I Don't Believe The State

He's lost it

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 14:17:00 +0000

In his appraisal of the immigration reform debate in America, Brad Warthen opines that it all boils down to a tasty tomato-and-cheese pie. Really:

But I know that as long as the pizza is this good in this country, they’re going to keep coming.

Read the whole thing. In the history of logical coherence, this has to be the absolute bottom. It just has to be.

Warren Bolton Doesn't Care About Black People

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Sat, 09 Jun 2007 13:06:00 +0000

The headline is a take-off of a Kanye West's famous Post-Katrina appraisal of George W. Bush. (For all of those lacking a sense of humor: this is funny because Warren Bolton is African-American himself and, as a Black man in Americ--oh, just forget it.)

Anyway, Bolton writes an odd and not-terribly-useful article that insinuates that Black supporters of school choice are somehow suspect because they...wait for it... are willing to work with conservatives! Oh, someone catch me, I'm about to faint.

Note to Warren Bolton: Some people would rather work with Republicans than lose another generation of kids to low achievement, high dropout rates and the continual cycle of grinding poverty. Just sayin'.

Cindi Scoppe is Out to Lunch

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 12:57:00 +0000

When the supposedly "conservative" South Carolina legislature elected ultra-liberal Don Beatty to the state Supreme Court, the citizens' group Conservatives in Action, uh, went into action.

As with all effort for citizen education, participation, and redress, this outraged State columnist Cindi Scoppe. She simply couldn't stand to see that voters with South Carolina values would come together to express their opposition to the election of a judge who legislates his very different values from the bench. So Cindi wrote this column.

Notice that the column focuses not at all on the claim that this justice is radically left-wing, unresponsive to the people, and not terribly qualified—Scoppe ignores what is the substance of the objection—and focuses instead on the idea that perhaps the opposition tp Beatty includes some people Cindi doesn't like. Boo-hoo.

In the meantime, in today's State we are given an awful object lesson in what happens when liberal judges ascend to the bench: public school child molesters are given ridiculously short sentences.

Some day soon, you may be able to get more years for cockfighting.

Also: Why is the sky blue?

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:55:00 +0000

Can someone please explain to me why Lee Bandy, who is nominally retired according to his own byline, is still filing columns that do not have even one scintilla of news in them?

I mean, I understand if you write meaning columns when you're under deadline—hey, we all have to mail it in sometimes—but why now, when you have nothing to say and no editor breathing down your neck?

Saying nothing is actually an improvement on the lies, petty and grand, I read day after day in The State every day.

Brad Warthen Claims to Speak for Jesus

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:04:00 +0000

Brad Warthen thinks Jesus Christ is against parental choice in education. Spake Brad:

Of course, I oppose even the more limited funding of Catholic schools with public money.[...]Jesus didn’t fund his ministry with the money St. Matthew had squeezed from the public as a tax collector. He didn’t take from the world; he gave. He told us to do likewise. We Catholics are far too stingy when the collection basket comes around, and that should change. We shouldn’t force Baptists, Jews, agnostics or anyone else to make up for our failing.

First of all, I do not have the words to express how offensive this is. Advocates for parental choice don't go around and pretend that Jesus, if he were alive and in the South Carolina legislature, would co-sponsor Put Parents in Charge. The supposedly theocratic religious right never says that Jesus would have wanted top marginal tax rates at Bill Clinton's 39% rather than George Bush's 35%. Likewise, this obviously falls under the "render unto Caesar" clause.

Second of all, there is no public money going to Catholic schools, Methodist schools, or Hindu Schools etc. There is money going to parents. That's it. How many times do we have to go over this? Parents can send their children to religious schools, secular schools, or schools that teach comparative religion. It's called a choice.

Finally, there is one way in which religion bears on this debate. Currently, public schools practice a fairly hardcore form of secularism. People of faith often say that "they kicked God out of school" and not without reason: a 30-second prayer at the beginning of school would be illegal under the current interpretation of the 1st Amendment. (This is the problem of choosing one default rule for everyone: someone's rights are going to be violated.)

Whether or not the interpretation of the 1st Amendment is correct, religious parents are surely getting the short end of the stick. They are not being allowed to educate their children in their own way. "But they can always send their kid to private school," a naif like Brad might protest.

Now if you're paying thousands of dollars a year in school taxes, you might not have the money left over to also pay for private school.

If the government is going to respect the rights of all kids, it's going to have to allow every parent to have an effective choice—either by giving them vouchers or tax credits. Either way, the resources are parent-controlled, not bureaucracy-controlled.

Every parent must have the right to choose the best education for their child.

Okay, that was a tangent. The original point of this that I wish Brad Warthen would quit his filthy blasphemy and go back to simply acting like an idiot.

Hey Look

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:26:00 +0000

Unlike La Socialista, this new blog doesn't suck.

Freedom vs. The State

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:19:00 +0000

I thought it would be a cold day in Hell before I saw some dude named Brad sticking up for political free speech on The State's Op-Ed page. I was wrong.

A Moron, That's What!

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 19:16:00 +0000

Brad Warthen wants to tax gasoline to make it $4 per gallon. He also thinks that President Bush's surge plan is a good idea.

Now we know what Warthen really thinks we are. [See the title.]

Separated at Birth?

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 14:43:00 +0000

Roger Federer consistently turns in unbelievable performances on the tennis court, pitilessly punishing his opponents and leaving them depressed and defeated. Brad Warthen proves that he can be just as ruthless in his war against logical consistency and the English language.

Evidence:

This governor showed virtually no interest in our schools in his first term, beyond leading an all-out campaign to undermine taxpayer confidence in the very idea of public education, and pay parents to desert it.

You can argue that Put Parents in Charge was a bad bill. You can argue that it had good intentions but wouldn't have worked. You can argue that it was the other way around.

But unless you are deaf and blind, you cannot argue that Gov. Sanford ignored schools. Moreover, even the most skilled writer usually takes at least two sentences—and indeed often many paragraphs—to contradict himself. And yet Brad Warthen manages to contradict himself in the same sentence.

I would say that Brad's blundering is magnificent but that doesn't do it justice. The guy is damn near superhuman.

Hey, Moron! Why won't you just shut up and let me help you?

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:12:00 +0000

[I thought it might be helpful to shorten and clarify The State's latest editorial gem.]

Do you know what I hate about you, maggot? No, it's not your ugly face or your smelly feet; you can't help those things.

No, here's what I hate about you. It's how you live your life. Your stupid, little, pathetic life. Through your bad choices, you make your life even stupider and less worthwhile.

You drink too much.
You smoke too much.
And you're fat, fat, FAT!

Honestly, it is so disgusting to live in the same state as you people—you wretched, miserable people—that I am going to be forced to fight back. How? I am going to use the power of the state to make you change your life.

I know, I know. You like your precious wittle "liberty." You like having a cigarette to unwind after work or throwing back a beer or 12 on the weekends.

Well, you're gross. You make me sick. And I'm powerful. So you don't get to abuse your liberty anymore.

Now, if I crack the whip just so, you're going to look just like me and act just like me. And I won't have to look at your ugly butt anymore. Now shut up and obey, like a good little ~~servant~~ citizen.

[Today's State Editorial page has been translated from the original gibberish.]

The Unpleasant Truth

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:14:00 +0000

Someone has to say it: The front page of La Socialista's website today couldn't be stupider, fluffier, or less informative. Way to go, guys.

Timeless elegance: Inaugural fashion

Ann ‘Tunky’ Osteen Yarborough Riley, wife of Gov. Richard W. Riley, 1983 (second inauguration)

FILE/THE STATE

+See more photos

PARTICIPATE:
+Full Schedule of Events
+Comment Dear Governor Sanford ...
+Survey Your favorite First Lady fashion

COMING THIS WEEK:
Today: A look at black-tie fashion in advance of the ball
+Pick your favorite

Wednesday: Up-to-the-minute coverage, photo galleries, live video, review Sanford's first four years

Thursday: Coverage and analysis of inauguration events, photo galleries

The Weird, Wacky, Wonderful World of Warren Bolton

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:37:00 +0000

Sometimes it's hard to tell whether you're reading Warren Bolton's column on politics or a sermon from the pulpit. I'm guessing that Bolton's trying to cleanse my soul but by the end of the "column" I just feel dirty.

Today, Warrin' Warren Bolton is doing his best not merely to chase the money lenders from the temple but in fact to strike out against usury in general—that's right, everywhere. I haven't heard someone thunder against unfair lending practices like this since I spent a little time thumbing through St. Thomas Aquinas on the doctrine of just price.

Bolton doesn't like payday lenders. Neither do I. I also don't like Billy Ray Cyrus, pistachio ice cream, or Bulgaria. So I avoid them.

But that's not enough for Warren. No, not enough for Bolton to avoid payday lenders, tell his friends and acquaintances of their dangers, or perhaps write some books or columns on the topic.

Since Bolton doesn't like short-term loans, that means that nobody should be allowed to use them.

Since some people get into trouble with debt, Bolton says no one should be allowed to take out some loans.

Unfortunately, Bolton's arrogance and bossiness seems like they have a good audience here in South Carolina. Via the tyranny of the majority, we can expect something like Bolton's ban to be passed into law. And so it goes; we lose a little more freedom with every legislative session.

'Where did I misplace my facts?' asks State opinion page

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 14:21:00 +0000

The next time that The State tells me that we don't have to reform education in South Carolina because it's already improving so fast, I hope they take the time to look back at their own newspaper. Money quote:

Children born and educated in South Carolina are among the least likely in the nation to be successful in life, according to a report released Wednesday by an education trade publication.
The state ranked No. 41 in the latest national evaluation of public school quality, policies and socio-economic conditions by Education Week.

I've gone and read the report; it's pretty interesting stuff. (Naturally, there was no link on The State website nor was there a pointer in the paper edtion.)

Ultimately Harmless but still painful

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:05:00 +0000

I've always thought The State's opinion page was a bad joke, but this is ridiculous.

Maybe it's because they're under the impression that South Carolina is in the Midwest. (Check the author bio.)

New Year, Same Old Ideology

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 14:18:00 +0000

More Money, Please. C'mon, you ign'ant taxpayer, give it up. That cash belongs to the gummint.

La Socialista rings in the New Year with a call for more funding for public colleges.

The state gives our public colleges only half as much money per student as Georgia gives its colleges — and only a third as much as North Carolina gives its colleges. [...]

The answer isn’t to eliminate merit-based scholarships. It’s to strike a better balance. That means more needs-based scholarships — and more funding for our colleges, which will allow them to hold down tuition. That will cost money, which makes this yet another reason for lawmakers to abandon the parochial approach that has resulted in an inefficient non-system of 33 colleges spread over more than 80 campuses in our small, poor state.

The State knows that the technical colleges aren't going anywhere and that any increase in spending on colleges is coming straight out of Joe Irmo and Jane Aiken's next paycheck (and every one thereafter). I can't believe that the year is less than 48 hours old and The State is already advocating bigger taxes and smaller paychecks. I guess I shouldn't be that surprised.

Government is always the Answer

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:39:00 +0000

It's no secret that I like Warren Bolton more than the Brad Warthen or Cindi Scoppe mainly because he doesn't demonize his opponents. But he does get his fair share of issues wrong.

Check out the latest column. Even though your siblings told you not to snitch, your Mom warned you not to be a tattletale, and your schoolmates taught you not to rat them out, good ol' Warren thinks what we need is a society of informers.

If you want a safer society there are a lot of things we need but more snitches isn't one of them. We need better, more enforceable/sensible laws; more resources and better training for police; more police; focus on more serious violent crimes and less on smaller violations; truth-in-sentencing (less parole); perhaps most importantly, we need more opportunities through decent education.

Bolton tries to equate "snitching" with citizen cooperation. No. Any citizen who sees a crime should assist and cooperate with the police. But volunteering information to get a lighter sentence must be discouraged. Encouraging citizens to fabricate stories to tell the police what they want to here is downright dangerous and inimical to a free society.

Mr. Bolton, please let me introduce you to Corey Maye, Kenneth Jamar, Kathryn Johnston, Acelynne Williams, etc., etc. Oh hell, if you want to break with State tradition and do some research, look at the map and check out the entire report.

Finally

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Thu, 28 Dec 2006 18:27:00 +0000

The State takes one giant leap for informed journalism, unbiased reporting, decency and common sense. On behalf of a grateful South Carolina, all I can say is "thank you."

Insanity

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:24:00 +0000

Even reasonable arguments are made badly in The State.

At 7 cents a pack — the nation’s lowest, 93 cents below the national average — we practically beg kids to smoke.

Look, we're not "begging teenagers to smoke" since teenage smoking is illegal. Maybe it's the right thing to raise cigarette taxes, maybe it's not. But taking thing A (too low taxes on cigarettes) and characterizing it as Thing B (an "invitation to smoke") you're demonstrating a disconnect from reality.

Another week has passed

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 17:07:00 +0000

Dateline, Friday—

The State's Brad Warthen publishes another utterly uncompelling look at why ~~anti-free speech laws~~ campaign finance regulations must be rigorously enforced.

Meanwhile, in a more daring piece, Dave Weigel at Hit-&-Run patiently explains why free participation in politics is The American Way and muzzling citizens isn't likely to work anyhow.

I'd bet cash money that Brad Warthen isn't brave enough to address the real issue: that spending money to get your message out is called free speech. Warthen = Chicken.

New Rule

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 21:20:00 +0000

I'm taking a page from the divine Sunny Philips's playbook: No off-topic posts on comments. You can tell me I'm a fool or a jerk or a prophet—based on the substance of the post, of course—but this isn't a place for people to grandstand on their random, out-of-left-field agendas. I'll be doing all the ax-grinding and ox-goring up in this piece, thank you very much.

Also: visit Sunny's blog; she has far-and-away the best web-design on the SC blogosphere. Laurin Manning, eat your heart out.

Okay it's official

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Mon, 04 Dec 2006 04:13:00 +0000

Cindi Scoppe has a crush on me. Why else would she behave like this? To see her swooning this way, smitten by my charms, desperately vying for my attention, fantasizing about what it would be like to be held in my arms, enthralled by the thought of a life of inseperable companionship, marked by connubial bliss, domestic tranquility, innumerable children and pets etc., etc.—it's all a little bit pathetic really. I'm embarassed for her.

The day after being excoriated on this blog for her premature declaration of defeat of school choice of this election, she feigns ignorance and files this ridiculous column. It's quite clearly a cry for attention. In some ways, this is not at all unlike when your previously potty-trained toddler has an accident. One step forward, one step back. You're upset about the mess but it's hard to stay angry at the child.

Cindi, I still care about you. But not like that.

Look, you're interpreting the tea leaves about school choice. But school choice wasn't on the ballot. Governor Sanford, chief cheerleader and architect of school choice, was on the ballot. (He won.) Thomas Ravenel, darling of the school-choice movement in South Carolina because he both runs a business and is pro-business, was on the ballot. (He also won.) Richard Eckstrom was on the ballot. (A friend of school choice, Eckstrom won.) Lewis Vaughn, the #1 proponent of school choice in the State House, got elected to the State Senate in a romp. The victories just kept 'a comin'.

Now, Jim Rex also won. But—as per comment #20 in the post directly below—we can't know why. But there were a heckuva lot of issues besides school choice. One was Karen Floyd's previous service in Spartanburg County, which Democrats implied led to the tragic death of a Wofford College employee. (Classy move, Democrats! What's next—kidnapping opposing candidates' tykes?) Another was huge Democrat turnout. Another was the Insider v. Outsider debate. Etc., etc. And then of course there was the vote-stealing which the Democrats have perfected into an art form; it's enough to make Katherine Harris blush!

The point is that Cindi Scoppe is living in a fantasy world where parents don't want any more choices for their children, because the current SC schools are just peachy keen. (Or can be fixed without breaking the monopoly.) Ha! Good one, Cindi! I love a gal with a sense of humor. No, NOT LIKE THAT.

In a world where kids' parents will be able to choose between buying their rugrats one of the three latest game consoles, wouldn't it be nice if they could also choose a little unimportant thing like where they go to school?

A Second Steaming Pile of Cindi Scoppe

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:43:00 +0000

The woman has lost her mind. It's pretty clear that she can no longer read and understand her own quotes and articles. I'm not sure if she's actually contracted mad cow disease but it's pretty clear that something has already eaten more than half her brain.

Don't believe me? Check out her last two opinion pieces. In her post-Election Sunday piece, she claims that Mark Sanford repudiated school choice in his victory speech, or at least forgot to mention it. But in the sections of his speech that Scoppe herself quoted, Sanford specifically said he would

continue to push for structural changes whether on the health care front or the educational front, because we believe on both counts that money is not the only answer to fixing either one of those things, that structure absolutely matters.

Okay, I don't know how Sanford could have been any more clear. If you're going to make "structural changes" to a system that is currently a government-run monopoly, then you are endorsing school choice. What else could he possibly mean?

Look, parents deserve choices. Kids deserve the schools that are best for them. Scoppe says that since Sanford didn't say "vouchers" or "tax credits," he was "speaking in code." How stupid does Scoppe think we are? "Structural change" means transforming the way an institution works. We know that Scoppe is a big fan of the current system which systematically snuffs out opportunity for poor kids and leaves them with little-to-no prospects for bettering themselves. But can she at least see what's in front of her nose when reporting what Mark Sanford is saying?

Second verse, same as the first. Scoppe claims that the victory for anti-eminent domain-abuse legislation was not a victory for property rights supporters. Or, rather, she claims that we should relax because everyone supports property rights. There was no opposition to property rights in the first place and therefore no reason for a citizens' movement against it. Tell that to the US Supreme Court. Cindi's spin: when someone fights for school choice and they lose, then they're an out-of-state interest who is testing radical ideas. But when someone supports an initiative to secure property rights and they score an overwhelming victory, then, well, that win doesn't count at all.

Cindi Scoppe hasn't lost her integrity—there's no evidence she ever had any—she's gone blind, no longer able to see what's in front of her nose. Or, alternately, she's gone crazy and can no longer cope with the reality of a South Carolina that refuses to be repeatedly shafted and bullied by special interests.

Now Back to Your Regularly Scheduled Programmimg

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:17:00 +0000

I had been hoping against hope to be able to wait for a Karen Floyd victory as the linchpin to a long post that would (a) gloat about the pathetic fortunes of our Palmetto State Democrats and (b) highlight the ridiculous and partisan coverage of the 2006 General Election in the "objective" pages of The State.

Now I see—via The State's uncharacteristically good SC Politics Today site—that Karen Floyd has conceded to Jim Rex in a heartbreaking loss amounting to less than 500 votes out of 2 million cast. For those of you who are graduates of South Carolina public schools, that's less than 0.25% of the vote. Undoubtedly, The State will claim that this is an overwhelming mandate against every parent having the right to choose the best school for their child. (Honestly, these people should be taken to the public square and whipped.)

When stuff like this happens, you always wish that you had spent an extra few hours making phone calls or sent in the extra $15 that you could've definitely afforded. What a heartbreaker.

UPDATE: As always, for informed commentary on how SC politics from one of the sharpest minds in the game, check out Will Folks.

UPDATE #2: Do expect much more frequent updates to this site as I have now finished holding my breath on account of this heartbreaking loss. Y'all come back now.

Worst. Endorsement. Ever.

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 13:15:00 +0000

Have you ever in your life seen anything more incoherent, cowardly, and morally obtuse than La Socialista's endorsement of the gay marriage initiative?

I challenge anyone—no matter how educated, sophisticated, or intelligent—to come up with a principled (or non-principled) defense of this endorsement. Even a Frenchman would recognize this as utterly spineless.

By contrast, in response to this initiative, SC's LGBT community has given us one of the best political ads of the season.

Okay, Who Hid Ross Shealy's Medication?

noreply@blogger.com (Bill Smith) — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:58:00 +0000

Really guys, this isn't funny. Ross needs those pills to keep himself under control.

Don't believe me? Check out this guest opinion piece in The State. Shealy has a strange, stalker-like obsession about someone who's a philanthropist trying to improve education, property rights, and political accountability around the country. Instead of just talking a good game, it more-or-less looks like Howie Rich is actually trying to do some good. Consider school choice: If he had started his own school—to give more choices to parents in South Carolina—how many students could he help? Maybe 6oo? Maybe 1,000?

And how many children would be helped if every single parent in the state of South Carolina were to have the ability to choose the best learnin' option for their child? Oh, about 600,000. Oh.

So Mr. Rich could have chosen the easy way out. If he gave a couple of hundred thousand dollars to USC—like the adorable Darla Moore—everyone would raise their champagne glass to him and toast to "our good friend from New York." But Rich thought about what would help the least powerful, most abused segment of our society—disadvantaged children. A good education is the surest way out of the poverty trap and towards a life of independence and dignity.

After trying to help the least among us, what does Howie Rich get for his troubles? The wrath and rancor of one crazed political lunatic whose own career will never involve trying to help get our poorest and most troubled into a better life. They say no good deed goes unpunished.

Now Shealy is trying to make this about the integrity of our political system or some such nonsense. Oh, please. Shealy is a couple of beers short of a 6-pack but even he knows the way that politics really works. He knows that the legislators are owned by the education bureaucracy, the big school contracting corporations (hello M.B. Kahn!), and the big unions. Sometimes they even forget that children exist. Now parents are finally getting their voice heard, their interests represented, their agenda pressed. Now all of a sudden Ross Shealy is the protector of the American Way.

Memo to Ross Shealy: Here in America, it's still legal to make campaign contributions. It's still legal to have an opinion. It's still legal to support candidates with your blood, sweat, and tears—and your financial wherewithal.

Remember, our Founding Fathers pledged their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" to the cause of American Independence. I dare say that they were better men than you.