Remembering the suffering at the Bulge, and elsewhere

This morning, Henry McMaster dropped by my table at breakfast, opening our conversation by saying, “Are you blogging somebody over here?” Which I took to mean that he was somewhat wary of talking with me after this incident. Or maybe he was referring to this piece involving his protege Trey Walker.

In any case, we didn’t dwell on the subject, but moved to something more important. Henry, apparently seeing I was reading the paper, mentioned The State‘s series this week about the survivors of the Battle of the Bulge. He immediately fixed on the very thing that always fascinates me about that battle — the day-to-day, routine human suffering apart from the combat. He said something like, “And we think WE have it tough sometimes…”

Indeed. As one who has never been tested by combat, but have certainly thought a lot about it, the thing that I’ve always found most intimidating about it is not the actual shooting part. Yeah, if you survived something like the landing at Omaha Beach, you’d be marked by the trauma for life. But in my own imagination at least, that part would be easy compared to the day-to-day misery of living in the field in harsh conditions.

And what the men trapped by the German blitz in the Ardennes went through is an extreme example.

This Bulge reunion is a particularly poignant event for my family, because when I first heard about it, I had thought of how we might be able to bring my father-in-law here for it. But he didn’t make it. He died in January. And when I told y’all about it on the blog, I wrote the following:

My father-in-law, Walter Joseph Phelan Jr., lived a full and worthwhile life. I was thinking yesterday as we mucked through the ice and snow about some of the far-harsher hardships he endured along the way. He was there in the Ardennes in late 1944, the coldest winter in Europe in a century, when the massive, unexpected German attack came. He was a member of the ill-fated 106th Infantry Division (like Kurt Vonnegut). That means he was right at the point of the German spear, right where it smashed through the Allied lines. A friend fell right beside him in the snow, victim of a bullet he felt was meant for him. If he had been the one it found, I’d never have met my wife, and our children and grandchildren wouldn’t exist.

Like Vonnegut and thousands of others, he was captured and held in a German stalag in the last months of the war, when the Germans didn’t even have enough food for themselves, much less for prisoners. After that experience, he never wanted to go to Europe again, and didn’t.

The coldest winter in Europe in a century… That detail from Stephen Ambrose’s Citizen Soldiers has stuck with me ever since I read it. Some of our troops, such as members of the 101st Airborne, were out in that, living in foxholes, for over a month. Every morning, as they stirred, their clothing would crackle as the ice that had formed in it overnight would break. In many instances, they couldn’t build fires for fear of revealing their positions.

I find the idea of soldiering on under such conditions inconceivable. Even if you weren’t killed, or captured (like Mr. Phelan), or wounded (like Bill Guarnere, who lost a leg in an artillery barrage), how on Earth did they not break? Many did, of course. But who could blame them.

Right now, I’m reading With the Old Breed by Eugene Sledge. Many have noted that for the Marines in the Pacific, the entire war was just as miserable as what the Army endured at the Bulge — only it was mud and blood and jungle rot rather than sub-freezing temperatures — and such books as this one and the one I just finished, Bob Leckie’s Helmet for My Pillow, present compelling evidence to that effect. As Sledge wrote of Okinawa, the Marines lived day after day in “an environment so degrading I believed we had been flung into hell’s own cesspool.”

There was a passage Sledge’s book that sticks with me, about how after that experience, the veterans had trouble relating to the rest of us back home; they had to struggle “to comprehend people who griped because America wasn’t perfect, or their coffee wasn’t hot enough, or they had to stand in line and wait for a train or bus.”

People like me. I just notice my coffee has grown cold as I was typing this. As I go to replace it with hot, I am mindful of the privilege, and those who suffered and died to make my life so easy.

Can “walk back” be walked back? And should it?

This morning, I got a link from Stan Dubinsky to an article headlined, “Does Your Language Shape How You Think?” I replied:

Sure it does. And limiting our thoughts intentionally is double-plus ungood.

Which is not to say I don’t love Big Brother, in case he’s reading this. I just don’t like to see the language messed with for political purposes. (And if you doubt the power of such tinkering, see if you can have a discussion of the disappearance of the inclusive “he” with a group of mixed gender without somebody getting angry.)

Which is not to condemn the natural growth and evolution of language. But I do tend to greet new constructions with some suspicion, feeling they must prove themselves in general use before being accepted. This morning I had occasion to wonder about a certain buzz phrase, since it seemed to burst upon my consciousness with all the subtlety of the German advance in the Ardennes in December 1944.

The phrase is “walk back.” Maybe it’s old hat to you. Maybe my noticing it three times this morning was just that trick of the mind whereby the first time you become conscious of a word or phrase that’s been there all the time, you suddenly see it anywhere.

Anyway, I first noticed it this morning in this piece from CNN:

Earlier this month, Obama was accused of giving two conflicting statements regarding a planned Islamic community center and mosque several blocks from Ground Zero in New York City. His August 13 remarks seemed to lend support to the project, but he told CNN’s Ed Henry a day later that he was “not commenting and [would] not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque” near Ground Zero.

In the NBC interview, Obama denied walking back his original statement.

“I didn’t walk it back at all,” he said.

That’s twice. And my initial impression that CNN made up the phrase is set back (walked back) by the president himself using it. So I got to thinking, “Maybe this is another one of those things that people who watch TV “news” hear all the time, so it’s just new to me. Which is distinctly possible.

Then, less than two hours later, this appeared on CNN’s Political Ticker Twitter feed:

Crist walks back same-sex marriage remarks http://bit.ly/cC8tLQ37 minutes ago via twitterfeed

So it is just me, or did this just appear in the latest edition of the Newspeak dictionary, and nobody told me?

And what do I think of it? Since its use seems to be pejorative by implication (the president denied it when accused of it), is this another blow in the battle to train us NOT to think? You know, another shot fired in the effort to cause us to see the reconsideration of positions as a bad thing — along with “flip-flop,” which is used to condemn anyone who actually continues to consider his (note the use of the inclusive masculine!) opinions in the light of new data or changed conditions — which a thoughtful person would think of as a good thing?

Or am I just being overly touchy?

Don’t say I never gave you anything, Doug

Since Doug was such a great sport giving to the critters back here, I’m including this extreme case of gummint waste for his enjoyment:

(CNN) — A worker was paid for 12 years without ever showing up for work at a Norfolk, Virginia, agency funded by federal, state and local money, officials say.

Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim told CNN on Friday that when a new director took over at Norfolk Community Services Board recently, she was “doing her due diligence” when she discovered the hooky-playing employee was on the books. The director, Maureen Womack, then notified the city attorney’s office, Fraim said.

Sandy Johnson, a spokeswoman for the Community Services Board, told CNN Friday that her agency couldn’t comment because of the ongoing investigation.

On behalf of the city attorney’s office, Norfolk city spokeswoman Terry Bishirjian referred to a statement released on Wednesday that said, “The city attorney’s office, with the approval of Womack, took appropriate steps to prevent any further payments to the employee and the employee was terminated.”

They fired her now, huh? I’ll bet that’s a bitter pill for her — if she can stop laughing long enough.

Virtual Front Page, Friday, August 27, 2010

Notice how I tend to always post these on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, but miss on Tuesdays and Thursdays? Anyway, last night I was just about to do it when my wife called and reminded me we were expected for dinner at my parents’ house, and had to run…

Here are the headlines at this hour:

  1. Bernanke Says Fed Stands Ready to Support Recovery (WSJ) — By doing what? Move interest rates to negative numbers? (Oh, wait — NPR has actually answered my facetious question.) Here’s what Ben’s reacting to: “Economy grinds to near halt.” Remember what I was saying about the negative waves, man?
  2. U.S. Economy Slowed to 1.6% Pace in 2nd Quarter (NYT) — In fact, this thing (mentioned above) is bad enough I thought I’d give it its own sidebar.
  3. Afghanistan’s Karzai criticises US troop pullout (BBC) — Hey, if I were going to be left holding the bag over there, I’d criticize it, too. In fact, I think I will anyway…
  4. Video Messages From Trapped Chilean Miners (NYT) — A human-interest story that continues to amaze us.
  5. North Korea Frees American After Carter Visit (BosGlobe) — This is quite a few hours old, but I thought it still held up. I found interesting this comment by Mark Knoller on Twitter this morning: “North Korea likes having former US presidents come calling for the release of Americans held by the Kim Jong-il regime.” Yup.
  6. Blockbuster tells Hollywood studios it’s preparing for mid-September bankruptcy (LAT) — Well, we all saw this coming, didn’t we? Still, ya gotta love the irony: After all the warm little Mom-and-Pop rental stores it ran out of business back in the 90s, it’s Blockbuster’s turn. You’re goin’ down, Blockbuster!

Le Carré trash-talks James Bond

Don’t know if you saw this in The Telegraph last week, but they resurrected a 1966 interview Malcolm Muggeridge did with David Cornwell (workname John le Carré), in which he called 007 a “neo-fascist gangster” and elaborated:

“I dislike Bond. I’m not sure that Bond is a spy. I think that it’s a great mistake if one’s talking about espionage literature to include Bond in this category at all,” Le Carré said.

“It seems to me he’s more some kind of international gangster with, as it is said, a licence to kill… he’s a man entirely out of the political context. It’s of no interest to Bond who, for instance, is president of the United States or of the Union of Soviet Republics.”

Asked now about the interview for a programme to appear on BBC Four next week, he eased up a bit, but still had to say:

“But at the root of Bond there was something neo-fascistic and totally materialist. You felt he would have gone through the same antics for any country really, if the girls had been so pretty and the Martinis so dry.”

Oh, lighten up, Francis! We get it! We know Bond is a silly Hugh Hefneresque fantasy, and we know you are the gold standard for real spy fiction (although Len Deighton has occasionally given you a run for your money, such as in The Ipcress File). And we get that it was probably pretty galling in ’66 that everybody was talking about Bond when you were putting out such gritty stuff as your masterpiece, The Spy Who Came In From The Cold.

Anyone ever notice how, if you watch an early Bond movie after seeing Austin Powers, you realize Mike Myers was hardly exaggerating at all? It was all really that goofy.

But here’s the thing that concerned me the most about the Telegraph piece:

Bond has become a Hollywood hero, but Smiley may have the last laugh. While financial woes at film studio MGM have put the 23rd Bond movie on indefinite hold, a new film adaptation of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy is planned for 2012 with Gary Oldman and Benedict Cumberbatch in starring roles.

Remake “Tinker, Tailor”?!?!? Possibly the best thing ever made for the telly (closest competition being “Band of Brothers”)? Sacrilege! I mean, it’s like Anna Chapman trying to cash in on her celebrity after being blown. In either case, Smiley would be appalled. Gary Oldman is awesome and all (I sort of see him as Karla, though, who does not appear in Tinker). But let’s have a little respect. Maybe instead you could do The Honourable Schoolboy, which got skipped in the original BBC productions.

Kick in a buck for the critters

Just saw this notice over on the Web site ADCO Interactive created for Pawmetto Pipeline:

Friday, August 27 is Dollar Donation Day!dollar donation day horiz

Sounds simple, but it is so rewarding. We are asking supporters and fans to donate $1 or more in our one-day dollar donation drive. The best part is that everyone can participate from your desk, home or wherever! We have over 4,000 members of our email community—imagine if each person gave $1.00 on Friday. What about $5? Or $10?

We’ll be tracking donations all day on our facebook page and posting pics of the sweet animals you’ve helped, so be sure to check in there often.

Where will all of the money go?  Once we rescue dogs and cats from the county municipal shelters they still need a lot of care before adoption.  All of our pets receive their annual vaccines, spay/neuter surgeries, a microchip, and heartworm and flea preventive before they hit the adoption events.  However, sometimes the needs are greater. Some need heartworm treatments (up to $500), some need dental procedures (at least $200) and others need to be nursed back to health.  We do not give up on any of our animals and we do everything it takes to make them healthy and happy once rescued. Help us help them this by donating $1 or more today.

Donate now

Just look what we can do with $1:

– If 20 people give $1 each, that will pay for kennel cough treatment for one dog

– If 100 people give $1 each, that will provide 3 cats with special-need diet food

– If 500 people give $1 each, that will pay to treat one dog with heartworms (we currently have 6 dogs needing treatment)

– If 1,000 people give $1 each, that will let us save 10 additional lives

Click here to donate now or follow our facebook updates.

Help us spread the word by forwarding this message to your friends.

OK, so I’m no Austin Meyer, but even I can afford to kick in a buck for the cause.

Sorry Nevada, but your name is an actual word

I love this resolution submitted by Harry Mortenson (D-Las Vegas) of the Nevada legislature:

Whereas there are two common pronunciations of the name of our great state:

(1)   the provincial pronunciation utilized by approximately two-million Nevadans, using a flat A-sound — a sound not unlike the bleating of a sheep, and;

(2)   the cosmopolitan or Spanish pronunciation used by the other seven-billion inhabitants of our planet, using a soft “A” intonation—not unlike a sigh of contentment, and . . .

Whereas it is becoming a continuous, prodigious, and daunting task for the two million colloquial-speaking inhabitants to interrupt and correct the other seven-billion inhabitants of the Planet who utilize the Spanish/cosmopolitan pronunciation . . .

Therefore; be it resolved, that henceforth, there will be two acceptable pronunciations for the name of our great state:

(1)    the preferred pronunciation will be the colloquial pronunciation, and;

(2)    the less-preferred pronunciation will be the charitably-tolerated Spanish/cosmopolitan pronunciation.

I regret that he came down on the wrong side of the issue by choosing the wrong pronunciation as the preferred one, but I like that he had a strong sense of irony about it. He realizes that the way Nevadans pronounce it sounds to a literate ear like Anthony Hopkins seeming to make fun of an American accent by the way he said “chianti” as Hannibal Lecter. It’s jarring.

You know, I believe that South Carolina would be a lot better off if more of our lawmakers had a sense of irony about our own states foibles. If only we would all resolve to lighten up and “charitably tolerate” those whose ancestors did NOT fire on Fort Sumter. We need to clone James L. Petigru.

Ya ever wonder what happens to failed ‘Idol’ contestants?

Well, in Canada, they just might become terrorists. At least, that’s what the Mounties say.

Above, you see the very sad performance by Pakistani immigrant Khuram Sher on “Canadian Idol” in 2008. Two years later, here’s what the authorities say about him:

OTTAWA—Canadian authorities said they found and foiled a terrorist bomb-making plot by three men here—one allegedly with links to the conflict in Afghanistan and another, a pathologist who auditioned for the TV show “Canadian Idol.”

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police arrested the trio of Canadian citizens after raids on their houses turned up schematics, videos, drawings, books and manuals for making explosives, said Serge Therriault, Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer in charge of criminal investigations.

The suspects—identified as Hiva Alizadeh, 30 years old; X-ray technician Misbahuddin Ahmed, 26, both of Ottawa; and hospital worker Khurram Syed Sher, 28, of London, Ontario—were charged Thursday with “knowingly facilitating a terrorist activity.”

“A vast quantity of terrorist literature and instructional material was seized, showing that the suspects had the intent to construct an explosive device for terrorist purposes,” said Mr. Therriault. The arrests Wednesday and Thursday “prevented the assembly of any bombs or terrorist attacks from being carried out,” he added.

The trio were working with an “ideologically inspired terrorist group” with links in Iran, Afghanistan, Dubai and Pakistan, the RCMP said. While officials would not say whether the trio had links to al Qaeda, they were driven by “violent Islamist ideology,” according to Raymond Boisvert, assistant director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the country’s spy agency.

NOW will y’all listen to me? Reality TV is a threat to all we hold dear, I keep tellin’ ya!

The stories I’ve seen haven’t been terribly specific as to WHAT these guys were plotting, but the most diabolical thing I could imagine would be if their plan all along was to get busted, and cause this video to go viral, thereby sapping Western morale. (And look — they’ve even tricked me into furthering their plan!)

A couple or three additional points:

  • We’re seeing the continuation of a pattern (hey, with such astuteness on my part, maybe they’ll base a character on me on “Rubicon”) of terror groups using agents who will be called “homegrown” in Western media. Sure this Triple Threat (singin’, dancin’ and blowin’ stuff up) has only been in the country 5 years, but it’s long enough to become legit and evade the scrutiny of the immigration authorities.
  • Here we have another instance of Privacy Gone Mad in an Exhibitionist Age: “The spokesperson at the hospital in Ottawa where Mr. Ahmed works said he couldn’t disclose personal information due to Canadian privacy laws.” Yet we can find out WAY more than we want to know about Sher — where he’s from, how long he’s been here, his hopes, his dreams — on “Idol.” Sheesh.
  • I was just about to throw up my hands and say, “Never mind! Maybe I don’t want a Canadian-style health system!” when I read in the lede of that WSJ story that Sher was “a pathologist.” But then below, I see that he was just a “hospital worker.” Make up your mind, WSJ. And yeah, I still want a Canadian-style system. Only I want the government to forbid anyone who treats sick people to appear on “Idol.”

Read Cindi’s latest column about Nikki’s “whoppers”

Since I griped about the lede headline in The State today (and I wasn’t picking on John there, it was just the headline that got me), I want to direct you, with my warm approval, to Cindi Scoppe’s latest today.

The subject: Nikki Haley’s habit of misleading, and just generally saying stuff that isn’t true. After taking Vincent Sheheen to task for HIS misleading question, “When will she release her tax returns?,” when she sorta kinda had, Cindi went on to demonstrate how such misstatements are a regular thing with his opponent.

I’ll excerpt here the last few grafs of the column:

The day after her WLTX interview, Ms. Haley appeared on Greta Van Sustern’s cable talk show and stepped up her usual attack on Mr. Sheheen for “making $400,000 as a trial lawyer” by calling him “a trial lawyer that makes $400,000 a year off the state.”

It’s pretty audacious, in a state with a median household income of $42,000, for someone who made $196,282 last year to castigate someone else for making $372,509. But the more serious sin here is the total fabrication about where Mr. Sheheen’s money came from.

Contrary to what you’d think if you listened to the Republicans’ drumbeat for Mr. Sheheen to reveal the sources of his income, legislators already have to report all the money they receive from state and local governments. In addition, attorneys must report the money they receive representing clients before the Workers Compensation Commission and other state boards.

As our news department noted on Sunday, last year Mr. Sheheen reported receiving $29,000 in salary and expenses as a senator, and his law firm received $13,000 from the Kershaw County Medical Center, $4,700 from the Cassatt Water Co. and $2,400 from the S.C. Guardian Ad Litem Program. That’s a total of $49,100 “off the state.” I suppose it’s possible that he made money that he didn’t report on his economic disclosure statement — you know, like that $40,000 in consulting fees that Ms. Haley didn’t report from a state government contractor who hired her for her “good contacts.” But since there’s no gray area in state law about reporting government income, I seriously doubt it.

Mr. Sheheen also reported that his law firm made about $170,000 in workers comp fees last year. Now, I would like more details about where the rest of his income came from, and I think he probably could provide them without violating legal ethics, say by telling us how much he received in contingency-fee awards, in retainers, in hourly fees. But it’s more than a little misleading for Ms. Haley to demand more transparency from the candidate who has been far, far more transparent than she has about his income as well as his communications on the taxpayers’ computers and e-mail accounts. Unfortunately, that sort of thing is becoming commonplace.

Cindi, by the way, is about the last person in the MSM you’ll ever see mistake feeling for thought. Always has been. Here, she has demonstrated that laudable trait once again.

By the way, you may want to read her previous column, which she links from this one, on the disturbing Jekyll and Hyde quality Mrs. Haley has demonstrated over time.

Mistaking feeling for thinking in American politics

I enjoyed reading an op-ed piece in the WSJ this morning headlined “A Muslim Reformer on the Mosque,” with the subhed, “The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong.”

Some bits I particularly liked… this:

Election-year politics, ratings-hungry media and deep personal fear foment raw emotion. In such an environment, “I’m offended” takes on the stature of a substantive argument. Too many Americans are mistaking feeling for thinking.

And this:

As a proud New Yorker as well as a reformist Muslim, I think, and not just feel, that this would be a fitting salute to the victims of 9/11. It would turn the tables on the freedom-hating culture of al Qaeda. And it would subvert the liberty-lashing culture of offense.

Perhaps you’re noting there’s a certain theme in what I like. Of course, I kind of helped you out by boldfacing the important points.

That first one should be made into a bumper sticker:

Too many Americans are mistaking feeling for thinking.

Maybe we should streamline it:

Don’t just feel. THINK.

It can be truly said of so very many things. Sure, I can speak from the gut when I don’t really know what I’m talking about. I did it back here. But I was aware that I was doing it. I told you I was doing it. Am I always that self-aware and candid about it? No. We are infallible. I mean, fallible.

But I try to lobby for thinking whenever it occurs to me to do so. That’s what I was doing back here. A few threads back, I was accused by Kathryn of making like a Vulcan. To which I could only respond, “Captain, Kathryn is being illogical.”

Yeah, we need some passion in public life. But we could use a LOT more Spock.

We got a fever in American politics, and the only prescription is more Spock.

Pandora needs a “like it a LOT” button (although it’s doing pretty well without one)

Here’s a conundrum…

Pandora, the “internet radio” site that attempts to use your feedback to shape “stations” that play stuff you like, has a pretty simple system for your input: After you enter a song or artist (or multiple songs or artists) that you’d like to hear, it guesses what else you might like based on that, and you click on either a thumbs-down button meaning “I don’t like this song,” or a thumbs-up meaning “I like this song.”

That’s it. No gradations of feedback. It’s way binary; ones and zeros. I try to click on one or the other on most songs. I don’t sit there poised with the mouse, but every few songs I ALT-TAB back to Pandora to catch up with my decisions (except when I’ve gotten lost in my work and lost track of what I was “hearing,” and even then if I’m familiar with the song, I render a judgment).

But I find this frustrating everyone once in a while. Most of my “likes” mean, “I don’t mind if you keep this in my mix.” But every once in a while, they play me something I really, REALLY dig.

Examples… I have a lot of stations for different kinds of music, but recently I’ve spent a lot of time defining one called “Brad’s All-Purpose Station.” In the “I don’t mind if you keep this in my mix” on that station, I’d include “After Midnight,” “Angie,” “Another One Bites the Dust,” “It’s Money That Matters,” “Long May You Run,” “Oh! Darling,” “Smoke on the Water,” and so forth.

But there are other songs that I want to make sure Pandora knows I really like a LOT more than those songs. It may be an all-time favorite, or a really good song I seldom here and don’t own a copy of, or something I’ve occasionally heard and loved but didn’t know the name of… all sorts of reasons. Into that category I’d put: “Sexy and 17,” Another Girl,” “Baby, It’s You,” “Badge,” “Adagio for Strings,” “Bring it on home to Me,” “Don’t Think Twice, It’s All Right,” “Gymnopedies (3),” “How Can You Mend a Broken Heart (the Al Green version!),” “I’ll Cry Instead,” “In Germany Before the War,” “I’ve Got A Woman,” “Naked Man,” “New Amsterdam,” “Simple Man,” “Werewolves of London,” and others. Oh, and on that last one: I’d much rather hear “Lawyers, Guns and Money,” or “Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner,” but neither has yet been offered.

When I hear one of those, I want to say, Whoa, I’m sorry I clicked “like” on those last 10, because this is what I REALLY like! Don’t just lump this in with those… But all I can do is click again on the “like” button.

OK, so I’m frustrated that I can’t give more nuanced feedback, but here’s the perplexing thing: In spite of that, Pandora does an increasingly excellent job of guessing what I’ll like. As time goes by, I hit that “don’t like” button quite seldom.

Contrast that to Netflix, which gives me five levels of feedback, from one to five stars — and yet remains pretty much clueless as to what I’d like.

Not that I haven’t put the time in… I’m sort of embarrassed to admit this, but I’ve rated 2,144 movies on that site. I keep thinking, Give ’em more data, and they’ll figure me out. But they don’t. You give “Casablanca” five stars, and Netflix assumes, “He likes any movie that’s more than 50 years old.” Yeah, it’s probably a little more sophisticated than that — but not much.

Frustrating. But kudos to Pandora.

THAT’s what she means by transparency (or is it?)

On a day when the state’s largest newspaper leads with a second-day story about Vincent Sheheen answering questions that he shouldn’t be asked, about GOP inside-the-Beltway shouting points (the headline, “Sheheen takes on the issues,” was baldly out of sync with the story, since those are NOT “the issues”), it was shockingly refreshing to see another medium report on the gubernatorial candidates talking about an ACTUAL gubernatorial issue — South Carolina’s economy.

Here’s an excerpt from the end of the Columbia Regional Business Report story:

[Nikki Haley] said South Carolina could build upon being a right-to-work state by being a “no corporate income tax” state.

[Vincent] Sheheen said South Carolina has one of the lowest corporate income tax rates in the nation.

“That proposal specifically will help very few businesses in South Carolina because the vast majority of businesses in South Carolina pay no corporate income tax,” he said. “If we are going to keep doing the same things we’ve been doing over the past eight years, we all as citizens of South Carolina better get used to very high unemployment rates.”

Sheheen spoke of a government that doesn’t divide, but unites. South Carolina needs to increase funding to its higher education system, invest in alternative energy initiatives and expand the port system, he said.

“If we are going to brag about our port, we have to be committed to improving our port,” Sheheen said. He supports a designated earmark in the federal budget for dredging at the ports. “That’s how we dredge ports in this country. I’m willing to go to bat for this state to get our port expanded.”

Haley spoke of reforming the property tax system, supporting school choice and enacting term limits for legislators. She also vowed to make government more transparent.

“You’ve got attorneys that turn around and serve on these committees that affect workers’ comp, work the system all the way, but when they get to the floor, they recuse themselves,” Haley said. “It’s not that they recuse themselves on the floor; they shouldn’t be able to serve on those committees. That’s a direct conflict of interest.”

Reading that, the scales fell from my eyes. I now understand — I think. I had been confused that Ms. Transparency was so reluctant to BE transparent when given the chance. But she never meant her. When she says, “Transparency,” she means, “Legislators who are lawyers should be transparent. In fact, they should shut up and not participate, because being a lawyer is a conflict, in ways that being paid $40,000 for nothing but one’s influence is not.”

At least, that’s what I gather from that passage. In Nikki’s defense, it’s highly likely that if I heard that quote in context I’d get a different impression. I’m sure Nikki has a more nuanced explanation of exactly what she means when she touts transparency. And I remain eager to hear it. Perhaps I will, and perhaps I’ll learn more about the candidates’ stances on economic development and education and the state budget and law and order and environmental protection and other relevant issues — if we can stop talking about abortion and immigration and … what was the other one? Oh, yeah , the federal health care bill that was a big national issue last year. (All of which is a long way of saying, “Talking about our feelings about Obama.”)

Maybe.

Virtual Front Page, Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Just a few more Dog Days left, and after that the news pickings won’t be so slim here in SC. Here’s what little we have today:

  1. Coordinated Attacks Strike 13 Towns and Cities in Iraq (NYT) — As our troops leave, the insurgents start to make their move. After a “mission-accomplished” visit to troops in Texas next week (and you can bet his staff will be on the lookout for any such banners, and rip them down if seen), President Obama will address the nation about Iraq.
  2. Mexican Military Finds 72 Bodies Near Border (BBC) — They were trying to cross into the United States, officials say.
  3. Outsourced Call Centers Return, To U.S. Homes (NPR) — Maybe they should change the term to “in-sourcing.”
  4. Refugees Fill Karachi, Fueling Strife (WSJ) — The human scale is appalling. The one good thing about news being so absent here at home is that at least in August, we notice some of the horrors happening elsewhere.
  5. Toxic chemical prompts warnings at Lake Wateree (The State) — Sammy Fretwell warns us about PCBs in striped bass, blue catfish and largemouth bass.
  6. New Skyscraper to Rival Empire State Building (NYT) — We still haven’t replaced the Twin Towers, but this is impressive. I’m not sure I want anything this close to the Empire State, but I’m a traditionalist. What do y’all think?

Tell Duncan and Scottie you saw the Yesterday’s ad here at bradwarthen.com!

I hope y’all have noticed the blog’s new business model. See the new ad, at the top of the rail at right? Try it out; click on it…

Rather than relying on those fickle politicians, who come and go like people in the land of Oz, I’m now turning to the private sector. (Oh, I’ll still happily take political ads, and even pursue one now and then, but they’re not the blog’s future.)

Please welcome Yesterday’s, my first non-political advertiser!

I’m particularly pleased that Duncan and Scottie MacRae and the rest of the gang have bought my first non-political ad. It’s not all the meals and pints I’ve consumed there, and will in the future. It’s not just that Yesterday’s has the world’s only Warthen/Ariail Memorial Booth. It’s just that to me, Yesterday’s is quintessential Columbia, and the heart and soul of Five Points — and has been for over 30 years.

Duncan and I have been brainstorming about creating a “blog special” that my readers can ask for and that no one else can get — which would be a handy way for him to know that people are actually seeing the ad.

But in the meantime, when you go to Yesterday’s for lunch, or dinner, or to belly up to the bar — and you should, soon — tell them you saw the ad. I’ll be glad you did.

An “ad homo-nem attack” on Sheheen?

First, I’ll admit that I got the “ad homo-nem” joke from my elder son, who said that when he saw the same thing I’m reacting to here:

@TreyWalker: Effeminate sounding non-answers by @VincentSheheen on ObamaCare won’t cut it in this cycle. From the Post and Courier: postandcourier.com/news/2010/aug/…

Say what? Effeminate-sounding? And this from one of your more sensible Republicans, Trey Walker, a McMaster and McCain kind of guy…

Here, for the record, is what Yvonne Wenger wrote on that subject:

Sheheen said he has answered questions throughout his campaign about his national policy stances, such as abortion rights.
“My answer is the same: I support life. I have always supported life and my voting reflects that,” he said.
Likewise, Sheheen said he has laid out his position on the new federal health care law, including his concerns about the expense and the burden to small businesses. But the new law has components that will remedy long-standing issues in the country that only a “bitter partisan” would find fault with, such as denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.
“I think it’s the next governor’s job to stand up against things that aren’t helpful to South Carolina within the health care law,” he said, adding that he would do just that if elected.
It is unclear where Sheheen stands on the individual mandate that Americans have health insurance and whether he supports the court challenge on the new law by the state Attorney General Henry McMaster, a Republican. Sheheen’s campaign didn’t immediately respond to questions Tuesday on the matter.

On thing that astounds me is that MSM types will actually go along with the Haley strategy of distraction by asking questions about inside-the-Beltway GOP litmus tests of a candidate running for governor of South Carolina. Abortion? Immigration? Obamacare? (This kind of mindlessness — the phenomenon whereby reporters exercise no judgment whatsoever about what matters, slavishly going along with any idiotic topic that gets brought up by either of the two “sides” you’re falling all over yourself to be fair and impartial to, whether it’s relevant or not — is why I gave up news and switched to editorial in 1994. In editorial, you’re allowed to think, and call B.S. “nonsense.” Unfortunately, we still couldn’t call it “B.S.” Not in a family newspaper. Or on a family blog.)

There is no frickin’ way I would expect a governor of SC to have an overall opinion on Obamacare. Hey, I don’t have an opinion on Obamacare (if I did, you’d have read it here). But maybe that’s because I sort of quit paying attention to Obama on health care way back during the primary campaigns back in the Year Seven, when it became clear that he was too timid even to suggest doing what ought to be done. (Seriously, folks, have you seen any effects from this massive health care “reform” yet? Neither have I.) Since that’s my position, I tend to look at these Republicans who keep wetting their pants about their imagined “government takeover of health care” as though they were recent arrivals from Venus. (Which, in case you missed the implication, is an “effeminate” planet. Your more masculine delusionals come from Mars.)

Another thing that astounds me is that Vincent stays cool and doesn’t get totally ticked off about it. I certainly would.

Maybe that — the fact that Vincent stays cool — is what Trey thinks is “effeminate.” Maybe Vincent should take a swing at reporters when they ask stuff like that. Not at Yvonne; that wouldn’t be manly. How about Tim Smith of The Greenville News? He’s the one who always wears the cowboy hat. It’s always manly to hit a guy in a cowboy hat. In fact, I’m pretty sure there’s a codicil in the unwritten Guy Code that if a guy’s wearing a cowboy hat, you’re allowed (and perhaps required) to hit him, whether he’s done anything to provoke you or not. OK, that should be Vincent’s strategy from now on: Whenever anyone in the MSM asks a particularly stupid, irrelevant or irritating question, Vincent should just take a big swing at Tim Smith. After a few times of doing this, the TV cameras would be ready and watching for it, and reporters would be making up stupid questions just to see Vincent pop Tim a good one. The voters would all see this on their boob tubes, and that would lay this “effeminate answers” non-issue to rest for good.

Anyway, I was standing there during the exchange that Yvonne was writing about, which you can see pictured in this image from a previous post (that’s Tim in his cowboy hat, and Yvonne at the left). You can also see Yvonne with me back on Episode 2 of “Pub Politics,” the one entitled “Wesley Sounds Like Crap.” But that’s sort of a digression, isn’t it? Although not nearly as much of a digression as asking candidates for governor of SC about abortion, immigration and national health care policy.

Vincent can stay cool in such absurd moments, because his staff gets all ticked off for him — the way I would. Below, you can see Campaign Manager Trav Robertson intervening to tell the reporters in no uncertain terms to can the stupid, irrelevant questions — and to arrange a time for an extended interview if they want to talk about irrelevancies. Good for you, Trav. Go get ’em…

… and curse Sir Walter Raleigh; he was such a stupid get…

As the man said in the song, I’m so tired… and yet have accomplished so little today. Blogwise, anyway. Progress was made here and there, but little satisfaction was to be had.

And the day began with such promise.

First, I went to an interesting breakfast discussion of clean energy at the Cap City Club, and haven’t had time since then even to peruse my notes, so I’ll just give you the press release:

Business and elected leaders gather in Columbia for energy roundtable

State and national experts discuss the tie between clean energy and job creation in SC

Columbia, SC – More than 60 business and elected leaders attended an energy roundtable this morning hosted by SC Businesses for Clean Energy. The organization is a coalition of over 100 businesses in the state seeking to create jobs and enhance national security by improving energy efficiency and developing clean-energy alternatives.

“There is a growing awareness in our state’s business community that we can create jobs and lower energy bills by improving the way we produce and consume energy,” said SC Businesses for Clean Energy founder Clare Morris. “Discussions like the one at the energy roundtable are just the beginning of the conversation.”

The roundtable included a panel discussion featuring three experts on energy and economic policy in South Carolina:  Grant Jackson, senior vice president for community development with the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce; Russ Keller, vice president for advanced technology international (ATI) of South Carolina Research Authority (SCRA); and Suzanne Watson, policy director with the American Coalition for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE). The moderator was Bob Bouyea, publisher of the Columbia Regional Business Report.

“There is a realization in South Carolina that we do not have coal, oil, or uranium, and that we have to import these energy sources from other places,” said Jackson during the panel discussion. “At the same time, we have abundant offshore wind, solar, and biomass, as well as, hydrogen and nuclear energy potential. Clean energy is a path to jobs.”

Jackson cited a July 2010 poll of South Carolina small businesses that showed 68 percent support clean energy initiatives.

Keller added, “It’s going to be small, innovative companies that will lead. We need to help encourage their ideas so that they can build their products right here in South Carolina and then sell them all over the world.”

Panelists also agreed that while attitudes in South Carolina are changing, the state needs a comprehensive energy plan to diversify its energy sources and create incentives for improving energy efficiency.

“ACEEE does not argue in favor of any one energy source because every state has its own particular resources and goals,” said Watson. “But invest in efficiency first and you will reduce the costs for any new generation power source that you build.”

Watson cited efforts by the South Carolina Electric Cooperatives to weatherize tens of thousands of South Carolina homes as a positive step toward reducing energy costs and creating jobs. A state-specific report released last year by ACEEE found that overall, investing in energy efficiency could create over 20,000 jobs and save ratepayers $5.1 billion on their bills by 2025.

The ACEEE report can be found at: http://www.aceee.org/research-report/e099

“It was tremendous to see that Boeing is coming to South Carolina,” noted Watson. “But energy efficiency could create six times more jobs than Boeing facility.”

Breakfast sponsors included SC Businesses for Clean Energy, SCBiz News, the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina, New Carolina, EngenuitySC, and the Quality of Life Task Force of the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce.

Then, while I was trying to get some ADCO work done, I got a phone call from the guy with the Huffington Post who had sent me this e-mail:

Hi Brad,
Ben Bell from the Huffington Post here. I just came across your blog.
I am writing to alert you to an opportunity. Right now we are in the process of building a network of citizen journalists to cover specific congressional candidates/incumbents this fall all across the country.
In SC, we are trying to get citizen journalists to cover Rob Miller and or John Spratt. The job would require the CJ to submit a weekly round up submission and attend events related to the specific candidate as they can. We are flexible on the number of events attended. The start date is TBA and is intended to be something done by someone with a full-time job or other commitment.
The position is not paid, but does offer the excellent chance for the CJ to get a byline on the HuffPost, which is a fast-growing and influential site. This would be a great opportunity for everyone from professors and professional bloggers to journalism students and those just interested in politics. All are welcome to express interest.
Please let me know if you are interested ASAP.
Also, we can discuss linking to your blog it when you submit content we publish.
Best,
Ben Bell

In discussing it with him on the phone today, I found the proposition intriguing, but am still undecided whether to pursue it. Actually, I sort of wanted y’all’s input on it, and was going to write a post listing the pros (such as, he said they WOULD link to my blog, and it might boost my traffic) and cons (as in, “the position is not paid”) as I saw them and asking what y’all thought, but I’m just too tired, and right now I want to go eat my dinner, and have a beer before I hit the sack. Maybe later.

Then I ran to Al Amir with the ADCO partners for an early lunch.

Then I went to the Vincent Sheheen thing downtown.

Then Lora and I conducted an interview with a guy in Canada about a potential project for ADCO. One that will require quite a few more such interviews before we’re even getting rolling good on it. Then, I suggested some wording changes for something we were doing on an RFP for another prospective client.

Then, there was another meeting about a project that just came up which I need to get finished by the end of the day tomorrow for an actual (not merely prospective) ADCO client. Not hard, but fairly labor-intensive (which means not much blogging tomorrow, either).

Then I sat down and whipped out a press release for that same client, minus a couple of questions I hope to get answered by tomorrow morning.

Then I went over some materials from yet another client who needs some PR help, anticipating running into the client tomorrow morning and taking it to the next step.

Then, determined that I would get SOMETHING to the point of completion today, around 6 p.m. I whipped out that post about the Sheheen thing, but now that I look at it I see it is practically incoherent.

And then I came home. And on the way home, I decided I’d write this to explain why the blog was less than stellar today, and why you didn’t get a Virtual Front Page.

Because, while I don’t have a lot to show (yet) for all my busy-ness today, I’m just so tired…

It was one of those days.

Sheheen and the mayors

I dropped by a press availability Vincent Sheheen had today, over at Bob Coble’s law offices, to announce the support he has received from a number of SC mayors.

The event was pretty anticlimactic, as one would assume that mayors would support Vincent. It’s pretty hard to imagine anyone who has to deal with the realities of municipal government — which is about practical public problems like filling potholes or making sure the garbage is collected, and not at all about Tea Party ideology, or any kind of ideology for that matter — actually, honestly wanting to see Nikki Haley become governor. To the extent that who the governor is matters to a mayor, one would assume that they would prefer a pragmatic guy like Vincent.

One of the few questions asked at the event was whether any of the mayors self-identified as Republican. One mayor spoke up to say that he deeply values his nonpartisan status (as any sensible person would) and won’t identify himself as being inclined to either party. Good for him. But the point was taken — were any of the mayors present taking a political risk by being there?

I kind of doubt it, although I’ll be happy to stand corrected if any of my readers more familiar with local politics in the towns whose mayors signed the resolution — above left — would like to set me straight. The names and towns are listed at right. Maybe some of these are taking a huge risk; I’m just not aware of it.

By that I don’t mean to belittle their stepping forward. Any time anyone stands up to be counted on something as important as this race for governor, I appreciate it. And I put more stock in the opinion of the embattled folks who try to run local governments in South Carolina — a state in which the Legislature does everything it can to make the job of local governments impossible — that in the views of almost anyone else.

If you’re running for governor in South Carolina, there are few people whose respect and support would mean more than that of mayors.

That said, it would even more meaningful if a few mayors who risked their political futures by doing so would step forward.

I actually know of some folks who fit that description — but I sincerely doubt they will ever step forward.

That’s because there is a considerable gap between people in their communities who have to deal with public policy on the business end, where it meets the road (and other mixed metaphors) and average voters of the sort quoted in that story in The State about Nikki’s cheerleaders in her home county — well-meaning folks who don’t live and breath public policy, and don’t really examine the matter beyond the fact that Nikki’s one of their own, or that she’s a woman, or whatever.

An elected official in a community like that is highly unlikely to come out for Vincent Sheheen. Which is a shame.

I like Steve Benjamin, and Joe Riley is probably the one elected official I admire most in South Carolina. But it’s no surprise that they would back Vincent.

What would be remarkable, and maybe help move the needle, would be for some of the less likely suspects to step forward.

A constructive suggestion

I got this feedback from Nancy:

Your links need to open in a new window, for the ones going to external sites, I say “grrr” every time I open one and its in the same window. 😉

You can tell WordPress to do this in that little window that pops up on the visual tab when you’re editing and inserting a link there, tell it to open in a new window, or on the html tab, insert target=”_blank” in the link code. So, it looks like 

Only for the links going to a site other than yours. 😉

Cheers,

N

OK, so I figured out how to make it open in a new window — although it will require remembering an extra step each time I do a link. Maybe I can figure a way to make it the default, but I don’t see how yet.

Actually, what I would prefer would be for it to open in a new tab, not a new window. A lot of people resent it when a new window suddenly pops into being. I’m one of them.

But so far, I don’t see that as an option.

Before I proceed further, any thoughts from anyone else on this issue?

Virtual Front Page, Monday, August 23, 2010

Starting off the week, here are our headlines. Not a lot of news today, but some interesting step-back-and-take-note-of kinds of pieces:

  1. Trapped Chilean Miners Are Alive (WSJ) — This is a few hours old, but still has a significant “wow” factor. And how often do you get to lead with a good-news story. Of course, it’s still a huge challenge to get them out alive.
  2. Pakistan’s humanitarian situation critical – UN (BBC) — The continuing tragedy… You may also be interested in this NPR angle, “In Pakistan, Militants Use Flood Aid To Seek Support.”
  3. Virus may cause chronic fatigue (WashPost) — I know what you’re thinking: Is this why I’m so tired today?
  4. Petraeus says Taliban momentum halted in key areas (BBC) — Just to give you a bit more good news.
  5. Storm Defenses in New Orleans Nearly Ready, but Mistrusted (NYT) — This $15 billion wall raises interesting questions about the efficacy of being prepared for anything and everything, as opposed to accepting that sometimes stuff happens. And no, I don’t know which is right.
  6. Hong Kong hostages killed in Manila bus siege (BBC) — Thank goodness for the BBC’s international coverage, or I’d have trouble getting 6 stories for my front.

Sorry I couldn’t find anything local that competed, but I just couldn’t. I hate it when that happens.

“Again with the negative waves, Moriarty!”

Again with the negative waves!

Once again, the media are filled with negative vibes about our economy, utterly heedless of the fact that the central tenet of the Warthen School of Economics is that “the economy” is an utterly abstract and theoretical thing built from collective emotions, and that the greatest single cause of “bad economic conditions” is negative thoughts regarding the economy.

This time, my beef is with this headline in the Columbia Regional Business Report:

Final accounting for S.C. fiscal ’10 paints grim financial picture

Thing is, the story (by my old friend Jim Hammond) is actually about what already happened with the state budget, which is fine. What gets me is that the headline implies bad economic times ahead. At least that’s the way I erroneously read it. And headlines are enough to make things bad.

To end with the words with which Oddball ends the above serious of clips, Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

And yeah, I’m kind of being facetious here. I just wanted an excuse to run the Oddball clips from “Kelly’s Heroes.” This, by the way, was what I was looking for earlier when I ran across the Kerouac clip.