Author Archives: Brad Warthen

RichCo board of elections needs to go away for good

1 Reply

The Richland County Board of Elections and Voter Registration, a useless entity created by the county’s legislative delegation for its own perverse, unknowable reasons, should definitely cease to exist.

The State made that case fairly thoroughly today. An excerpt:

The board has failed repeatedly to act in the public’s best interest. While former director Lillian McBride shoulders much of the blame for the botched election, a preliminary report noted that the board had failed to ask important questions.

After the election fiasco, the board initially refused to acknowledge that it had the power to discipline the director; when the panel finally acknowledged its authority, it refused to remove Ms. McBride. Once Ms. McBride resigned, the board bent over backward — much farther than it should have — to accommodate her, creating a deputy director’s slot that pays $74,600.

When it embarked upon the single most significant task involved in rebuilding public confidence and trust — hiring a credible director — the board blew it. It created a search committee led by a member who had just joined the board. That search committee chairman caused tension by barring a fellow member of the Board of Elections from discussions with candidates; he also played a role in the committee’s refusal to release the names of the three finalists as required by law.

But The State secured the names of the finalists and, through routine checks, discovered problems in each candidate’s work history. As troubling as it is that the candidates failed to reveal the matters, it is also unacceptable that the committee didn’t conduct a thorough enough search to discover them.

When two of the finalists withdrew their names, the only prudent thing to do was to start a new search. Instead, the Board of Elections hired the remaining finalist — Howard Jackson, the Orangeburg County elections director.

Mr. Jackson failed to tell search committee members that he had been investigated in 2008 for election-law violations involving alleged absentee ballot irregularities.

The State Law Enforcement Division found no wrongdoing, but his failure to be upfront about it doesn’t engender trust, which is essential to turning the Richland County office around…

But in case you find The State‘s opprobrium to measured and calm, there’s always Mia McLeod out there to channel our rage, like Key and Peele’s “Obama’s Anger Translator.” She put this release out today:

Since the infamous Richland County Elections fiasco of 2012, the Old Guard (“OG”) has really ramped it up a few notches. Turns out…fiercely protecting and defending incompetence is only a fraction of the skills they’ve acquired during their 6-month tirade.

Who else could take a beyond-botched general election and turn it into a reality-tv scandal in a matter of days? Yeah, the OG is mega-talented, alright. Some parts scripted…some not…but clearly, no shortage of actors or creative content.
And while the OG renders Oscar-worthy performances…it’s Richland County voters who stood in line for 6-8 hours last November, only to be cast as “extras” in this dramatic mini-series.

But sometimes, “extras” stumble onto their “five minutes of fame” and this time was no different because these lucky voters not only got a chance to be disenfranchised one time…they got to experience a 6-month “Exclusion Extravaganza!” And they even get to pay for it.

Brilliant…isn’t it?

In fact, the OG was gracious enough to allow us to take an “after-the-fact” glimpse of behind-the-scenes footage, just so our palates can get a taste (never-mind the smell) of what they’ve crammed down our throats.

Okay, I think we’re ready. Open wide, now…

(Brief pause while we rewind. Please hold your applause until the end).

November 6, 2012 – The biggest voter disenfranchisement in SC history
OG advises Elections Director to “shut-up” and shut it down, while they develop their game plan
Attorney General issues Opinion: County Legislative Delegation has no authority to fire Elections Director, despite hiring her
OG launches aggressive lobbying effort to influence County Elections Commissioners and Council members to not fire Director, while“stacking the deck” with OG Elections Commissioner(s); (new) OG Commissioner appointed; begins serving “officially” the same day
OG controls delegation meetings to appease and deceive the public; stalls for time
Investigative report” reveals the obvious…Director is responsible for Election Day debacle by not deploying enough machines or staffers
OG back room negotiations continue, to protect & insulate Director
Elections Director prematurely announces resignation (through attorney) to Legislative Delegation during executive session; delegation member publicly discloses the impending resignation too soon; director reneges until OG finalizes her “deal”
OG successfully secures contractual agreement for Director, who is publicly “demoted” and privately promoted to a newly created taxpayer-funded position
OG appoints Interim Director; pays him big money to carry out “master plan”; names “Search Committee” for new Director; stacks deck with OG members to ensure desired results
OG repeatedly refuses to acknowledge or accept meeting requests by delegation members to discuss critical elections issues
Seventeen applications received and “screened” by the Search Committee; three applicants meet eligibility requirements; two of three finalists “mysteriously” withdraw their names in the final hours
OG announces to the public and delegation on May 15th, that remaining finalist is new director and proudly welcomes yet another “Jackson” into the fold; trio (Delegation Chair, Councilman, Elections Director) is complete
OG schedules first delegation meeting of 2013 for June 4th (2 days before session ends), after critical elections decisions have been made

So with all due respect to the new Richland County Elections Director, because the OG has consistently and calculatedly closed the process to the public, his hiring and everything associated with it, looks and smells… shady. Why not reopen (or open) the process to new applicants instead of choosing one by default?

Quite frankly, it’s the “stench” of the last six months that makes so many of us turn up our noses in disbelief and disgust. So even if Mr. Jackson is the best Elections Director this county has ever seen (and he very well could be…) the OG has gone out of its way to present him on a filthy garbage can lid instead of the fine China that might’ve been a much more fitting and flattering accompaniment.

And once again, Richland County residents are the forsaken, forgotten ones. But, it’s not Mr. Jackson that we loathe. It’s the process and the “platter” upon which he was presented.

Closed-door meetings. Back-room deals. Lies. Cover-ups.

What else could we possibly need to restore public trust? This scandal leaves Richland County voters with uncounted ballots and a $153,000 bill. How could we not have confidence in a process that obviously works? Bravo, OG!

Perhaps Mr. Jackson will find his role in the sequel because in 2014 and 2016, the curtain rises again. Only this time, the “extras” are gonna make their debut…center stage. And the OG’s season finale will hopefully bring its tumultuous reign to an end.

Now, that episode will be one worth watching. Stay tuned…

P. Diddy breaks all barriers on ‘Downtown Abbey’

2 Replies

In providing a sneak preview of his star turn on “Downton (or as he calls it, ‘Downtown’) Abbey,” Sean “P. Diddy” Combs breaks the color barrier, the time barrier, the genre barrier and of course the comedy barrier.

PBS denies that Combs has joined the cast of the wildly popular period drama, but “Funny or Die” provides video proof to the contrary. Besides, P. Diddy said it was so on Twitter, so whom are you going to believe?

Yes, there’s strong language, but quite mild compared to his performance in “Get Him to the Greek.”

I don’t know where I’ve been, but this is the first time I’ve run across “Funny or Die,” which according to Wikipedia was founded by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay’s production company, Gary Sanchez Productions.

Good stuff. Since SNL isn’t going to be funny any more with Bill Hader gone, y’all should definitely check it out.

… no matter what Rand Paul may tell you

8 Replies

This headline on thestate.com just cracked me up:

Don’t be alarmed by the helicopters, National Guard says

You really need to look at the picture with it.

I couldn’t help thinking of all the people who would not be reassured by those words. Starting with all those folks who thought Rand Paul’s filibuster about drone attacks in the U.S. was the greatest thing since Daniel Webster.

I’m further reminded of summer maneuvers that were conducted up in the Pee Dee one summer when I was a kid, and staying with my grandparents in Bennettsville. I guess I was 8 or 9. Everywhere you went, there were military convoys and soldiers bivouacking in farm fields. I seem to recall the sounds of the titanic struggle between the Red and Blue armies out on the edge of town — artillery, small arms fire — but that may be my memory making it seem more exciting than it was.

Of course, we kids were inspired to play war, too. One day, I was lying in wait in a ditch just off Jordan Street, ready for an ambush, when an open jeep with a couple of soldiers pulled up at the stop sign not six feet from me. The guy in the passenger seat looked down at me in the ditch, with my helmet and toy gun, formed his thumb and forefinger into a mock pistol, pointed and me and went, “Bang.”

He got me. I guess I should have found better cover.

I suppose I knew I was being condescended to, but being a kid, I was sort of flattered to have been included in the adults’ game, however fleetingly…

An insider’s perspective on the Sanford campaign, Part I

Leave a reply
The author with the candidate.

The author with the candidate.

Several weeks ago, my friend Clare Morris said she planned to go down to Charleston and volunteer in Mark Sanford’s campaign sometime before the 1st Congressional District special election was over. Knowing that she went to college with the guy, and worked for him in his congressional office and later in his Commerce Department, I did not react with shock or horror. At least, not outwardly. I flatter myself that I’m good at the deadpan reaction.

When I ran into her at the benefit for Boston bombing victims Tuesday evening at the Capital City Club, she started telling me about working in the campaign. I asked her to write a guest piece about the experience. She jumped at the opportunity. In fact, she got into it enough that she’s giving it to me in a couple (or maybe even three) installments. This is the first.

So never let it be said that nothing sympathetic to Mark Sanford runs in this bit of the blogosphere. Enjoy Clare’s report:

How I Spent the Final Days of Mark Sanford’s Congressional Campaign

By Clare Morris

I’ve known Mark Sanford since I was 17 years old. We met during Orientation Week for Furman’s Class of ’83.

I’ve always liked Mark – he was an easygoing and fun guy in college.

When he was elected to Congress in the mid-‘90’s, I worked as his press secretary. We kept in touch over the years, and when he became governor of South Carolina, I was the spokesperson for the SC Department of Commerce.

This gives a little context to what I’m about to describe.

I went to Charleston the last few days before the 1st Congressional District special election and volunteered for Mark’s campaign.

When I told people that was what I was planning to do, the answer was pretty much, “Are you crazy???” I was like, “He’s an old friend from college, and I want to be there to support him.”

So, here’s a little timeline of what it was like:

 

Sunday, May 5th

I wind around East Bay Street in Charleston until I finally find the campaign headquarters. It’s in this small kind of dirty old building across from the Harris Teeter.

I get there and Mark is chatting with a couple who have driven all the way up from Fort Lauderdale to help with his campaign – Laura and Paul. When I noticed that Paul had on a jacket that had a Cato Institute logo on it, I thought, well, this guy is a true believer.

It had been years since Mark and I had seen each other – I’d left Commerce in 2006 to start my own company – and he seemed so tickled to see me. He gave me a big hug, thanked me for coming, introduced me to Paul and Laura, and made me promise that we’d have a “visit.”

What was so interesting about seeing him after all these years is that he seemed so comfortable in his own skin and genuinely happy. You’ve heard in press reports that he’s humbled and appreciative of the support he’s received from former staffers and volunteers, and that’s absolutely how his demeanor seemed.

The campaign headquarters was filled with former staffers (folks I’d worked with back in the mid-‘90’s) and volunteers from all over. The atmosphere was unbridled optimism.

The volunteer coordinator needed us to make calls to get people out to vote and to encourage them to support Mark. The phones were pretty complicated, and the Florida couple and I needed a little orientation to figure out how to work them.

They had phone numbers of likely Mark supporters queued up, and also a script to follow. It was something like this:

“Hi! My name is Clare (no last name) and I’m a friend of Mark Sanford.  I’m just calling to remind you that the special congressional election is coming up on Tuesday. Are you planning to vote?”

At this point, you would document their answer directly into the phone. The next part was:

“Great! Do you think Mark can count on your support?”

Again, you document their answer and thank them for their time.

I have very limited campaign experience. What was really notable about this campaign, however, was that volunteers were instructed to absolutely not say anything bad about the opponent. I was told, “We’re really not into that.”

I made 100 calls that afternoon. It was pretty even between Mark and his opponent. However, one kind of crazy old irate guy said, “If I were you, I wouldn’t say that I’m a friend of Mark Sanford’s!”

I said, “Well, actually, I am. We went to college together.”

He hung up on me.

 

Monday, May 6th

I purposely wore a dress and heels that day so that I wouldn’t have to hold up campaign signs out by the street.

I was back on phone duty and this time the folks I called could not tell me soon enough that they were voting for Mark and they were taking several of their friends to the polls. They actually interrupted my spiel to tell me that.

Also, interestingly enough, several folks I spoke to said that they were praying for him. One lady actually said that she and her friends were going to hold a prayer vigil for him that night. I made sure to tell him that and he seemed really touched by that.

Not all of the volunteers were human. There was this one lady who dressed up her dachshund and rolled him around in a stroller that had “Mark Sanford for Congress” stickers all over it. She talked to Mark every time he came in the room. I asked him at a volunteer appreciation cookout that night how he knew her, and he said that he didn’t.

At that party, the lady was taking pictures and suddenly put her little dog on my lap. I was sitting by Mark and he started making fun of me. A little while later, she put the dog on his lap. All of a sudden, it wasn’t that funny after all.

More to come…Election Day, the victory party, and meeting Maria.

With the dog...

With the dog…

Ted Vick makes the Daily Mail

8 Replies

Yes, the Daily Mail, as in the one in London — the one in “Paperback Writer,” for my fellow Boomers.article-2325324-19CE5AD1000005DC-443_306x366

Imagine my surprise. I just this morning loaded the Daily Mail app onto my iPod, and this was one of the first stories to pop up, right there on the main U.S. news page.

And why on Earth would an arrest of a South Carolina lawmaker be worth a headline in such a venue? I think maybe it was Todd Rutherford’s explanation about the rock in his shoe. They even squeezed that into the hed, “South Carolina Democrat arrested for second DUI in a year but blames ‘impairment’ on rock in his shoe.” An excerpt:

A South Carolina state representative has been arrested for his second DUI in less than a year despite claims by his attorney that his perceived impairment was because of a rock in his shoe.

State Rep. Ted Vick, D-Chesterfield, was arrested on the Statehouse grounds around 11 p.m. Tuesday by the Bureau of Protective Services, according to Department of Public Safety spokeswoman Sherri Iacobelli.

An officer followed Vick after seeing him stumbling as he walked into a parking garage in Columbia. Vick got into his car and hit a cone before the officer could catch up and ask him to stop…

But Vick’s lawyer, fellow Rep. Todd Rutherford, said Vick was not impaired.

Vick was walking funny because he had a rock in his shoe, said Rutherford, D-Columbia…

Kevin Fisher on Sanford, Kathleen and me

64 Replies

Kevin Fisher is a thoughtful columnist. He called to leave a message and warn me that I’d be mentioned in his column this week, as follows:

I realize that sentiment cuts to the quick of Sanford bashers, including people I like and respect. For example, former editorial page editor of The State and local blogger Brad Warthen sometimes seems obsessed with Sanford’s misdeeds, real or imagined.

Meanwhile, South Carolina’s own superb nationally syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker badly missed the mark in a prominent column leading up to the recent election, writing “Sanford’s candidacy is on life support … not only did his former wife Jenny not stand by her man, she wrote a book, went on TV and recently took him to court for trespassing … Where the wife goes, so go the people.”

Apparently not, to the dismay of not only the usually astute Warthen and Parker but also the inevitably smug and self-righteous commentators of MSNBC.
While partisan hacks are now the norm on cable news (both left and right), Chris Matthews and company repeatedly made fools of themselves by ridiculing the idea of a Sanford comeback, all while assuring each other that the people of SC-1 would not be such knaves as to vote for him…

Kevin always does that. He doesn’t really have to, when he’s saying something that mild, but I’m impressed that he does.

I did call him back to make a couple of points: One, that I never shared Kathleen’s belief that Sanford was toast. I sort of marveled at the fact that she seemed so convinced of it. In fact, I cast doubt on it at the time — even though between the time she wrote her column and I reacted to it, a poll had come out showing him 9 points behind. This is me then:

I think it’s premature to count Mark Sanford out. That district is so Republican, and he won the crowded GOP primary. The same people who voted for him all those times before seem poised to do it again. Relying on those voters not to show up on election day seems like a thin premise.

I now think he may lose. [That was because of the PPP poll.] I’d very much like to see him lose, because it would go a long way toward bolstering my faith in democracy in South Carolina, which frankly has been repeatedly bruised over the last few years. It would show that voters in that district have some sense.

But I’m not counting on it, not on the basis of information currently available to me…

And on the day before the election, I flatly wrote, “he is likely to win tomorrow…”

As for Kevin’s observation that “Brad Warthen sometimes seems obsessed with Sanford’s misdeeds, real or imagined,” I have two things to say. I write like that — very insistently and repeatedly — when I’m worried that something bad is going to happen. In this case, the bad thing being Mark Sanford returning to public office. It was a clear and present danger, as the outcome confirms.

Looking back, I think my best statement of the reasons voters shouldn’t have elected Sanford came after the election, when it was too late. That was in this comment:

Nor should voters have voted against Sanford because of the Argentina thing. Or the pathologically narcissistic interview a week later in which he droned on about his “soulmate.” (Michael Jackson died to save Mark Sanford from further humiliation, but he just had to grab the spotlight back.) Or messing up the State House carpet with the stupid piglet stunt. Or vetoing the entire state budget in 2006 (hours after it was too late for anyone to vote for his opponent in the GOP primary). Or the constant contempt he has heaped on his fellow elected Republicans over the years. Or being the only governor in the nation who didn’t want his state to get the stimulus money that they’d be on the hook for just as much as taxpayers in the rest of the country.

Not even for his maddening verbal tics. I would say.

No, at the end of the day (if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em), it should have been cumulative. People should have learned from the totality of his record in public life.

But they didn’t.

Note that those are real, not imagined, misdeeds. :)

And somehow, in all of that, I failed to mention his 37 ethics violations, including flying 1st or business class instead of coach as state regs required, using state aircraft for personal travel and spending campaign funds for noncampaign expenses. Mind you, this is the guy who was such a watchdog of public money that he made state employees double up in hotel rooms when they were on state business. And you know, that’s why his supporters supposedly love him — because he’s so respectful of their money. Which is hogwash, just for the record.

Your Virtual Front Page, Tuesday, May 14, 2013

40 Replies
FSB photo showing alleged International Man of Mystery Ryan Christopher Fogle, seated at right.

FSB photo showing alleged International Man of Mystery Ryan Christopher Fogle, seated at right. I like the touch of the one guy with the digitally blurred face.

It depends on what the definition of “news” is. Here’s mine, at this particular moment:

  1. FBI launches criminal probe of IRS conduct (WashPost) — One of two front-page stories out of a Holder presser today. The Post reveals an IG report on the mess as well.
  2. Russia to Expel American, Saying He Is a C.I.A. Officer (NYT) — If the latter-day KGB’s colorful allegations have any truth to them — if he indeed offered a potential agent $1 million a year — I want to go on record now as saying I am available to help CIA in any way I can. If I can lay my hands on the information, it’s yours. Do I get a decoder ring? And do I get to meet Anna Chapman?
  3. Holder: AP story posed major security threat (The Guardian) — Today’s other Holder story. By the way, he had called the presser to talk about Medicare fraud. But neither big headline that emerged was about that. Sort of like with the Obama-Cameron thing yesterday.
  4. Columbia couple sues state over toddler’s sexual reassignment surgery (thestate.com) — From the WTF file. However this lawsuit comes out, I don’t see how anyone is a winner…
  5. Wal-Mart Goes Solo on Bangladesh Initiatives (WSJ) — Following on actions by European retailers yesterday.
  6. Horror at Syria ‘heart-eating video’ (BBC) — I hope you weren’t eating dinner as you read this. I think maybe somebody in Syria has watched “Red Dawn” a few too many times…

Fund-raiser for Boston bombing victims tonight at Cap City

29 Replies

Just wanted to give y’all a heads-up on this event tonight, brought to my attention by my friend and fellow Capital City Club member Clare Morris:

MEDIA ADVISORY: Boston Marathon Bombing Fundraiser at the Capital City Club Tonight

The public is invited

 

What: The Capital City Club is sponsoring cocktails and fun for charity, featuring Celebrity Bartender Dr. Frank Clark. Dr. Clark, an avid runner and Columbia resident, finished the Boston Marathon in 2 hours and 57 minutes.image001

 

Frank’s special drink for the evening is Sam Adams Boston Lager. All Sam Adams Boston Lagers and Club brand drinks are $4.00. Complimentary hors d’oeuvres will be served.

 

When: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 5:30 to 7:00 pm

 

Where: The Capital City Club Lounge, 25th floor, Capital Center, 1201 Main St., Columbia

 

For more information: Contact Clare Morris (803.413.6808 or Clare@ClareMorrisAgency.com)

 

Check-out Frank’s WACH-FOX interview – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-hIbd_kw5Q

I’m going to drop by, and it would be great to see some of y’all there. As Clare said, the public is invited, so you don’t have to be a member. (Of course, if you’d like to become a member, I’ll be more than happy to help you with that.)

I like the way Clare worked Dr. Clark’s finishing time into the release. Aside from the horrific events of that day, I find his athletic achievement impressive.

Video of Benjamin campaign announcement

1 Reply

The Steve Benjamin campaign sent out this video of his announcement yesterday. I haven’t had time to watch it all myself — quite busy today — but I thought I’d make it available to you.

One thing that struck me in the minute or so that I did listen to — Benjamin wasn’t speaking as smoothly as he usually does. I guess he’s better speaking extemporaneously than he is reading a speech…

‘Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi!’

32 Replies

There’s a scene in “Bananas” in which Woody Allen’s character is discussing the economy of his new, adopted country, and when he’s told that bananas are its greatest export, he cries, “Bananas, bananas!” in a tone that conveys that he’s heard enough about that particular fruit. (I tried to find a video clip of that, but couldn’t. And is it my imagination that that movie used to be available on Netflix, but is not now?)Woody-Allen

There were times in recent months when many of us would have a similar reaction to Lindsey Graham’s (and John McCain’s, and Kelly Ayotte’s) repetition of the word, “Benghazi.”

Subsequent events have indicated that further inquiry into what happened there last Sept. 11 is at least worth further investigation. There should be bipartisan agreement on that much. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that any investigation that involves the Congress will be tainted by consideration of the 2016 presidential election, and the anticipated candidacy of Hilary Clinton.

For that reason, I though it particularly unfortunate that Lindsey Graham should say, just as everyone is finally paying attention, the following:

If it had been known by the American people seven weeks before the election the truth about Benghazi, I think it would have made a difference in the election…

No, it wouldn’t have. You still would have had Barack Obama going up against Mitt Romney, and the outcome would have been the same. It’s hard to imagine any sort of statement that might have been made about Benghazi. I mean, really, what would it have been? Are you saying the president should have said, “I’ve done a rotten job of protecting the American people, because I just don’t care. I could have saved the ambassador, but I personally decided not to, because I just didn’t like him. And I’ll do it the same way next time…”

It was a terrorist attack in a politically unstable place where there are tremendous numbers of weapons circulating, and it ended tragically. It should cause us to review consulate security across the globe. That’s the “truth about Benghazi,” and if the administration had said that on day one, and continued to say it through the election, I see no way it would have affected the election outcome.

Anyway, you and your fellow senators were being heard as you cried in the wilderness about this topic, before the election. But you were being dismissed by some as Republicans who were trying to wring electoral advantage from the tragedy. So… why would you want to give credence to that by saying something like this?

Nostalgia with an edge: Back before we were ‘green’

90 Replies

Bart shares this with me, apparently one of those email things that goes around.

As the “why, back in my day” genre goes, this one has a pretty good point:

Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to me the other day, that I should bring my own grocery bagsbecause plastic bags weren’t good for the environment.

I apologized and explained, “We didn’t have this green thing back in my earlier days.”

The clerk responded, “That’s our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations.”

She was right – our generation didn’t have the green thing in its day.

Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. But we didn’t have the green thing back in our day.

Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags, that we reused for numerous things, most memorable besides household garbage bags, was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our school books. This was to ensure that public property, (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribblings. Then we were able to personalize our books. But too bad we didn’t do the green thing back then.

We walked up stairs, because we didn’t have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn’t climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right. We didn’t have the green thing in our day.

Back then, we washed the baby’s diapers because we didn’t have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts — wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days.Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that young lady is right; we didn’t have the green thing back in our day.

Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house — not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana . In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn’t have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn’t fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn’t need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But she’s right; we didn’t have the green thing back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razorinstead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull. But we didn’t have the green thing back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn’t need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint.

But isn’t it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we older folks were just because we didn’t have the green thing back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish older person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smart — young GREEN person.

And dagnabit, we played outside instead of staring at a screen all day. Of course, that’s because there was nothing good on…

Your Virtual Front Page, Monday, May 13, 2013

23 Replies

Here’s what we have at this hour:

  1. Justice Department secretly obtained AP phone records (The Guardian) — AP’s top exec calls it a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.” Technically, the intrusion did not actually have mass and therefore couldn’t be “massive” (I once had an editor for whom this was a pet peeve), but you know what he meant.
  2. Obama says he ‘will not tolerate’ IRS misdeeds (WashPost) — The word “outrageous” was used. What I want to know is, if the IRS had to screw up like this, why did they have to do it to groups that believe, as an article of faith, that this is just the kind of thing government would do?
  3. Obama dismisses criticism of Benghazi talking points as ‘side show’ (WashPost) — Me, I’m feeling bad for PM David Cameron. Two headlines from his joint presser with POTUS, and neither is about their meeting. So much for the Special Relationship. Meanwhile… a car bomb kills several people in… Benghazi.
  4. Philly abortion doctor guilty in 3 babies’ deaths (AP) — There were a lot of stories out there on this, but I used this because it was the only headline that used the word, “babies.”
  5. Major Retailers Join Bangladesh Safety Plan (NYT) — Meanwhile, the death toll from the building collapse tops 1,100.
  6. Steve Benjamin seeks re-election as Columbia mayor (thestate.com) — But I already mentioned that.

Of course, Mayor Benjamin is running for re-election

4 Replies

This passage, in The State‘s advance story about Steve Benjamin’s expected announcement that he will seek re-election as mayor of Columbia, struck me:

Benjamin will be a latecomer to the race. Already, city council member Moe Baddourah, a restaurateur, and Larry Sypolt, a former FBI analyst, have announced for mayor…

Latecomer? Yeah, technically, others had announced before he did, but that’s not the way we think of it, is it? We tend to see the incumbent as already being in it, and the others who announce as challengers to the assumed candidate for re-election. If an incumbent does not run for re-election, that is news.

Much to the chagrin of Doug Ross and others who favor term limits…

Specifically, Steve Benjamin has seemed like he was running since he was first elected, maintaining a higher profile than his predecessor, and taking his communications efforts seriously from the beginning. He is, after all the first major to have the staff to do so.

Some may think I’m being critical in that previous paragraph. No, I think effective communications happen to be an essential element in leadership. And Mr. Benjamin has tried to be more of a leader than Columbia’s weak mayoral position would normally allow.

I like that he’s running on a platform of creating a strong-mayor system. But that makes me wonder — weren’t we talking about that in the last election? Why hasn’t it happened? (OK, yeah, I sort of know reasons it didn’t happen; I was being rhetorical.)

I didn’t make it to Benjamin’s announcement today. Here’s a release about it:

MAYOR BENJAMIN LAUNCHES RE-ELECTION BID


COLUMBIA, S.C. — Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin on Monday announced that he will seek re-election in the upcoming November 5 municipal election.

“Today, I am announcing that I will be a candidate for re-election and today we are launching our 2013 campaign,” Benjamin told reporters, supporters and onlookers during a morning press conference at the corner of Main and Taylor Streets in Downtown Columbia.

“Since I became Mayor three years ago, we have made a great deal of progress,” said Benjamin. “We’ve increased transparency, improved efficiency and cut waste. We’ve generated a budget surplus for three straight years, improved our credit rating, and saved taxpayers millions of dollars by restructuring government.

“We’ve created thousands of jobs, secured billions of dollars in capital investments and cut unemployment by over two-and-a-half percent. We’ve led an economic and cultural renaissance here on Main Street and throughout our city. We continue to build lasting regional partnerships toward a vibrant, dynamic 21st century Columbia.

“But most importantly, we’ve invested a tremendous amount in improving public safety. As a result, crime is down across the city in nearly every category and our first responders have the resources they need to keep our city safe.”

Benjamin, who took office in July 2010 after a hotly contested election to replace long-serving Mayor Bob Coble, promised to once again run a clean, positive campaign.

“I will focus clearly on what our community has accomplished so far and the positive things we can do together in the months and years ahead,” Benjamin said.

Benjamin will hold an official campaign kick-off event open to the public on Monday, May 20 at 5:30 pm at Tapps Art Center on Main Street.

 

# # #

I did make it to a fund-raiser for Moe Baddourah a couple of weeks ago. Not much to report. There were only about seven or eight people there, but I only stayed a few minutes, and it was a drop-in. Also, it’s very early in the campaign. Moe told me he had knocked on 2,700 doors so far, so he’s out there working.

One of Mr. Baddourah’s supporters told me the thing that had made him want to support the councilman was the recent decision by the city to buy the cotton warehouse.

That’s the thing about being the incumbent. For good or ill, you have a record…

 

‘Woof! Woof! (long pause while holding breath) Woooooof!’

7 Replies

Sometimes I get releases that really seem to come out of left field, such as this:

Dying Pets Prescribed Marijuana

 

Guest Opportunity:  Kim Baker, Animal Whisperer and Expert in Holistic Health for Animals

 

The debate over medical marijuana for pets is continuing to intensify as more veterinarians are speaking out about the pros and cons of the practice.

 

California vet, Dr. Doug Kramer, treated his own dog who was terminally ill from cancer.

 

Kramer said the marijuana regimen increased his dog’s “quality of life”. ..

Yeah, dude. I’ll bet it did.

Near as I can tell, this release did not intend to be humorous. And mind you, I’m not making fun of animals in pain. What cracks me up is the wording. This vet did NOT say the pet had less pain, or greater mobility, or improved appetite, or any other specific benefit. Just that its “quality of life” was increased.

I have to say I was completely unaware of this “issue” until now. TIME says they’re not making it up, though.

Jim DeMint not getting much respect on immigration — and that’s among conservatives

56 Replies

Jim DeMint, former far-right kingmaker, isn’t getting a lot of respect in his new role at the Heritage Foundation — even among conservatives.

Earlier this week, he put out a report suggesting that immigration reform as envisioned by the Gang of Eight will cost the country $6.3 trillion. The report is, quite understandably, ridiculed and excoriated on the left. But conservatives, people DeMint would once have counted as allies, aren’t very positively impressed either.

Kimberley Strassel made a point of that in her column in the WSJ today:

The Heritage Foundation on Monday released a report designed to kill immigration reform. A few days later, nearly 30 leaders, hailing from the core of the conservative movement—think tanks, faith groups, political and advocacy organizations—signed a public letter backing the congressional process. Which got more notice?

The media glory in conflict, and so they devoted this week to the angry feud/war/battle in the GOP over immigration reform. The evidence? One research document from one think tank. The real news is the growing unity among conservative leaders and groups over the need to at least embrace the challenge of reform. This is no 2007.

At the height of that past fray over immigration—as restrictionists whipped up seething grass-roots anger against reform, drowning out proponents—Heritage released a similar report. It fueled a raging fire, and played a singular role in derailing reform…

Very interesting. I don’t know to what extent this truly reflects a growing “conservative” consensus for sensible immigration reform, but it’s promising. (It would also be good news for Lindsey Graham for next year, although the DeMint faction in SC remains large.)

My own favorite comment on this general subject came more from the center-right — from David Brooks — earlier in the week. For him, it was a pretty scathing piece. An excerpt:

The opponents of immigration reform have many small complaints, but they really have one core concern. It’s about control. America doesn’t control its borders. Past reform efforts have not established control. Current proposals wouldn’t establish effective control.

But the opponents rarely say what exactly it is they are trying to control. They talk about border security and various mechanisms to achieve that, but they rarely go into detail about what we should be so vigilant about restricting. I thought I would spell it out.

First, immigration opponents are effectively trying to restrict the flow of conservatives into this country. In survey after survey, immigrants are found to have more traditional ideas about family structure and community than comparable Americans. They have lower incarceration rates. They place higher emphasis on career success. They have stronger work ethics. Immigrants go into poor neighborhoods and infuse them with traditional values.

When immigrant areas go bad, it’s not because they have infected America with bad values. It’s because America has infected them with bad values already present. So the first thing conservative opponents of reform are trying to restrict is social conservatism….

It goes on in that vein. Good stuff.

With a phone like that, who needs R2D2?

7 Replies

When I first saw this headline on my iPad this afternoon…

Amazon Is Developing Smartphone With 3-D Screen

… I thought, what on Earth would I want something like that for? I’ve seen 3D movies. I’m not impressed. Who needs that kind of cheesy distraction on a phone?

Then I thought, now what would be cool would be a phone with holographic projection, like the Princess Leia message that R2D2 carried…

Then I actually read the story, and saw this:

One of the devices is a high-end smartphone featuring a screen that allows for three-dimensional images without glasses, these people said. Using retina-tracking technology, images on the smartphone would seem to float above the screen like a hologram and appear three-dimensional at all angles, they said. Users may be able to navigate through content using just their eyes, two of the people said…

OK, now, that’s pretty cool. I’m not promising to give up my iPhone or anything (note: second product placement in this post; why is Apple not paying me to do this?), but I’d like to see that.

But it prompts questions:

  • Is the WSJ just not believing what it’s hearing? Talk about your over-attribution… “they said… they said… two of the people said…”
  • What do they mean by “seem to float above the screen like a hologram?” Would it not BE a hologram? If not, then what is it? Hypnosis?
  • Why have we not seen this technology in a consumer product before now? I’ve been hearing about holograms, it seems, since I was a kid. And while I’m at it, where are those flying cars that were supposed to be here before the 20th century was out?
  • Why Amazon? With all sorts of other companies out there with more experience and expertise in digital imaging, how on Earth would the company that sells books (and other stuff) on the Internet beat them to it? Why not Sony? Or Canon? Or Apple? Or HP? For that matter, I would think the Internet porn industry alone would have invested billions seeking this breakthrough…

Anyway, I’d like to see one of those…

 

What Charles Ramsey did — now THAT’S redemptive (as opposed to what Mark Sanford did the next day)

87 Replies

My initial purpose in writing this is to second what Joan Walsh says on Slate — that despite very bad things in Charles Ramsey’s past, including domestic violence, what he did the other day still makes him a hero:

In hindsight, maybe Charles Ramsey was trying to tell us something when he insisted to Anderson Cooper Tuesday night that he’s not a hero. “No, no, no. Bro, I’m a Christian, an American. I’m just like you,” he told the news anchor.

Maybe he knew the whole hero story line would come with an unhappy ending: Now we’ve learned, via the Smoking Gun, that Ramsey was charged with and served time for multiple domestic violence counts. He was also convicted and imprisoned on drug charges and receiving stolen property.

All of that is awful, particularly for his ex-wife and daughter. But it doesn’t change the fact that Ramsey was a hero when he helped Amanda Berry escape Monday night. It may make him even more admirable, if he had an inkling that his sudden fame might expose his troubled past…

Of course he’s a hero — one with deep flaws. But all heroes are flawed. That Mr. Ramsey’s are what they are makes what he did this week, if anything, more laudatory.

I’m not dismissing his past offenses as some sort of colorful details. To me, there is no crime more contemptible than domestic violence, except the abuse of children — which is its close relative. Wife-beaters are right down there among the lowest of the low.

But what he did Monday was a redemptive act. One more excerpt from the piece:

To dismiss the character Ramsey showed in rescuing Berry is to suggest that nobody who’s ever done something bad should try to do something good, because the bad will always matter more. It would be a shame if Ramsey’s exposure, and the cackling about his past from some quarters, served to discourage other ex-convicts from helping others for fear that their pasts will come back to haunt them.

What Mr. Ramsey did on Monday didn’t erase his past offenses. Those are still on his ledger. But it was still heroic, and it has redemptive value.

This brings us to Mark Sanford.

I was pretty upset with the news headlines I saw in a couple of SC newspapers saying that Sanford had achieved “redemption” through his victory. Note again, these were news stories about the election, not opinion pieces, expressing a highly debatable opinion about the meaning of his win. More offensively, they were using the language of faith, of theology, making an assertion about the salvation of a man’s soul. Unless they were talking about trading in pop bottles for the deposit — the only other common use of the word “redeem” I can think of — and we don’t do that in South Carolina.

They had no business doing that. Especially since Mr. Sanford presumes to speak for the Almighty a lot, with his line about the God of… what’s he up to now, by his own count… eighth chances? (As I said in a comment yesterday, I think God should get a good lawyer and seek an injunction to stop Sanford from going around blaming the election result on Him.)

Managing to con a Republican district into voting for you with a campaign that consists of frightening them with a big picture of Nancy Pelosi — a cheap, generic, off-the-shelf, appeal to visceral partisanship — does not constitute “redemption.” Showing Nancy Pelosi and saying “Boo!” is like striking Republicans on the patellar ligament with a rubber hammer — you get a reflexive response. Earlier, when he was talking about himself, he was losing.

So don’t talk to me about redemption.

“Oh, but that’s just your opinion, Brad,” you say. Absolutely. It’s a carefully considered, supportable opinion that I think a lot of people would share. Which is why that word shouldn’t have appeared in those headlines.

I’m about to get back to Charles Ramsey, in just a moment…

For close to four years now, Mark Sanford has been going around asking us to forgive him, being careful to mention that God has forgiven him — the heavy implication being, so what are you people, better than God? He does this in that casual, unconcerned way that he has of expressing himself. Within the context of his other actions — such as his repeated violations of the terms of his divorce decree — it all comes across as just another element in his powerful sense of self-entitlement. Mark Sanford does whatever he wants — ditch the job to run off to Argentina, abandon his boys on Father’s Day weekend, lie to his staff about where he’s going, veto the entire state budget, block stimulus money that his state needs so he can posture on FoxNews about it 46 times, carry defecating piglets into the State House to make a cheap political point and leave others to clean up the mess, use state funds to visit his mistress in the Southern Hemisphere when he’s making state employees on state business double up in hotel rooms (because he’s such a fiscal conservative), enter his ex-wife’s house without permission repeatedly, because he feels like it. Because he’s Mark Sanford, and he’s entitled. And if any of it gets him into trouble, then we’re supposed to forgive him.

Meanwhile, Charles Ramsey is a sinner who’s done jail time for his crimes. He doesn’t ask us to forgive him, much less expect us to forgive him. He doesn’t ask anything of us. He exhibits no sense of entitlement. He’s just this dude who, when a woman cried for help while he was eating his McDonald’s, went out of his way to help her. A guy with a low-enough opinion of himself that when a pretty young white girl comes and hugs him, he knows something is wrong.

What he did doesn’t erase what he’s done in the past, and he doesn’t go around telling us that it should. But it was a redemptive act, and it was heroic.

Your Virtual Front Page, Wednesday, May 8, 2013

28 Replies

Just some quick headlines:

  1. Official recounts frustration at Libya response (WashPost) — According to Jennifer Rubin, it was more dramatic than that headline makes it sound.
  2. Bangladesh death toll tops 800 (The Guardian) — It just gets worse and worse.
  3. Charges in Cleveland Abduction  (WSJ) — What a horrific story.
  4. Jenny wins; Sanford admits to being in contempt (AP) — Of his divorce decree. His contempt for the people of the 1st District, and their willingness to submit to it, is another matter.
  5. 17 U.S. officers stripped of missile power (The Guardian) — Nuclear missiles, that is. A very disturbing leaked report.
  6. Lawmakers Shift Focus to Sex Assaults in Military (NYT) — This was a bigger story yesterday than today, but I didn’t do a VFP yesterday.

 

Jenny wins; Sanford admits to being in contempt

24 Replies

Of his divorce decree, that is:

By BRUCE SMITH — Associated Press

CHARLESTON, S.C. — Newly elected Congressman Mark Sanford and his ex-wife have settled a complaint that said he was at her home without her permission in violation of their divorce agreement….

Under the settlement, Sanford admits he was in contempt of the divorce decree then and on previous occasions. The judge agreed to withhold sentencing Sanford as long as he complies with the provision in their divorce settlement that he not enter his ex-wife’s Sullivans Island, S.C., home without her permission.

Sanford also agreed to pay her $5,000 in fees and court costs…

As to the matter of his showing contempt for the people of the 1st District, and them just eating it up, that’s another story.

He’s all yours, Lowcountry, and welcome to him.