.

Representative Haley couldn’t get a job at the Department of Revenue with her resume.  Yet, she expects South Carolina to trust her to run state government.

I believe when the public elects someone to office, they are giving a sacred trust.  He or she should be worthy of that trust.  Representative Haley’s record shows that her actions do not match her rhetoric.  I am tired of hypocrisy by our state’s leaders and today, my campaign will begin running a new commercial pointing out the real Nikki Haley.  After the last eight years of deceit and scandal, we must elect a governor we can trust.  Here’s my message to all South Carolinians: You can trust me.

Very truly,

Vincent Sheheen