Friday, May 26, 2006
The State is
praising Bill Cotty to the heavens and taking the time to patiently explain to Republican voters why they need to support him in the primary election.
Of course,
The State doesn't seem to remember that the Republican primary is for
Republicans. You remember, Brad: those people with conservative values?
So
America's Worst Newspaper (TM) is promoting Cotty on the basis that he:
(1) served on an ineffective bureaucratic oversight commission and
(2) sought to massively increase the size, inefficiency, and power of government by expanding Kindergarten to 4 year-olds. It's not bad enough that we're making illiterates out of children starting at age 5. Let's pluck those chickadees away from the nest even faster! Papa Bird Bill Cotty led the charge.
(3) broke his pledge not to support any new taxes
Here's the problem. Republicans aren't like that. Unlike Bill Cotty, they prefer lower taxes and smaller government. Unlike Bill Cotty, they prefer families to government-run institutions. Unlike Bill Cotty, they don't think that all the smartest people in South Carolina go to work under the State House dome.
Assuming that Republicans vote on Republican values in the June 13th primary election, Bill Cotty is toast.
So who is
The State trying to fool with this one? Real Republicans, real conservatives, real advocates of accountable government know that Bill Cotty ain't one of ours...
Posted by Bill Smith at 9:36 AM |
0 comments
Monday, May 22, 2006
Since I'm not running for anything, I can say things that are true but unpopular. For instance, here's
an item that needed to be commented upon.
From
The EmbarassmentState:
By all I’ve read, [corporate executive Patricia]Woertz is a remarkable person, but, gosh, is she worth 50 times what the chief justice of the United States makes? Is Katie Couric’s cherubic smile and famous chutzpah worth 70 times as much? Is Couric worth 400 times what the average American earns in a year?
Are you paying her salary? No? Okay then. Let's go over this one more time: In a free country, people are allowed to make agreements with each other. If you're not part of the deal, you should probably shut up and butt out.
Posted by Bill Smith at 12:09 AM |
0 comments
Friday, May 12, 2006
Cindi Ross Scoppe thinks they suck—which should make any thinking person intrigued—but I learn lots from
South Carolinians for Responsible Government. Check out their
blog; unlike reading
The State, it won't make you want to stab yourself.
Posted by Bill Smith at 4:57 PM |
0 comments
Monday, May 08, 2006
The most narrow-minded bigot could not possibly be more hypocritical than the mental midgets running
The State newspaper.
Last spring, when they were busy crucifying
Put Parents in Charge because it dared to (a) tear down a precious bureaucracy and (b) let poor kids have an education as good as rich ones, they went after one part of the proposal with special abandon: scholarships for poor kids.
One can never be sure when examining the mind of the
The State—it takes advanced nanotechnology and powerful microscopes to deal with these sorts of brains—but it seemed as if the problem with the scholarships for poor kid were that they were
paid for by TAX CUTS.(How do you pay for something with a tax cut, one might ask? Simple, you let people, charities, or businesses pay for item X rather than paying for taxes. In this case, any contribution to a scholarship fund was money that you or the Elks or BMW didn't have to pay in taxes.)
But
The State's religion is that no tax cut is ever any good at any time (unless it's offset by another tax hike.) Here's the secret about
The State (and, sadly, our state). They want you to have less money so that they can have more. If they could double your taxes tomorrow, they'd do it. The more money in state coffers, the more money that powerful people—and the people at
The State editorial board ARE POWERFUL—have to play with.
Simply put, they would like to reach into your back pocket, grab your wallet, pluck out every last bill and credit card, spend it on things they think you should have (after they take a
healthy cut) and then expect you to thank them for it. The common thief is nice enough not to expect your thanks nor harangue you when you fail to offer it.
Back to schools. Here's the deal. The people who are fighting to get our schools out of
50th place are determined. They seem to have all the tact of a bull in a china shop while also possessing that bullheaded stubbornness you need to deal with bureaucratic bull—well, BS.
So they went back to the drawing board, improved
Put Parents in Charge, and dared the legislature to vote against children for a second time. (Politicians can be so silly sometimes.)
Predictably,
The State went bonkers. (What? No more delusions of grandeur for pompous Editorial Board Editors? No more grand plans for school reform? Just parents—on their own—making their own choices?
This shall not stand.)
So they went after Rep. Tracy Edge's legislation.
One small problem: Edge's legislation wasn't the right version. The mix-up was due to a simple error in submission process..
Now they've got an editorial trail that proves that they'll oppose parental choice
no matter how it's designed. If the proposal has a scholarship component, it's bad; if it doesn't, that's also bad.
What could be clearer proof of
The State's anti-parent bias?
But do they print a retraction? An admission of error? A profession of shame? An apology?
Nah.
Posted by Bill Smith at 1:44 PM |
2 comments
Monday, May 01, 2006
Date of publication in a real newspaper:
April 16.
Date when South Carolinians are privileged to read the important argument:
May 1.
"Timely and informative" are not among the virtues of Brad Warthen's Opinion Page.
Posted by Bill Smith at 8:48 AM |
0 comments