Howard Dean’s Scream will now be forgotten

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

But not so with this guy.

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

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

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

Fair or unfair? You be the judge

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…

Was original draft of cartoon ‘an ethnic slur’?

Robert Ariail, noticing that I had posted his recent cartoon on the blog, sent me the original version, which he said he withdrew from dissemination because someone thought “it would precipitate claims of an ethnic slur.”

Robert wanted to know what I thought. I responded:

I see nothing wrong with that, Sahib.

Seriously, I know where they’re coming from — they’re worried that the evocation of India might make people think you’re saying something you’re not, and distract from the message — although I think they’re being oversensitive.
I wish I could post this on the blog to see what my readers think — but that would probably put you in an uncomfortable spot, wouldn’t it? So I won’t.

But Robert said he didn’t care, so I’m asking y’all.

For comparison, here is the culturally sanitized version again, below…

Editorial in The State explains Wilson ethics case well

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Virtual Front Page, Thursday, September 9, 2010

OK, at least one more for the week. I may not have time to do one tomorrow; I have some important ADCO deadlines coming up:

  1. Florida Pastor Cancels Plans to Burn Quran (WSJ) — “Mr. Jones said he decided to cancel his protest because the leader of a planned Islamic Center near ground zero has agreed to move its controversial location…” Huh?
  2. Economist’s views on Muslims spark controversy in Germany (WashPost) — Just so you know we’re not alone with this kind of bad craziness here. A member of the Central Bank is worried that the master race is being dragged down by Muslims.
  3. US losing war in Afghanistan: Taliban leader (AFP) — The enemy unveils a new tactic: Trash-talking. They don’t realize they’re playing to our strength. Still, we might have to dig deep into our strategic arsenal and bring Muhammad Ali out of retirement to counter this.
  4. Appeals Court Ends Ban on Stem Cell Financing, for Now (NYT) — That pretty much says it: “For now.”
  5. Haley’s Family’s Business Also Penalized for Late Taxes (AP) — And the trend of revelations continue, revealing Nikki Haley’s putative strengths to be liabilities.
  6. ‘You lie!’ windfall for Wilson, Miller (thestate.com) — Yup, it was a year ago today that two things happened: A right-wing star was born, and it was guaranteed that no strong candidate would emerge to oppose him, as huge amounts of cash flowed to Rob Miller — and then to Joe himself.

Apparently, the government had a really, really HARD time taking a dollar from Nikki

Alert reader J brings our attention to this AP story, which shows that not only can Nikki, the accounting whiz (just ask her; she’ll tell you), not pay her personal taxes on time, but neither could the business for which she acted as bookkeeper:

COLUMBIA, S.C. — A business owned by the family of South Carolina Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley has been penalized for failing to pay taxes three times since 2003, according to records obtained by The Associated Press.

Haley has frequently cited her experience as an accountant for her family’s clothing store, saying the state needs such business knowledge at its helm.

Records show the store’s taxes were at least 19 months past due each time the state filed a lien.

Two of the tax liens were for failing to pay corporate income taxes and one was for not turning over taxes withheld from employee checks. The company paid nearly $4,000 to remove the liens.

In response, Haley’s campaign said Thurday she is running for governor in part because she wants to cut red tape and taxes that are too burdensome. Her campaign declined to discuss the specifics of the liens.

“As a family, we saw how hard it was to make a dollar and how easy it was for government to take it,” Haley, a state House member, said in a statement. “I’m committed to making government friendlier to the people and businesses it serves.”

A key part of Haley’s economic plan is to eliminate corporate income taxes, an idea the Legislature rejected earlier this year….

Run that nonsense by us again, Nikki:

“As a family, we saw how hard it was to make a dollar and how easy it was for government to take it…”

Yeah, right! Where, precisely, did y’all SEE that? Obviously, in the case of your family business, the gummint had a heckuva hard time taking it.

And this is, apparently, what Nikki means when she says she wants to run government like her business.

Differences between Haley, Sheheen on education spending

Doug was talking about differences between Nikki Haley and Vincent Sheheen on education spending on a previous post, and it reminded me that I wanted to share with you this Mike Fitts piece on an important difference between the gubernatorial candidates in that area:

Sen. Vincent Sheheen sees an opportunity to change the balance of education in the state by having more funding flow to the poor rural districts that have lagged behind. Rep. Nikki Haley sees a new formula as the way to get more money out of the S.C. Education Department and into all school districts.

To Sheheen, a Camden Democrat, only a funding arrangement that gets more dollars to poor districts addresses what really ails state education. As funding rebounds from the bottom of the recession, Sheheen said, more growth should be directed to the schools that don’t have a strong tax base. Districts in prosperous areas should not be given less, but poor districts should be helped to make up ground, he said.

“Until we have equitable funding, we’re always going to be fighting about equitable funding,” Sheheen said.

Haley’s school funding rubric would emphasize dollars per student rather than the tax base of a district. The simpler funding formula Haley advocates would still take into account such factors as poverty and special needs.

Haley, R-Lexington, believes far too much money still is being spent at the state Education Department, despite several rounds of cutbacks as the state budget has shrunk….

Bottom line, Nikki wants to cater to the right-wing fantasy that the Department of Education is where all the money goes, and if you just redirect THAT, schools will have all they need. Meanwhile, Vincent wants to address the actual education problem in South Carolina — poverty. If you make the mistake of being born into a poor family in a poor district, your chances of getting a good education is much, much less than if you go to school in Nikki’s district, where as she boasts, the public schools are “like private ones.” That’s anti-public-educationspeak for “the public schools in my district are good.” And they are. But they’re not good because they are “like” private schools. They’re good because they are good public schools.

Bottom line, though, is that we won’t be at a point where poor, rural districts do as well as suburban districts until the economic inequities between rural and urban South Carolina close. Economic development and public education go hand in hand, and each affects the other dramatically.

In the meantime, there are smaller things we can do. Sending more resources to the poorer districts will help — some. Consolidating districts so that each has more resources and less total administration to fund will help — some. (If you want to see money wasted on excess administration, look there.) But it’s going to be a long, hard slog.

The place to start, of course, is with electing state leaders who actually believe in public education. Then you can begin the long journey.

Here’s hoping Vincent has better luck than Alex did with HIS gun ad

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Moment of Zen – Alex Sanders Ad
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

It took me a few minutes, but I managed to dig up a clip of the Alex Sanders ad from 2002 in which he and Zoe were shown blasting away with their shotguns.

If you’ll recall, Alex had to yank the ad down pretty quick when the news filled with “the Beltway sniper” that October.

At least, he thought he had to, and did. When you think about it, there shouldn’t have been a problem. Snipers don’t use shotguns, after all.

But I guess that in South Carolina, home of Democratic Senate nominee Alvin Greene, you can’t really give voters that much credit…

It was bad luck for Alex. It was like the election gods just weren’t going to let a Democrat portray himself (even accurately, as in this case) as a gun lover.

Anyway, I hope Vincent Sheheen fares better with his ad than Alex did.

Trying to get used to cartoons of a different color

Have you checked out Robert Ariail’s most recent cartoons? Increasingly, they are in color.

He does it well, but this is going to take some time to grow on me. I prefer the classic, sharp black and white lines that are the glory of the well-executed editorial cartoon, and no one does it better than my good friend Robert. And Robert has sort of resisted the trend, being the master than he is of the traditional form.

But I’m sure he’s gotten pressure from his syndicate on this point — increasingly, the few cartoonists remaining in the country are doing color. And at some point, one must bow to fashion. Or maybe it’s just that the Spartanburg paper wanted color; I don’t know.

Suppose I’ll have to get used to it…

It’s not Clapton, but Sheheen’s “Crossroads” is a good start on the fall campaign

Above is the TV ad just released by the Sheheen campaign, entitled “Crossroads.”

I like it. It hits the right notes for going after the people who decide elections — us independents, and the Republicans who are smart enough not to want another four years of Sanford. And there are a lot of such Republicans, no matter what some Democrats might think. It’s good to see that Vincent is starting out trying (honestly and candidly, without a single note of artifice) to appeal to them, as well as to the sensible folk in the middle.

This is a good start on the fall campaign. But we need to see a lot more good stuff if he’s to avoid another defeat for South Carolina.

Oh, and just for fun, here’s the Cream electrified version of the Robert Johnson classic below:

“Use to was:” Small town South Carolina

Dang it, I searched on Google Books for the quote I wanted, but you know how they leave out pages here and there? Apparently the page I wanted was one of those.

Anyway, there’s a page somewhere in John le Carre’s The Little Drummer Girl in which our heroine Charlie is being escorted through a bombed-out 1980s Beirut by a couple of young Palestinian-affiliated gunmen whom she, and the reader, find utterly charming. One of them speaks English with an odd tick: He throws “use to” in front of all verbs, giving his speech a strange poignancy at all times. At one point, he’s indicating where a certain landmark — I want to say a Holiday Inn, but my memory could be failing me (and maybe it wasn’t even in the book but in the movie, but good luck finding that; Netflix doesn’t even have it) — back before the city’s devastation, back when it was the Paris of the Mideast. Let’s say it was a Holiday Inn, in which case he would have said, “Holiday Inn — use to was…”

That line kept running through my head when I went home to Bennettsville Saturday for the funeral of “Teenie” Parks — my grandmother’s best friend, who lived next door to my grandparents and then my young uncle (only six years older than I) as he raised his family there, with Teenie taking the place for his kids of my grandmother, who died in 1969. There are people in B’ville who would ask Teenie how I was related to her, even though I wasn’t. We were all that close. Her husband Frank, who died in 1984, had grown up in the house that my grandparents lived in during my childhood and my uncle still lives in today. Then they sold the house to my grandfather and moved next door. From then on it was like one household; we walked in and out of each others’ houses as though the doors weren’t there. We were, as I said, that close.

The funeral was at Thomas Memorial Baptist Church, where I was baptized long before I became Catholic. It’s the scene of an incident for which I’m still remembered by some of the older folks in town — far more than for anything else, really. While at the visitation various folks made a point of saying what I hear so often, that “We miss you so much from the newspaper,” a couple of my relatives made a point of mentioning The Incident, and admonishing me not to repeat it.

(Here’s what happened: It was 1957, and I was four years old. Our preacher then, Mr. Thomas, was not the most accomplished homilist. He tended to drone and lose his train of thought. He was reciting a list of some sort in which towns in the Pee Dee were ranked. It went something like this: “Cheraw was first, Dillon second. Um, Marion was third. And Bennettsville was… it was… um… Bennettsville was, um…” I couldn’t take it. I shouted out, as loud as I could, “FOURTH!!!” The congregation, which had been as tense as I was, erupted into laughter, drowning out Mr. Thomas as he murmured “fourth.” I had not known I was going to do it; it was involuntary. Four, after all, was my favorite number because I was four years old. How could he not think of it? But now that I’d shouted it, the laughter of all those grownups overwhelmed me with embarrassment. I lay my head on my mother’s lap and pretended to be asleep for the rest of the service. Bottom line, to this day, I am known by some as the little boy who yelled “Fourth!”)

After the funeral, driving back through town on Main Street, I pointed out to my wife landmarks that once had been. That’s what put me in mind of the le Carre character. B.B. Sanders’ Esso station, where the proprietor would always lean into the driver’s window, while his employees swarmed over the car to check the oil and the tires and the water and wash the windshield, and ask us, “Y’all want a Co-Cola?” Use to was. Belk’s — use to was. The Bennettsville Department Store — use to was. Penney’s, Miller Thompson pharmacy, the dime stores, Bill Stanton’s daddy’s store, the movie theater, the A&P, the Harris Teeter. All “use to was.” The buildings are all still there, and most look fine from the outside. But they aren’t what they were. And there is almost no one walking on the once-busy sidewalks.

This morning, I almost got a parking ticket because lobbyist Jay Hicks sat across from me as I was about to get up from breakfast, and I stayed, and we started talking about a number of things. Eventually, we got onto the state of South Carolina’s small towns, especially the ones well off the Interstates. He spoke of Bamberg, and I mentioned to him how impressed I was the one time I visited Allendale — all those abandoned motels along 301, which died when the Interstates opened.

We talked about whether there was any hope for turning around South Carolina’s small towns, whether Nikki Haley (who hales from Bamberg) or Camden’s Vincent Sheheen is elected. We reached no conclusions.

And I spoke of visiting Bennettsville over the weekend. I didn’t mention the “use to was” part, because it would have taken too long to explain.

Virtual Front Page, Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Here’s what we have today:

  1. Court Backs Rendition (NYT) — The CIA wins a battle in the War on Terror, this one in a federal appeals court. A sharply divided court, that is. But if the ACLU can’t win in the 9th Circuit, where can it win?
  2. Karzai seeks to limit role of U.S. corruption investigators (WashPost) — Which is not exactly the way to clean up Afghanistan.
  3. Obama Takes Aim at Republicans (WSJ) — He’s had a certain edge in his speeches the last couple of days. Evidently, he has decided not to take this midterm election lying down.
  4. BP spreads blame over oil spill (BBC) — I’d play this bigger, but it was in newspapers this morning, so it’s old now.
  5. Candidates urged to keep Gov’s budget blueprint (thestate.com) — This is a small followup story, but worth your attention.
  6. Pastor Still Plans Quran Burning Despite Pressure (WSJ) — Just in case you’re still following this. I’m mindful about what some of y’all have said to the effect that if the media would have ignored this, we wouldn’t have a problem. True, as far as I know. But now it’s out there… Meanwhile, “Most Americans object to planned Islamic center near Ground Zero, poll finds.”

Haley wants to drop one thing Sanford did right

I’m with Mark Sanford on this one:

Last week, Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley said she would do away with detailed executive budgets, which were typically ignored due to the acrimony between Sanford and lawmakers. Instead, Haley said, she would set a small list of priorities and work with lawmakers during the process.
In a message sent to Sanford’s campaign e-mail list, the outgoing governor argued his successor should also draft a detailed budget.

“These Executive Budgets have been vital in creating a budget blue print that showed how we could fund core services of government without raising taxes,” Sanford wrote, encouraging recipients to read a Post and Courier editorial on the subject. “They were important in showing the savings that might come from restructuring and consolidating government.”

Sanford does not mention Haley, a political ally who shares many of Sanford’s positions, by name in the e-mail.

Even with our weak-governor system, the governor is the one elected official with the closest thing to a governmentwide perspective — and has the broadest responsibility to voters. He (or she) should at the very least propose a budget setting priorities for spending, which lawmakers are then free to ignore the way they have since Carroll Campbell started the practice a couple of decades back. Campbell was right to go ahead and ACT like a governor, at least in advocacy terms, by submitting a budget, rather than waiting around to actually be put in charge of the executive branch.

Nikki Haley is on the right track looking for ways to antagonize lawmakers less. (Although it’s a bit late for that. Unlike Sanford, who started with a honeymoon, she’s already alienated legislative leaders to such an extent that if elected she would start out in a hole with them, and she knows it, and knows we know it, which is why she’s talking about this.) But this is the wrong item to start with. An executive budget, theoretical as it is, is a useful tool.

And while Mark Sanford went out of his way to alienate lawmakers so that they would ignore his budget proposals, along with the rest of his agenda, he put a lot of work into his budgets. And while they had their flaws, they were worth considering.

So would be Nikki Haley’s, were she elected. And so would Vincent Sheheen’s, which is why I hope he would continue to submit them. We need governors to actually take an interest in governing.

It’s great that Nikki wants to signal that she’d be different from Sanford. But this is the wrong way to start.

Who wants to join me at the Walk for Life?

My wife, a breast cancer survivor (Thank God for his tender mercies), told me the other night that she had signed me up for her team for the Walk for Life this year.

I said, “But I was going to form a blog team!”

So she said I’d better go ahead and do it. Instead of just talking about it the way I did last year. The deadline for participants to sign up is a week from today.

So I went to the website, and set up a team called “Brad’s Bloggers.” I had no idea what to set as a fund-raising goal, so I went with the default $100. That way, if y’all don’t come through, I can cough it up myself.

But you will come through, right? It’s on Saturday, Oct. 2, starting at 8:30 in Finlay Park.

You can sign up for the team by going to this link, clicking on “Join Our Team,” and following the prompts. Once you’ve done so, please e-mail me at [email protected]. Then, just before the event, I’ll send all those who contacted me info on where and how to meet so we can walk together.

So how about it? Let’s show ’em we bloggers are more than just a bunch of couch potatoes sitting in front of a laptop in our pajamas. Put on some actual pants, and shoes, and walk with us.

A candidate for the UnParty? I’m not sure

Still catching up with e-mail from the long weekend. Don’t know much about this write-in Senate campaign, but it sounds intriguing:

GREG SNOAD ANNOUNCES WRITE-IN CAMPAIGN FOR U.S. SENATE

GRAY COURT, SC, September 7, 2009 – Greg Snoad, a Mauldin High School social studies teacher long-active in politics, has formally announced his intention to launch a write-in campaign for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Jim DeMint.

Snoad likened his bid for office to an opportunity to take a stand for civilized political discussion, and noted that in writing his name on the ballot, voters have a chance to symbolically express their discontent over the current polarized state of politics.

“My firm belief is that instead of trying to develop different sides and waste so much time arguing with one another, we need to concentrate on a comprehensive approach; figure out what we are able to agree on and work from there,” said Snoad.  “A write-in vote for Greg Snoad says that you agree to find common ground and build consensus.”

The Snoad campaign will focus on being a purely symbolic campaign conducted primarily through social media websites including Facebook and Twitter.  Snoad views social media as a framework to help foster bipartisanship and bring voters together over issues.

“By writing in my name, voters will be declaring that they support a process, not a candidate,” said Snoad.   “Likewise, one does not always have to adhere to the end result of the process to still support the idea, as long as they feel that the civil discussion about politics was worthwhile.”

Greg Snoad has taught social studies at Mauldin High School for 25 years. He teaches government, economics, European History, and Global Studies. He has served on the Gray Court Town Council, and currently serves on the Gray Court Planning Commission, and the Board of Directors of the Pleasant View Community Center. He has been active in political campaigns for many years, and has always tried to bring real-life issues to his classroom teaching. He is a graduate of the University of Western Illinois, with a BA and MA in Political Science. He is a Nationally Board Certified Teacher, and was named South Carolina Social Studies Teacher of the Year in 2001.

###

So does he mean he want’s the UnParty endorsement? If so, he hasn’t contacted party HQ yet.

I like the “find common ground and build consensus” part, but I’m not sure what he means by “purely symbolic campaign conducted primarily through social media websites including Facebook and Twitter.” So does that mean he wants us to write in his actual name on actual ballots, or not?

I’ll ask him that if and when I talk with him. (In fact, the answers may be on his Facebook page, but I don’t have time to look right this minute.) Someone offered a couple of days back to put me in touch with him, but I haven’t had time to follow up on that yet. In the meantime, I just thought I’d share the release with you…

Candidate seeks Anton Gunn nomination

I don’t know who else might have also filed for this, and I don’t know what to think of this person, but since the release just came in, I thought I’d share it with you:

MIA BUTLER FILES FOR HOUSE DISTRICT 79
Local businesswoman seeks to fill seat
vacated by Rep. Anton Gunn
COLUMBIA, SC – Mia Butler, a business owner and entrepreneur with two decades of public and private sector experience in South Carolina announced late today that she has officially filed to become a candidate for the District 79 vacancy left open by Democratic Representative Anton Gunn.

Butler said she wants to use her business experience to bring a strong voice for job-creation and economic development to the State House. She also vowed to continue the example set by Representative Gunn to bring rational and effective leadership, focused on bringing both sides together to help address South Carolina’s challenges. “As a strong business woman with government experience, I know what it takes to streamline a budget and resolve issues that individuals and small business owners are facing. I have demonstrated it in my business for 8 years. You can’t have success in business without working with people to address their problems, effectively and efficiently. We need a strong leader who is focused on getting things done,” said Butler.

“I have lived in this district for the last 13 years. I’m raising my family here and I’m seeing the changes that are happening in our community. We need a leader who understands those changes and can make an immediate impact at the State House. I have the experience and the commitment to stand up for what’s right for our district and our state. I want to be an independent voice for our district,” stated Butler.

As the Principal of the corporate communications firm, McLeod Butler Communications, Butler has been a tireless advocate for small businesses, public education, crime victims, public safety and higher education institutions over the last decade. Butler’s professional experience includes launching and directing a statewide program for former South Carolina Attorney General Charlie Condon, receiving a gubernatorial appointment to direct one of the largest programs within the South Carolina Governor’s Office of Executive Policies & Programs under former Governor Jim Hodges and serving on the Board of Directors of the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, where she is an active member of the Chamber’s Small Business and Communications committees, as well as its Excellence in Education Council.

Business and political leaders praised Butler’s candidacy for the State House.  Former Governor Jim Hodges said, “Mia Butler was a key member of the leadership team in my administration.  She’s intelligent, hard working and has great ideas about job creation and educational improvement.  I strongly support her candidacy for the Democratic nomination in House District 79.”

“From improving education, to passing comprehensive tax reform and creating jobs, we face many challenges in South Carolina.” Butler said. “We can meet those challenges, but it will require a leader who can hit the ground running and advocate on behalf of small businesses to spur economic growth opportunities. I know I can bring that to the State House.”

“I believe that Mia Butler will be a great Representative for Kershaw and Richland counties. She has demonstrated her leadership skills in business and she has a clear vision for improving our state,” said Steve Benjamin, Mayor of Columbia. “Mia believes in the South Carolina values of faith, hard work, community involvement, and independence.”
Mia Butler is married to Tracy Garrick. They, along with sons, Brian “BJ” and Cameron Butler reside in Lake Carolina.

So if Hodges is supporting her, does that mean she’s anointed? I don’t know. Not necessarily. More as I do know…

Remember, the Democrat who replaces Rep. Gunn faces Sheri Few in November.

Time for good people to stand up and be counted

GEORGE BAILEY: We’re all excited around here. My brother just got the Congressional Medal of Honor. The president just decorated him.
MR. CARTER, BANK EXAMINER: Well, I guess they do those things… Well, I trust you had a good year.
— “It’s a Wonderful Life”

I’m guessing that like George Bailey, Vincent Sheheen expected a bigger reaction to the release he put out yesterday about his latest endorsement:

Today Vincent Sheheen, candidate for governor, will join the South Carolina Education Association for a press conference at 4:30 PM at the SCEA Headquarters, where they will be announcing their support of his campaign.

WHAT: SCEA Endorsement of Vincent Sheheen for Governor

WHEN: TODAY, TUESDAY, September 7, 2010 at 4:30 PM

WHERE: SCEA Headquarters, 421 Zimalcrest Drive, Columbia, SC

####

But like Mr. Carter, I’m underwhelmed. I didn’t even bother to show up. I suppose Sheheen did, but I haven’t checked.

The SCEA endorsed the Democrat for governor? Well, I guess they do those things… now let’s look at your books, so I can get back to my family in Elmira… (And if you know me, you know I’d just as soon drill a new hole in my head as look at anybody’s books.)

And I say this as a guy who really, really wants to see Vincent Sheheen elected governor.

For that reason, and knowing what it takes to win, I want to hear about more endorsements like the one from the S.C. Chamber of Commerce.

And I’m not just putting this on the Sheheen campaign. I’m saying that some of you business leaders and independents and community leaders who could actually exert influence in Republican and swing voter circles — including some who have shared with me off the record their fervent hopes that Vincent (and NOT Nikki) get elected — need to get out of your comfort zones, and stand up and be counted.

Yeah, standing up for something might cost you something. But not as much as it will cost South Carolina to waste another four years the way we have the past eight.

There are a lot of good, smart people in South Carolina who want the best for our state. But you know what I’ve noticed over the last couple of decades about good, smart people who want the best for South Carolina? They tend to be spineless. Whereas the demagogues and peddlers of negativity never rest, and aren’t a bit shy. (I’m not saying the SCEA aren’t good people. I’m just saying that they’re the usual suspects. Statewide elections in SC can be won by Democrats only when they can demonstrate support far beyond the usuals suspects.)

Vincent Sheheen is a good guy who’s standing up. So should you. And you know who you are.

Is this the best Stephen Hawking can do?

It was with some trepidation that I started reading the piece in the WSJ over the weekend headlined “Why God Did Not Create the Universe,” and with the byline of Stephen Hawking and some other guy.

I mean, he’s a smart guy. He knows lots of stuff. Maybe he’ll make a good argument that I don’t want to hear. Right?

But I read it anyway.

And the whole time, I figured he was lulling me, leading me down a logical primrose path, so that when he finally hit me with the reason WHY God didn’t create the universe, I wouldn’t see it coming. I was all ready to be indignant over such a cheap trick.

That’s because most of the piece, to me, beautifully expresses the reasons why one would naturally believe in a Creator God.

I knew that he knew this, and he acknowledged it by saying “Many people would like us to use these coincidences as evidence of the work of God.” And when he did say that, I thought, here it comes. Here’s the Whammer coming up to the plate. He’s going to knock God’s pitch right out of the park.

But he didn’t. At best, he took a walk.

Near as I can tell, what he had to say was that, ummm, it doesn’t have to be God. Even though, you know, this is kinda the way it would look if God DID create it. But he didn’t have to. At least, I don’t think so…

It was weak. When I was finished, I understood why the WSJ had buried it on an inside page in a back section. If he’d made a better argument, it would have been real news. Far better to play Tony Blair’s essay on the front of that section. He made more sense. He always does. (You know, he converted to Catholicism. Just like me.)

Sure, Newton’s thinking was kind of fallacious, if Hawking is accurate in the way he describes that luminary’s attempt to stick up for God by saying our habitable solar system did not “arise out of chaos by the mere laws of nature.” The problem was with the “mere” part. As though said laws would be anybody’s but God’s. I mean, duh. Whether you’re a deist or a Prebyterian, the original Designer fits perfectly with observable facts.

But I always come away from these things thinking that. When I look at life evolving over billions of years, I think to myself, Yep, that’s exactly the majestic way He would do it. As Tom Sawyer would say, I wouldn’t give shucks for any other way. Or for a God who wanted to do it any other way.

But that’s just me, I guess.

Virtual Front Page, Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Here’s what we have at the beginning of this truncated week:

  1. NATO chief: Karzai must crack down on graft (WashPost) — Good call. But can he?
  2. Church Still Plans to Burn Koran (WashPost) — For more on this, go to this discussion.
  3. Chicago Mayor Daley Won’t Run for Re-Election (WSJ) — No, not that Mayor Daley. His boy. Still, big political news.
  4. Pension rallies hit French cities (BBC) — Is there anything more fun than marveling at the sense of entitlement of the French? Those… those cheese-eating retirement monkeys!
  5. Records show Sheheen’s workers’-comp income (The State) — Small quibble with the subhed, saying the candidates’ incomes is a “major issue” in the campaign. Actually, I don’t even think it’s a captain issue. It’s a first-lieutenant issue, tops. But it is interesting to consider that Sheheen, whom his opponent would like to paint as a worker’s comp fat cat, earned less from that sort of practice in two years than Haley got from Wilbur Smith for her great connections.  You know, that income she was reluctant to disclose…
  6. Costs Of Defensive Medicine May Be Overstated (NPR) — Since we’re short on hard news today (and I thought August was over!), an interesting issue to discuss…