Brave new world of political discourse

By BRAD WARTHEN
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
ONCE, NOT so long ago, serious people decried the reduction and trivialization of political ideas to the level of a bumper sticker. Some days, I long for the coherence, the relevance, the completeness of bumper stickers.
    Let’s knit together a few of the unraveled threads that have frayed my mind in the past week, shall we?
    Thread One: A Colorado congressman who takes pride in his technological savvy claimed partial “credit” for the demise of a newspaper, saying, “Who killed the Rocky Mountain News? We’re all part of it, for better or worse, and I argue it’s mostly for the better.... The media is dead and long live the new media.”
    Thread Two: Last week, I started working out again. I can’t read when I’m on the elliptical trainer because I bounce up and down too much, so I turn on the television. This gives me an extended exposure to 24/7 TV “news” and its peculiar obsessions, which I normally avoid like a pox. I hear far more than I want to about Rush Limbaugh, who wants the country’s leadership to fail, just to prove an ideological point. The president’s chief of staff dubs this contemptible entertainer the leader of the president’s opposition. Even more absurdly, the actual chief of the opposition party spends breath denying it — and then apologizes for doing so. See why I avoid this stuff?
    Thread Three: Two of the most partisan Democrats in the S.C. Senate, John Land and Brad Hutto, introduce a mock resolution to apologize to Rush on behalf of South Carolina so that our state doesn’t “miss out on the fad that is sweeping the nation — to openly grovel before the out-spoken radio host.” The Republican majority spends little time dismissing the gag, but any time thus spent by anyone was time not spent figuring out how to keep essential state services going in this fiscal crisis.
    Thread Four: At midday Thursday I post on my blog a few thoughts about the just-announced candidacy of U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett for governor, and invite readers to share what they think of the Upstate Republican. As of mid-afternoon Friday, there were nine comments on the subject, and three of them were from me. By the same time, there were 66 comments about the Rush Limbaugh flap.
    Thread Five: A colleague brings to my attention a new Web site called SCTweets, where you can read spontaneous “Twitter” messages from such S.C. politicians as Anton Gunn, David Thomas, Bob Inglis, Nathan Ballentine and Thad Viers, with a number of S.C. bloggers thrown in. It’s the brainchild of S.C. Rep. Dan Hamilton and self-described GOP “political operative” Wesley Donehue (which would explain why Rep. Gunn is the only Democrat on the list I just cited). They see it as “a creative way to showcase SC’s tech-savvy elected officials.” It sounds like a neat idea, but when you go there and look at it... well, here’s a sample:

bobinglis Want a window into our campaign themes? Check out my recent letter at http://wurl.ws/9coX Join us if you can!

annephutto had a great lunch

AntonJGunn Having lunch with the Mayor of Elgin.

mattheusmei Prepare to have your mind blownaway http://tinyurl.com/b6w8w9 #sctweets, simply amazing!!!

RobGodfrey Beautiful day in Columbia. #sctweets

thadviers just had lunch with little Joe at Jimmy Johns.

    Perhaps this will be useful to someone, and I applaud Messrs. Hamilton and Donehue for the effort. But so far I haven’t figured out what Twitter adds to modern life that we didn’t already have with e-mail and blogs and text-messaging and, well, the 24/7 TV “news.” Remember how I complained in a recent column about how disorienting and unhelpful I find Facebook to be? Well, this was worse. I felt like I was trying to get nutrition from a bowl of Lucky Charms mixed with Cracker Jack topped with Pop Rocks, stirred with a Slim Jim.
    Thread Six: Being reminded of Facebook, I checked my home page, and found that a friend I worked with a quarter-century ago was exhorting me to:

* Grab the book nearest you. Right now.
* Turn to page 56.
* Find the fifth sentence.
* Post that sentence along with these instructions in a note to your wall.

    I followed his instructions. The book nearest to my laptop was the literally dog-eared (chewed by a dog that died three decades ago) paperback Byline: Ernest Hemingway. Here’s the fifth sentence on page 56:
“He smiled like a school girl, shrugged his shoulders and raised his hands to his face in a mock gesture of shame.”
    Not much without context, but you know what? I got more out of that than I got out of that Twitter page. At least I formed a clear, coherent picture of something.
    I just remembered that I said I would knit these threads together. OK, here goes:
    It occurs to me that Twitter and Facebook are the bright new world that the Colorado congressman who claims credit for killing The Rocky Mountain News extolled. In this world, political discourse consists of partisans prattling about talk show hosts and elected officials casting spontaneous sentence fragments into the dusty, arid public square.
    I was going to write a column for today about Congressman Barrett’s candidacy for governor. As I mentioned a couple of weeks back when I wrote about Sen. Vincent Sheheen entering the race, I’m trying to get an early start on writing as much as possible about that critical decision coming up in 2010, in the hope that if we think about it and talk about it enough, we the people can make a better decision than we have the past few elections.
    But I got distracted.
    I’ll get with Rep. Barrett soon; I promise. And I’ll try to write about it in complete sentences, for those of you who have not yet adjusted.

For links and more, please go to thestate.com/bradsblog/.

Comments

[bill]

Don't Believe Everything You Think

[Elise]

Facebook, where politicians are concerned, is the ultimate in contrived, sycophantic, narcissistic self-promotion. It is a venue for the shallow to appear deep, and the boring to seem interesting.

It is also the logical extension of our “information age”, a time when we are inundated with data, much of it wrong and most of it unimportant. Most of SC knows that Charles Barkley is in jail for a DUI, but have no idea that the 2009-10 budget for SC is the largest budget in history.

Think about this: Barak Obama wrote his own history (in the form of his two books), and as we know “his” version of history was used by the media and he is now the president of the United States. So by using Facebook and Twitter and writing our own histories, and using glossy websites, our politicians can shape themselves to where there is a great deal of public information about them, yet none of it has any relationship to the truth.

At some point we must move past this collective “teenage –hood” of gossip and “flash and glitz”, and become adults. We must measure a man by his deeds, not his words (or press releases). .. or the one dimensional image created by Facebook and the like.

It’s an old saying now, but it is true… it’s time for the adults. But are there were any left.

[KP]

I don't know that your blog readers aren't interested in talking about Barrett; maybe we're mostly like Martin and don't know enough about him yet to say much. As for me, I was fooled by Sanford the first time around so I'm reserving judgment on the candidates I don't have much experience with. Like Sheheen and Barrett.

But hey, if my dad's political theory holds (he who has the best hair wins), Barrett should do okay.

[Greg Flowers]

By when do you think a candidate would have to announce and still have a reasonable chance? When are the primaries? Sometime next summer. Could someone wait until this time next year to make their intentions known?
Here are the potential gubernatorial candidates I have heard of, does anybody have anymore information or names?

R
Barret- in
Bauer
McMaster
the academic from the upstate whose name I forget- in

D
V. Sheheen- in
J. Lourie- out?
J. Smith- our
Rex
Tennenbaum

[Randy E]

Brad, this is a tremendous challenge for educators. David Brooks wrote of the cognitive age in which we are confronted with incredible volumes of information we must analyze or blindly accept.

It is no coincidence that the most progressive states have the most highly regarded education systems. I think this parallel set of characteristics manifests in our leadership.

Senator Demint disparages the education system in DC. When confronted with the fact DC's high school graduation rate is 14% higher than SC's, his office offers a statement "clarifying" his position. Governor Sanford declares that he may not accept unemployment benefits from the stimulus. When confronted on CSPAN by an unemployed SC resident, Sanford offers his prayers.

Meanwhile, the republican Governor Rell of Connecticut is considering an implementation of a New Deal program called
Civilian Conservation Corps. She's bitten the bullet and offered massive spending cuts in some areas but is willing to attack the unemployment issue head on in a nuanced and thoughtful approach.

The conservative movement is generally about controlling the message and the soundbites Brad criticizes. Democrats are generally for goverment helping to improve lives. The Great Communicator belittled government as being the problem and invoked a contrived "welfare queen." That's hardly the cognition David Brooks champions.

[Randy E]

pPint of clarification: my point about Rell is that she is not a conservative in contrast to the ideologues identified in SC.

[slugger]

What we need for governor is a new face. One that has never held public office. A person with expertise in economics. One that has management skills. He or she should be a Christian. They should have a personal background that can pass all the tests for honesty and integrity.

He or she should have the ability to make decisions on their own without political influence or reward to any party or person.

The candidate should not be a lawyer.

Talking about bumper stickers. How about one that says “If I am paying your mortgage. Honk your horn”.

[Birch Barlow]

bannephutto had a great lunch

AntonJGunn Having lunch with the Mayor of Elgin.

thadviers just had lunch with little Joe at Jimmy Johns.

This is absolutely disgusting. I am so sick and tired of the pro-lunch crowd running our lives. These politicians are just puppets of the Big Lunch lobby. Look at the facts, you brainwashed lunchheads. Lunch makes you sleepy in the middle of the day. It's counter-productive!

On the other hand, breakfast gives you energy to start the day off right! Clearly, it is the most important meal of the day. And yet it has been historically neglected. Contact your representative today! We must fight for our breakfast rights!

And don't even get me started on brunch... the ultimate fence-sitters!

[Dick Carlson]

It must be very, very difficult to see something that you care so deeply about (newspapers) being ignored and marginalized by pretty much your entire potential audience. Years ago, you were highly respected and looked to as the people who we depended on to tell us what to think, how to think, and as the final word on the meaning of the events of the day.

Now, it's a rare newspaper that can even pull enough readers to break even without adding pictures of big-busted maidens or stories of teen-age sex slaves. You've been forced to lay off quality writers, to slim down your editorial staff, and to even let go of the people who told us what music was ok to listen to and what films were of a high enough standard to see.

I feel for you. It's gotta hurt to realize that so many people just don't care about what you do. And as I see it, newspapers have two choices. This is evidenced very clearly by your writing about Twitter.

Option 1: Find a flourishing type of new media, and dip your toe in it enough to write a few sarcastic lines that will amuse your newsroom buddies, fraternity brothers and banker friends. The vast majority of readers of the State don't bother with the editorial page, anyway.

Option 2: Really spend some time finding out why so many people engage with this new tool, and why they think it benefits them. Write a clear, quality piece about what you've found. Show that you're willing to give your readers something they're obviously interested in. Sell papers. Increase income. Keep jobs.

Which one did you select? Why?

[Randy E]

Birch, the comfort food lobby has been big the past few months.

[Karen McLeod]

I haven't commented about Barrett because I don't know him from Adam's off ox. How about you tell us about him. Personally, I don't care what religion or political brand anyone comes with, I'm just very tired of the "My way, or the highway" approach to government, and I know that our most helpless (and unable to vote--that knock's them right off any politician's map) can't afford any more tax cuts.

[Ish Beverly]

Until some drastic changes are made in our political system, the Republican Party will not win anything in future elections. Since the '04 election, the liberal news media has learned to "shoot down" any potential conservative winner before he or she is selected as a candidate. They pounce early. Sometimes even before they announce. If a better candidate gets by, then the ever increasing unsophisticated part of the electorate, which overwhelmingly vote for the Democrats, takes care of the rest.

[Randy E]

Ish is correct. Take for example Couric sabotaging Palin with that "what do you read?" landmine. And, there's the way the MSM choreographed Jindal's Mr. Roger's moment. Don't forget the way they MADE Sanford and Steele apologize to Limbaugh. Finally, there's Lindsey Graham making a push for earmark reform and then having to explain his 37 earmarks in the very budget the GOP is upbraiding.

Conservative columnist David Brooks denounced the asinine idea of a federal government spending freeze some republicans are proposing. Newt declared Rush's hope for Obama to fail is irrational. I guess the MSM control these two as well.

[slugger]

We are facing the trickle up effect of prosperity for the poor. We are presently doing reperations and are not even aware that this is taking place. Obama taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

I want eveyone that is a US Citizen to prosper.

The Mexicans could never have taken over the jobs in the US unless those that are unemployed would have taken the jobs that were available to them. Why could they not take the jobs? They would probably make too much to meet the requirements to keep accepting federal aid. You cannot pay people not to work if there is employment available.
I check the newspaper every Sunday morning about birth rates in York County, SC. Give or take 20 deliveries there are at least l5 babies born to unweb mothers. This is certainly not the prime reason that our country is in the tank but it goes a long way to destroy our ability to keep providing for the those that have no responsibility for their own future and bringing childen into families that cannot support themselves regardless and ignoring the fact that they are giving their children no chance of financial success. They are breeding people that rely upon the government to take care of them like forever. Generation after generation. A lot of the children wind up in prison. The women that would want a father in the house winds up in the lockup.

The fair housing wanted just such people to have a home of their own. It started with Carter and was re-inforced by Clinton. We allowed people that do not qualify for loans for ownership to move into houses that were way above their ability to make the payments. TARP was passed to keep the people in their homes by awarding money for loans. The TARP MONEY went to CEO's by millions of dollars.

Our country is in a financial situation that the elected officials are unable to solve. They are part of the problem so they will cover their butts to be sure that the blame does not sit on their shoulders.

Sad to say the the majority of the people that are voters are at this moment in time watching some reality TV or some sports show. They are sitting with the self-assured facts that are presented by Obama, Pelosi, Reid etc that they will take care of all the poor by moving them to the middle class with our taxes. The poor do not pay taxes. One percent of the people that pay the taxes that Obama wants to pay for all the poor people, does not compute. When you have more people getting tax money than their are people paying taxes, we are at a point of no return.

[slugger]

World news
Cuba

Obama will use spring summit to bring Cuba in from the coldUS companies are queuing up as the president moves to ease restrictions on travel and trade, raising hopes of warmer relations and an end to the embargo
Comments (…) Rory Carroll, Latin America correspondent The Observer, Sunday 8 March 2009 larger | smaller Article historyPresident Barack Obama is poised to offer an olive branch to Cuba in an effort to repair the US's tattered reputation in Latin America.

The White House has moved to ease some travel and trade restrictions as a cautious first step towards better ties with Havana, raising hopes of an eventual lifting of the four-decade-old economic embargo. Several Bush-era controls are expected to be relaxed in the run-up to next month's Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago to gild the president's regional debut and signal a new era of "Yankee" cooperation.

The administration has moved to ease draconian travel controls and lift limits on cash remittances that Cuban-Americans can send to the island, a lifeline for hundreds of thousands of families.

[slugger]

World news
Cuba

Obama will use spring summit to bring Cuba in from the coldUS companies are queuing up as the president moves to ease restrictions on travel and trade, raising hopes of warmer relations and an end to the embargo
Comments (…) Rory Carroll, Latin America correspondent The Observer, Sunday 8 March 2009 larger | smaller Article historyPresident Barack Obama is poised to offer an olive branch to Cuba in an effort to repair the US's tattered reputation in Latin America.

The White House has moved to ease some travel and trade restrictions as a cautious first step towards better ties with Havana, raising hopes of an eventual lifting of the four-decade-old economic embargo. Several Bush-era controls are expected to be relaxed in the run-up to next month's Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago to gild the president's regional debut and signal a new era of "Yankee" cooperation.

The administration has moved to ease draconian travel controls and lift limits on cash remittances that Cuban-Americans can send to the island, a lifeline for hundreds of thousands of families.

[penultimo mcfarland]

I’ll get with Rep. Barrett soon; I promise. And I’ll try to write about it in complete sentences, for those of you who have not yet adjusted..

What an arrogant insult for a New York Times sycophant to toss at his readers, particularly when his insightful political thought led to the endorsement of such high-minded politicians such as Tommy "Payday Lender" Moore and Thomas "Cocaine" Ravenel.

[Randy E]

slugger, are you angry at poor people or people who could not afford the home they bought thanks to a POTUS from 18 or 28 years ago? Carter and Clinton are to blame for the TARP issues? If someone has had their home since the Clinton years, doesn't that indicate they've been paying mortgage and TAXES for more than 8 years?

Let several of the houses in your neighborhood undergo foreclosure then you'll have more pressing issue than your tax payer dollars - YOUR EQUITY!!

[bud]

What an arrogant insult for a New York Times sycophant to toss at his readers, particularly when his insightful political thought led to the endorsement of such high-minded politicians such as Tommy "Payday Lender" Moore and Thomas "Cocaine" Ravenel.
-pm

Let's not forget Sanford (in 2002), Bush Jr. twice and the mccain/PALIN ticket.

Seriously Brad, you can be one arrogant twit sometimes. The paper version of the paper is about as obsolete as steam locomotives, fountain pens and Hieroglyphics.

[Brad Warthen]

Actually, bud, if that were true we could instantly eliminate our biggest expense -- paper and ink (plus distribution costs). Actually, I'm not sure which is greater, that or payroll; they have historically been close to the same percentage, I believe -- almost all of a newspaper's expense is one or the other.)

Unfortunately, we are tied to the paper product in two ways: 1) Lots and lots of people still want a newspaper; and 2) We can't generate enough revenue from online ads to support a newsroom (or editorial department).

It's not lack of interest on the part of readers; it's the collapse of the advertising model, exacerbated by the recession.

I've often wondered whether, if we could go completely online, it MIGHT be possible to support newsgathering, once we ditch the expense of the paper version, but I don't know -- an accountant would have to investigate that. And the accountant would have to make leaps of assumption, since the track record doesn't exist...

So no, the problem isn't that we're too liberal or too conservative or too irrelevant or don't provide what people want. It's about the advertising.

[Brad Warthen]

Oh, and by the way, several of those endorsements that appall y'all so (although certainly not McCain, which was a case of liking both candidates, but liking him more) were about the fact that it was unthinkable for us to endorse that person's opponent, which of course you conveniently ignore -- even though when that is the case, we explain it.

And no, it's not acceptable to just not endorse. When it's down to two candidates, ONE of them IS going to hold the office, and it would be a total copout not to say, openly and honestly, which of two bad choices is LESS bad.

[Birch Barlow]

And no, it's not acceptable to just not endorse. When it's down to two candidates, ONE of them IS going to hold the office, and it would be a total copout not to say, openly and honestly, which of two bad choices is LESS bad.

We simply disagree here which is fine.

I think that instead of giving an endorsement where both candidates are bad choices, you should say that both are unacceptable and will not earn an endorsement and give your reasons why. And if enough people think this way and do not whore out their votes for the sake of voting, then the candidates will have real incentive to change before the next election. And maybe we will end up with an acceptable choice the next time. Let's face it, with our two party system and the huge advantages incumbents have, there just isn't much incentive to change.

In other words, I take a more long term view of the whole process.

Can you acknowledge that my point here has validity? Or is it just a copout as you say?

[bud]

I'm with Birch on this. Occassionaly tther papers don't make an endorsement. I find it perfectly acceptable and even commendable to indicate both candidates are unsuitable.

[Greg Flowers]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090309/us_time/08599188378500

The above leads to an interesting article about to future of newspapers. Looks like NY could well be about the only multi daily market in a year or two. Two interesting points: 1) Its looks like some papers will be able to make a go of it as online publications. How? and 2) The article says that McClatchy could be on the verge of bankruptcy. If this is true, who would be the potential buyers for the State?

I know that some people want a paper and ink publication but I would guess that this is primarily older readers and therefore their numbers are declining. Is there an exit strategy? I know it is of great concern to all in the industry, but hair pulling only goes so far. If the market will not support something, then should we try to find artificial ways to prop it up?

[Greg Flowers]

I'm with Birch on this. Occassionaly tther papers don't make an endorsement. I find it perfectly acceptable and even commendable to indicate both candidates are unsuitable.

The Jakie Knotts endorsement being a PIME example of this!!!