It speaks for itself:
Vote for Change in 2012
It speaks for itself:
Vote for Change in 2012
Elizabeth Moffly, candidate in the GOP primary run-off for State Superintendent of Education, has attended college, but in all of her 49 years, she apparently could never find the time to complete a degree. When we first heard this, we thought it might be a joke–with the punchline comparing her to the substandard graduation rate in SC schools–but no, it’s true and strange.
Without a degree, she wouldn’t be qualified to teach in SC schools, even as a substitute teacher. Yet she wants to be the State Superintendent of Education.
We could go on with our review of her positions and forget that her 2006 endorsement of Democrat Jim Rex helped narrowly elect him Superintendent and cripple our schools for four more needless years, but smart, enthusiastic lady she may be, we simply suggest she get the education before she gets the job.
Our endorsement of Mick Zais, however, is not solely due to a process of elimination. A review of just his campaign website finds an impressive resume (BA, MA & PhD degrees, 31 years in the US Army culminating as Brigadier General, in-classroom experience teaching at West Point, president of Newberry College), as well as positions we favor, such as expansion of school choice, performance pay for teachers, increased emphasis on classroom discipline and transparency in school expenditures.
Information in newspaper, radio and internet reports, such as the Post & Courier’s “10 Questions” and WLMA’s “Meet Me at the Diner” on-air candidate interviews, did little to conflict with the information Zais himself presented.
Therefore, the Charleston Reader endorses Mick Zais in the GOP primary run-off for State Superintendent of Education.
In the June 8 primary for Berkeley County Supervisor, the Charleston Reader “reluctantly, half-heartedly” endorsed Hanahan mayor Minnie Blackwell for the job.
We should have been more emphatic in our support for Blackwell, because it was the only GOP race in which the Charleston Reader endorsee did not win or at least place in the run-off.
Blackwell garnered just under 19% of the vote. Current US congressman Henry Brown and current county supervisor Dan Davis both received over 40%, with Davis beating Brown by three votes. (A sitting US congressman can’t even come in first to win a demotion to a puny county job?) Now we are stuck with the pitiful run-off choice between Davis and Brown.
Blackwell has thrown her support behind Brown. Curious, because if Brown hadn’t entered the race (after Blackwell had already declared), then Blackwell would have had a good chance to win the race.
A week before the election, Blackwell was practically acting as if Brown were her only opponent. The last posting on her Facebook page–now deleted but still accessible through Google cache for a while–read: (Just add [sic] where appropriate in this uncorrected version.)
…we want everyone to know that Henry Brown States in his many flyers he sends out, that he will bring jobs to Berkeley County because of his many contacts he has in Washington! Henry has been in Washington for the past SEVERAL yrs why didn’t he bring jobs then? What makes us think Henry Brown will bring them NOW?
Just by running, Brown pushed Blackwell aside and stopped her political advancement. Yet, Blackwell has shown herself to be a political animal. After her loss, she initially said she would not make an endorsement in the race and then promptly endorsed Brown a few days later. We suspect that her reasons for backing Brown now may be more politically advantageous to herself than to Berkeley County. After all, he would have more connections than Davis should she wish to continue in political life or seek opportunities beyond her current middle school teaching position. We don’t begrudge her that, but it’s not going to help us any. Therefore, we have to discount the endorsement of our former endorsee.
So in one corner we now have Davis, who has paid insufficient attention to citizens’ wishes and complaints and has been incapable of getting along with a council whose positions we tend to support more than Davis’. County employees complain he acts like a puffed-up potentate. (If the comments section of that hyperlinked story is to be believed, some of the preparations the various county agencies make for a visit from the august Davis would do the administration of Kim Jong-Il equally proud.)
The supervisor’s blog on the county website has the distinct odor of campaign propaganda about it–and much of it is linked to by Davis’ campaign Facebook page. (See his March 12 and April 19 postings.) If a candidate is going to be that blatantly open about their inability to differentiate between official duty and political speechifying, we worry what they’d be willing to attempt when they think no one’s looking.
With all the financial punches that Berkeley County residents have endured during Davis’ short three-and-a-half year tenure, as tallied up by the “smalltownrumor” commenter on a Post & Courier story, a voter has any number of reasons to vote against him…until he considers the candidate he would have to vote for instead.
In the other corner, we have a congressman that’s been in Columbia and Washington for the past 26 years–and on city council before that. Like a tick on a dog, it looks like it’s going to take a hot match to the back to get him to open his pincers and let go of the government teat.
No need to rehash the basic reasons we previously outlined in our opposition to Brown. Here’s some additional ones:
Can anyone think of a single bill that Henry Brown authored or pushed? He did, of course, but we’re talking something more significant than a resolution to honor the Charleston Culottes t-ball team on making it into the quarterfinals of the Boopsie KinderCare league. Brown has not distinguished himself as a leader. Instead, he’s demonstrated that he’s perfectly content to be just one of the 435 herd. Now he wants to be the head honcho, without having exercised that muscle in Congress.
The one area in which Brown did set himself apart was in his use of the franking privilege, winning the annual award for wasting taxpayer dollars on postage for nonstop, mass-mailed self-promotion. If Brown had promised the voters “a flier in every mailbox, and a calendar on every wall,” he honored his commitment tenfold. This talent would be wasted on the county level, as one commenter said on an early Post & Courier article: “Has the postage budget for the Berkeley County Supervisor gone up now?”
In Brown’s continual mailers during the past 10 years, he has loved to tout his constituent services. Yet, that’s not going to be a major part (let’s hope) of the county job, doling out little favors and goodies to everyone.
All in all, the Berkeley County Supervisor job requirements and Brown’s demonstrated skill set are not a good match. If Brown were to be elected and sink his pincers into us, we could end up with an autocracy–with little of the enthusiasm to oust him from his post that would be in evidence if Davis were to remain in office.
The people that encouraged Brown to run did themselves a huge disservice. If they had backed Blackwell (or other earlier local candidate), they could have booted Davis from office and formed some alliance that could have gotten the county safely through the next four years. As it is, the Berkeley County GOP chairman, Tim Callahan, a supporter of Henry Brown and a county council member, is no friend of Davis. So for the duration, there will be someone to counterbalance Davis, and someone who will be trying to put a hot match on Davis’ back come next election season.
On the bright side, Davis and Brown both declared themselves to be good friends in a Post & Courier article–though the friendship was growing shaky by the WTMA radio debate (podcast available here). If there’s some assistance that Brown’s connections can direct Berkeley County’s way, then Davis should have no problem getting Brown on the phone, and for all his professed love of the county, Brown should have no problem helping out pro bono when Davis calls. After all, he’ll be in retirement, living off his comfy pension and rental income, just rambling around his farm like a workhorse put out to pasture.
For his part, we hope Davis has had the fear put in him of losing his job and will begin to pay closer attention to the citizenry. It would have been nice to hear him say at some point during the campaign that he has learned his lesson and will mend his ways. He didn’t, as far as we have heard and read, so in all likelihood, he’ll be stubborn as ever and just keep giving us more of the chaos we got during the last four years.
Other interesting (and some wacky) perspectives in support of Davis or against Brown can be found at:
Ably standing up against all of the above links is a “Nosy Woman from Cross” on her Grits, Eggs & Politics blog. An open-eyed voter would peruse her extensive commentary on the adventures of Dan Davis and the Berkeley County Council before going to cast their vote. The research will not make casting a vote for Dan Davis any easier, but she’s got on rose-colored glasses when it comes to whether things would be any better under Henry Brown’s “leadership.”
She brushes off any criticism of Brown by saying he has “assured” her it isn’t true. We’d treat all Brown “assurances” the same way we’d treat all Davis assurances, with extreme skepticism and requiring our own research into the truth. [And the Charleston Reader will join Ms. GE&P in decrying any future shenanigans occurring in the supervisor’s office or county council.]
Quite frankly, it will be a gut-wrenching experience to press Dan Davis’ name tomorrow. Let Davis be forewarned: Our vote for him is merely a vote for ABB–Anybody But Brown. Ultimately, a vote against Brown will be a loud message sent to all Congressmen throughout the land: “If you don’t steadfastly represent your public and defend the Constitution, then the people back home won’t even elect you dogcatcher–or county supervisor.”
Therefore, the Charleston Reader endorses retirement for Henry Brown. To achieve this, voters must press the Dan Davis slot. (To combat the after-effects, we found this $3 off coupon for our readers.)
In the other Berkely County runoff, the Charleston Reader continues to endorse Bill Salisbury for coroner for the reasons previously stated.
We stand behind those endorsements for many of the same reasons, but also because we believe the combination of the two of them will be stronger and more effective than either of them having to be the lone soldier fighting for our side.
For all the good our current governor Mark Sanford has tried to do, he’s not only had to face the legislature head on, but he has also had to deal with the palace intrigues of his backstabbing lieutenant governor, Andre Bauer [the losing 2010 gubernatorial candidate who has thrown his malodorous support behind Haley’s opponent, Gresham Barrett].
Should we finally have a united pair able to work in tandem to formulate and carry out battle plans against the fat and sassy legislative leadership, we just might hear some stuck pigs squealing like we haven’t heard since the day that Pork and Barrel appeared at the house chambers. (Video here.)
Our readers support the Haley-Connor team as well. Reader Jeff supports Connor, saying, “Ken Ard being a Giuliani staffer was a real turn-off for me and Bill Connor is a Conservative superstar of the Jim Demint mold.” He also reminds us to recommend the Palmetto State Politics blog, which has done some excellent investigative blogging regarding Ken Ard. [Ed. note: We are unaware of similar blogging done on Connor. If anyone knows of any that should be presented here for contrast and reflection, please let us know.]
Therefore, the Charleston Reader endorses Haley and Connor again. We urge voters to support them both as the “reform” ticket. Electing them as a pair will immediately bring a long-missing calm and stability to the governor’s mansion before they lock arms and march on the statehouse.
ABC News reports that the US Supreme Court has just invalidated over 500 rulings made by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), because the decisions were made by just two board members instead of the congressionally mandated quorum of three. (The board has five seats, one of which is currently unfilled.)
This ruling does correct an injustice (or, really, over 500 injustices) and pushes back against one little pint of the tidal wave of executive branch maneuvers that exceed its legal authority.
The story says:
The high court, in a 5-4 ruling in which the court’s leading liberal–retiring Justice John Paul Stevens–sided with the court’s four most conservative members, said the law does not allow the National Labor Relations Board to operate while it is short-staffed because of political arguments.
To bring the board to its current four members, President Obama installed two through recess appointments because the Republicans had blocked them (as Democrats had blocked President Bush’s appointments).
Unfortunately, the 500 reopened cases will now be decided with Obama’s “temporary” appointments plunging the balance to the left.
In fact, of the four current members on the board, the only member solely appointed by a Republican administration, Peter Schaumber, will have his term expire on August 27, 2010. So then, the NLRB will be down to just the minimum three required to make a quorum–and all of them Obama-approved. With the deck so stacked in his union buddies’ favor, it’s unlikely that Obama will be in any rush to fill the two extraneous seats.
In other words, if management won any of the 500 rulings previously, they can kiss those goodbye.
The Charleston Reader is currently preparing its endorsements for the June 22 primary run-off. Before we make our final commitments, we offer our readers the opportunity to weigh in on our impending decision–to beg us not to go the way we did before, to submit information that must be taken into consideration. If you say something illuminating, we’ll link to it in the corresponding endorsement.
Below are the races for which we seek your input. Candidates are presented in alphabetical order, and any races that we previously made endorsements for are hyperlinked to their related editorials.
Governor: Gresham Barrett v. Nikki Haley
Lt. Governor: Ken Ard v. Bill Connor
Attorney General: Leighton Lord v. Alan Wilson
State Superintendent of Education: Elizabeth Moffly v. Mick Zais
U.S. House of Representatives District 1: Tim Scott v. Paul Thurmond
Berkeley County Supervisor: Henry Brown v. Dan Davis
Berkeley County Coroner: Bill Salisbury v. Sharon Shuler
On the Democrat ticket, there’s the US Senate race…oh wait, that’s right. It’s already been decided.
If there are other local races within the boundaries of the 1st Congressional District that you’d like to make a pitch for, go ahead. Your comment may very well come up in a search and be seen by someone looking for guidance. We will also publish comments regarding other SC races for US Congress.
Here’s your chance to be heard. Click the “Comment” link below and have at it.
[Ed. Note: If all we get is complete silence, we’ll know that our recent experiments in 3G hypnotism have been successful and we have an army of docile Readerites ready to do our bidding as soon as we post instructions. So please do comment to enable us to know who out there is still resisting our powers.]
Update: When Larry Kobrovsky endorsed Paul Thurmond yesterday, he did us no favors because, like Thurmond’s other endorsers, he gave only platitudes about how great Thurmond will be. What we wanted to know from all of the endorsers is…
We would have also liked to have heard the same answers from Scott’s endorsers as well.
From viewing debate performances, we have been leaning toward Scott, plus it peaked our interest that Sen. Jim DeMint was uttering (non-endorsing) praise for him.
On the Thurmond side, it worried us when a news story recently came out that “GOP House Leadership” were backing Scott. We’re not too fond of most GOP leaders these days, so that was a mark against Scott. It was tolerable, however, to learn one of the two leaders backing Scott was Eric Cantor. He has bucked up his spine a bit lately, and we like his “You Cut” campaign.
But then we learn the other is the clueless Rep. Kevin McCarthy, deputy minority whip and disastrous head of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). McCarthy’s the one that threw money down the DeDe Scozzafava rathole. An endorsement from him is a reason to vote against someone.
Therefore, readers, please weigh in on why Scott lost the endorsements of his opponents. (Of course, Larry Kobrovsky, Ken Glasson, Stovall Witte and Clark Parker are invited to comment directly on their endorsements.)
You may post comments by clicking the comment link below if the comment box is not already open, or if you prefer not to be published, share your thoughts by emailing “hotline -at- charlestonreader.com”