Katon’s Kountry Klub Problem Rises Again
Remember Katon Dawson? He made headlines in 2008 for resigning his membership in a whites-only country club shortly before launching an unsuccessful bid for Republican National Committee chair.
Dawson’s supporters included Glenn McCall, a black RNC committeeman who offered effusive praise for Dawson’s decision to cancel his membership:
I see what Katon did as evidence of his commitment to including and involving people from all walks of life and all races. Katon took a stand for what was right. He stood up in front of his friends at the club and told them what they were doing was wrong, and when they refused to change, he decided to leave.
Just one problem: Katon Dawson never gave up his membership at the exclusive Forest Lake Country Club. His very public resignation was a sham, quietly dispensed with after losing the RNC chairmanship to Michael Steele.
Accordingly, Dawson never technically “rejoined” the club in 2009, as he has been privately telling supporters.
Sources familiar with the club’s financial records tell FITS that Dawson actually paid his membership dues at the Forest Lake Country Club in Columbia, S.C. throughout the RNC campaign – and as a result was never removed from the club’s membership rolls.
“He paid in advance for the duration of his leave,” one of the sources told FITS. “He has never not been a member of Forest Lake.”
Another source said Dawson paid five months worth of dues in advance.
This news comes as no surprise to critics who questioned the politically expedient timing of his faux resignation. After all, in the twenty-first century, racially exclusive clubs are a no-no even when you’re not campaigning.
Dawson heads to Hawaii later this month to attend the RNC meeting. Last week he told CNN he would serve as South Carolina GOP chairwoman Karen Floyd’s proxy at the meeting, but a South Carolina GOP spokesperson denies that was ever the plan.
Dawson says he’s “not ready to comment” on why he won’t be attending the meeting in an official capacity. Oh, Katon, Katon, Katon, I think we all know why.
South Carolina: The Fox News of States
It’s no secret that President Obama and his administration have attempted to sideline Fox News, openly punishing the highly rated cable news channel for failing to promote the White House agenda. Fox was conspicuously shut out of Obama’s five-network Sunday talk show blitz in September, and the White House has already determined that the president will not grant any interviews to Fox anchors during the remainder of 2009.
Alienating the millions of Americans who watch Fox is strategic buffoonery of the highest degree. But why focus on solid strategy when you can engage in some good ol’ fashioned spite? And why settle for popular news networks when you can make your petty resentments known to an entire state, like say, South Carolina?
U.S. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said Friday that a conversation with White House staff left him with the sense that a hostile environment in South Carolina is keeping the first lady from visiting.
The high-ranking South Carolina Democrat said he has received more than 100 invitations for Michelle Obama. But this summer when he brought one of those requests to her staff on behalf of his alma mater, South Carolina State University, Clyburn said her security was an issue.
The conversation came after former Richland County GOP activist Rusty DePass suggested on Facebook in June that an escaped zoo gorilla was not harmful because it was probably one of Mrs. Obama’s ancestors. DePass’ comment was coupled with a remark in July from U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, a Republican. DeMint said that beating the president’s health care plan would be a ‘Waterloo’ moment for Obama.
Congressman Joe Wilson’s ‘You lie!’ outburst during Obama’s joint address on health care reform last month didn’t help either, Clyburn said.
‘A lot of it has to do with the fact that the climate in South Carolina just is not good, and that’s a shame,’ Clyburn said at a roundtable discussion at his Columbia office.
‘I do believe it is keeping her away from this state,’ he said.
Emphases mine.
Yes, a moronic South Carolina GOP grunt wrote something shameful about the first lady and a couple of politicians made bold statements about the president and his policies. How do those comments indicate a statewide climate hostile enough to jeopardize Mrs. Obama’s security?
Simple answer: they don’t.
The White House isn’t keeping Michelle Obama out of South Carolina to protect her from assassins in white hoods. South Carolina is being kept off her itinerary to send a message: embarrassing the president will not be tolerated. (Are you listening Joe Wilson?) Dissent will be contorted into proof that racist backwater bumpkins in the south are undermining Obama’s presidency and endangering the very life of the first lady with their dangerous coded rhetoric.
Who cares about smearing the people of South Carolina? After all, it’s just a red state.
Update: Michelle Malkin links. Thanks, Michelle!
Update 2: My very first Instalanche. Thanks, Glenn!
Henry McMaster Campaigning on a “Sink Sanford” Platform
South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster (R) is running for governor. He knows it, citizens know it.
Although he hasn’t officially declared his candidacy, McMaster’s campaign is in full swing. Moments ago I received a press release from McMaster for Attorney General announcing his mission to have the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division comb through Governor Mark Sanford’s travel records.
McMaster Requests SLED Review All Sanford
Travel Records in Light of New RevelationsColumbia, S.C. June 30, 2009 – “In light of the governor’s disclosure of additional travel today, I have requested that SLED conduct a preliminary review of all Governor Sanford’s travel records to determine if any laws have been broken or any state funds misused.”
###
A review of Governor Sanford’s records is completely appropriate given his recent admission of international dalliances with his girlfriend. But Henry McMaster’s use of the inquiry to troll for political contributions is classless politicking at its worst. McMaster for Attorney General distributed the press release about the Sanford investigation just hours after sending out a plea for second quarter campaign contributions to be made before midnight tonight.
Henry McMaster’s intent is completely transparent, but that’s not the sort of transparency we need in South Carolina government.
Mark Sanford Didn’t Cheat on You
Clucking hens and crowing roosters, go back to your coops. Unless you’re Jenny Sanford, it’s time to forgo the unseemly impulse to tar and feather South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford for his marital infidelity.
Governor Sanford engaged in what might be the most vanilla extramarital affair in recent political history. His sexual liaison did not result in a federal probe, the payment of hush money, or any of the truly illicit scandals that have surfaced among politicians lately. Barring the disclosure that his girlfriend is actually an Argentine farm animal or underage hooker, the public has no business using Sanford’s affair to oust him from office.
If there’s any truth to the gossip about Governor Sanford’s official conduct, the people of South Carolina will hold him accountable. To that end, the rumors oozing from the Columbia political grapevine should be addressed as soon as possible. But if we determine that Sanford maintained appropriate contact with his staff during his trip to Argentina and did not misappropriate state resources to fund his trips, his affair is no reason to abridge his gubernatorial term.
The governor experienced a moral lapse. But this isn’t some fable in which the king’s transgressions expose the entire kingdom to drought and famine. Mark Sanford broke vows he made to his wife Jenny, not to his supporters and not to the people of his state.
If you don’t like a guy who cheats on his wife, don’t marry one. Don’t befriend one. Go ahead and sympathize with his wife. Call him a hypocrite and a scumbag, and be grateful he’s not your spouse. But remember that point: he isn’t your husband and you’re not his jilted wife.
There’s no reason to assume infidelity in marriage is a precursor to a politician’s betrayal of his constituents. Violation of marital trust is a very different animal than violation of public trust. And personal integrity just isn’t a reliable measure of professional integrity.
Can a man act as a politically principled, trustworthy leader while betraying his wife’s trust and his own ideals? Distasteful as it might seem, the answer is yes. The pacts we make are independent of each other, and we’re capable of maintaining surprisingly rigid compartmentalization in our lives. It is entirely possible to be a loyal friend and a cheating spouse, a diligent employee and an unreliable friend, or even a successful governor and an unfaithful husband.
South Carolinians voted for Mark Sanford believing that his moral compass pointed in the same direction as their own. His compass spun out of control for a short time, but that doesn’t mean his values and vision for the state are any different than when he was elected.
Mrs. Sanford may or may not be able to forgive her husband’s affair. But for the rest of us, there’s nothing to forgive. Did citizens go to the voting booth looking for husband material or to elect a principled conservative to lead a reform movement in South Carolina?
I don’t need my politicians to lead by example, I need them to be exemplary leaders.
So let’s quibble about whether Mark Sanford is a good governor. Let’s pick apart his conservative principles and see if his achievements measure up to our expectations. And if and when he runs for office again, we can decide whether to hold Sanford’s moral failures against him.
But let’s leave these affairs of the heart to be sorted out by Mark and Jenny Sanford. They don’t need our input and scarlet letters are simply passé.
Cal Thomas Has Got Some ‘Splainin’ To Do
In his Friday column, Cal Thomas discussed how we all have a little Mark Sanford in us:
The first thing that should be acknowledged about South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford’s admission to an extramarital affair is that it could happen to any of us. That is not an excuse (and no, it has not happened to me, or to my wife). Every married person has heard the voice; the one that says you deserve something “better.” [emphasis added]
Most of us have wandering eyes and there’s nothing wrong with that. Some marriages survive even when it’s other parts that are doing the wandering. To be human is to be fallible. But my guess is that Thomas’ little voice that says “you deserve something better” reveals a lot more about him than it does about “every married person.”
Anyone want to bet Cal Thomas will be sleeping on the sofa this weekend?
Getting South Carolina Lawmakers To Go On The Record
It isn’t hard to figure out why South Carolina state legislators spend taxpayer dollars so irresponsibly: anonymous voice votes shield them from being held accountable by constituents.
South Carolina ranks lowest in the nation for legislative accountability and the vast majority of votes in the state legislature are never recorded. South Carolina is one of only five states where legislators are not required to record votes. In 2008, the South Carolina House of Representatives recorded only 8 percent of votes on general bills or joint resolutions, and the Senate recorded only 1 percent.
A roll call rule to improve legislative vote recording took effect in January, but the measure is temporary and subject to the whims of the legislature. The Spending Accountability Act of 2009 (H. 3047) is a more permanent solution introduced by possible 2010 gubernatorial candidate Rep. Nikki Haley. S. 11 is the companion Senate bill.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are sponsoring the bills, but support is not universal. Opponents say roll calls for every vote will incur unjustifiable expense, an excuse that’s pretty rich coming from legislators who approved funding for an Elvis impersonator, a deep fryer, and a “Doo-Da” Festival.
A House subcommittee hearing on the Spending Accountability Act is scheduled for Tuesday, April 21, 2009. The citizens of South Carolina have a right to know how elected officials are voting on all issues brought before the South Carolina General Assembly. Remind the legislature that transparency in government is not optional by urging them to pass H. 3047 out of committee so it can be voted on by the entire House.
Contact the following South Carolina House members, as well as your Representative, and let them know that open government is a principle worth fighting for.
Subcommittee Chair Denny Nielson
803-734-3097
DWN@schouse.org
Rep. Brian White
803-734-3113
WBW@schouse.org
Rep. Murrell Smith
803-734-3042
GMS@schouse.org
Rep. Herb Kirsh
803-734-3071
Speaker Bobby Harrell
803-734-3125
HSP@schouse.org
Chairman Dan Cooper
803-734-3144
HWM@schouse.org
Majority Leader Kenny Bingham
803-734-3138
KAB@schouse.org
Update, 4/21/09: The Spending Accountability Act of 2009 passed subcommittee today. The next step is a hearing before the full House Ways and Means Committee tomorrow (Wednesday, April 22) at 2:30pm. Contact information for all Ways and Means members is available on the State House Web site, or the following list of email addresses may be copied and pasted into your email client:
HWM@schouse.org, LDB@schouse.org, JAB@schouse.org, KAB@schouse.org, WC@schouse.org, GCH@schouse.org, TE@schouse.org, HB@schouse.org, KK@schouse.org, HBL@schouse.org, LFL@schouse.org, DAL@schouse. org, JL@schouse.org, JM1@schouse.org, JN@schouse.org, DWN@schouse.org, HLO@schouse.org, PittsT@schouse.org, RFR@schouse.org, JGS@schouse.org, GMS@schouse.org, JS@schouse.org, WBW@schouse.org, ADY@schouse.org
Update, 4/24/09: The meeting this week in which the Ways and Means Committee was scheduled to address the Spending Accountability Act was canceled. A new meeting of the full Committee has not been announced, and Rep. Nikki Haley is calling the cancellation a “major setback.” The Committee may fail to review the bill before the House adjourns for the year.
Please, melt the phones and flood the Ways and Means Committee members with emails. Let them know that voters expect H.3047 to pass during the current session.