HOME | Contact Editor | Forum | Directory | Search | Advertise | Tell-a-Friend
November 10, 2005 | South Carolina Headlines


Join us in
South Carolina Headlines

Sign up today to take part in the forums, interact with the content, receive South Carolina Headlines newsletters, display current weather conditions in your area, and more.

Already a member?



Support South Carolina Headlines - visit our advertisers



 :: Jonathan Pait
 :: Benj Buck

 :: Guest Columnist
 :: Doug Kendall
 :: Henri Thompson
Press Releases

 :: List All

Want to be a columnist? Contact the editor to learn how.

You must have an active account in order to participate in the online forums. You can sign on using the MyVoice! section of this page, or you can set up an account.

Laws are made by fools like me
W. Andrew from Greenville writes:
4/29/2005 2:52:35 PM
First, it seems that the cost-benefit of such a plan may not justify the trouble. I don't know what the cost would be, but I assume that there will be some cost to the added regulation. Also, I believe that many times there are unintended consequences that mitigate against action even when the cost-benefit marginally favors action.

Although I suppose there would be some benefit from keeping mature (large) trees, this is a benefit that can be achieved fairly easily on an individual basis. This is not a problem where pooling risks or resources creates an advantage, nor is this a situtation where the interests of many are impacted by the decisions of one or two developers (as may exist in commercial development).

However, I say "lean" because there is much I do not know. Despite your belief, I do not believe that every single aspect of life should be subject to regulation; and when there is only marginal net benefit, I tend to opt for status quo, particularly when dealing with areas that relate to fundamental rights (property).

It is simply determination of where we draw the line.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Andrew from Greer writes:
4/29/2005 2:25:54 PM
Just curious, why do you lean away from this most recent desire by U.F.?
[ reply| Previous in thread ]
W. Andrew from Greenville writes:
4/29/2005 8:45:38 AM
First, of all your characterization of "this stuff" is off-base. My point is that some people know the solution before they know the problem: You have one bunch who know that a "market solution" is always best and others think a government solution. My point is that there is not one type of solution that fits every problem.

Once again you construct a quote and then proceed to knock down your straw man. I am not open-minded because I am Democrat; I am a Democrat because I am open-minded. Moderate? Sometimes. Conservative? Sometimes. Pragmatic...always. There are lots of open-minded folks and lots of Democrats who ideas are not well-thought out...this is not the point. Once again, your black and white view of the world causes you to generalize and miss the point; I am simply making a statement about my personal approach to problems.

Bite size incrementalism seems to be as bi-partisan as it gets. Perhaps, the all-or-nothing anarchists could learn something about method progress, but it seems their faith does not permit such an approach.

Finally, a useful tool? I hope so. Sometimes, I wonder how useful I am in furthering my ideas, some of which are shared by Upstate Forever. Unfortunately, I fairly certain that characterizing you or your comrades as "useful tools" would not be appropriate. I still hold out the hope that you folks will add a bit of common sense to your ideology, because a third-party that promotes freedom would indeed be useful.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
W. Andrew from Greenville writes:
4/29/2005 8:15:45 AM
So, not only is Ralph able to see hidden agendas, but you have decided that they are not even environmentalists, and both edicts pronounced with the typical right-wing righteousness. Nuts? Of course, this is in the eye of the beholder or does it take one to know one? There are several cliches that come to mind.

Seriously, I do know these folks, and they are well-intentioned and honest people who believe that unrestrained growth causes harm to the environment, and that there are some simply strategies that might mitigate this impact. I am a member of Upstate Forever, although I do not agree with all of their proposals and honestly, lean against this latest proposal. However, I have really not considered the pros and cons nor thought through a cost-benefit.

To complete this response to your first reply, what is the unfair generalization about Ralph? Ralph has declared the existence of hidden agendas (faith is defined as belief in things not seen) and you call Upstate Forever nuts and that they are not true environmentalists. I started with cliches, and I will end with one: Seems the pot is calling the kettle black.

Will return momentarily to address your second post.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Andrew from Greer writes:
4/28/2005 10:45:29 AM
W. Andy,

Do people really buy this stuff about "I must be an open-minded moderate because I'm a Democrat and therefore all my ideas are well thought out?" If it works I need to try that strategy. If it doesn't it's really getting old.

Why am I not surprised you know the people of Upstate Forever, and ostensibly know them well enough to know they have no ulterior motives?

I am not surprised, becaue I don't think their agenda is all that hidden, but it meshes quite nicely with other folks who do desire to dole out their agenda in nice bite-size, incremental pieces while keeping their ultimate goals secret.

Do I accuse you of hiding your agenda? No. But your explanation for Ralph goes the same for the company you keep as well. You are in danger of being a useful tool.

Ten Point Plan for Sensible Growth In The Upstate from the Upstate Forever site _________________________________

1. Protect open space and natural resources.

2. Prepare and implement land use plans.

3. Promote and encourage sustainable development practices.

4. Require communication and coordi-nation among counties, cities and special purpose districts and the consolidation of some services.

5. Concentrate roads, schools and sewer and water services in areas where growth is desired.

6. Continue and expand community revitalization

7. Adopt and enforce strong ordinances to control design and appearance.

8. Promote and support affordable housing.

9. Promote and fund alternative methods of

10. Control storm water through innovative strategies.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Andrew from Greer writes:
4/28/2005 10:34:36 AM

Appreciate the nod, but don't worry. We can handle your light work.

W. Andy,

First, you have a mucked up definition of ideologue. My definition is that of people who ignore facts and push their view over other despite reasonable objections and common-sense alternatives. That is the definition of the green mob at a county council meeting.

Secondly, these people can't even be called environmentalists. They just want to tell people how many trees they need to have, regardless of what impact those trees may have on the environment, or the people for which the environment exists. I live in a lower middle class subdivision. The trees were clearcut because these houses need to be cheap and affordable and having trees all over the place adds to construction cost. Now there are plenty of trees. In upper middleclass subdivisions there are plenty of original trees because the owners prefer it that way. What's on God's green earth is the problem?!?

Thirdly, it is a darn sight ideological of you to make a generalization towards Ralph, especially when you know better. Ralph discusses his views every day. As far as I can tell, he takes all the calls and all the points of view while the tree nuts prefer to use county council to force their opinions on people. He has had some of the most outspoken liberals on his show!

As for Democracy and freedom versus ideology, the tree nuts are't fit to carry Ralph's trash bags.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
W. Andrew from Greenville writes:
4/28/2005 10:33:56 AM
Ralph, I am well-aware of your faith; but you missed the point. I was not accusing you have having a hidden agenda (since I do not consider myself an ideologue)...my point is that left-wing ideologues are likely to accuse you of a hidden agenda just like you accuse them.

For example, left-wing ideologues see dismantling of Social Security (as opposed to saving Social Security) as the hidden agenda behind private accounts, or dismantling of public educuation (as opposed to improving public education) as the hidden agenda behind vouchers.

Of course, even the paranoid have enemies, and so, I suspect that ideologues find enough boogy men to support casting their suspicions so broadly. Knowing the folks behind Upstate Forever, I think they are just as upfront about their agenda as Ralph. Every faith must have the dark side, and Ralph's faith is no different. But Upstate Forever? Disagree with them, but to accuse them of some ulterior plot to abolish private property or whatever you believe their evil intentions maybe is simply foolish.

As is evident, most ideologues do not feel embarrassed about deciphering the intentions of those that they do not know. It amazes me the blind spots that intelligent people succumb to once they have adopted a faith which constitutes a theory of everything...I suppose that is what they mean by blind faith.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Joe from Edisto Island writes:
4/28/2005 9:37:53 AM
Way to go Ralph!

So when will you go into syndication so that we can hear your views, rants and 'agenda' over a lowcountry (Charleston) radio station?

I know of one or two talk-jocks here in town that really NEED replacement!

I guess I should just wait a few moments as Clear Channel's talk format station seems to be going through 3-6pm drive time talk hosts 'like crap through a goose' trying to compete with Citadel Communication's afternoon drive guy. Maybe if Clear Channel would simply broadcast YOUR show, someone could give Andy Thomas a run for his money in presenting a show with statewide appeal.

:- )

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Ralph from Mauldin writes:
4/27/2005 11:18:10 PM
My agenda is not hidden at all. I expose it daily from 3 to 6 p.m. on 1330/950 WORD-AM. I am an unabashed free-market capitalist who believes that enlightened self-interest is the best servant of all of mankind and the planet we occupy. True environmentalists need not fear aggressive economic development because the market will systematically exterminate those who allow their avarice to offend their constituency which, by huge majorities, are quite fond of trees. Is that clear enough for you, or are there other parts of my agenda you would like exposed? I'm all about exposing my agenda.
[ reply| Previous in thread ]
W. Andrew from Greenville writes:
4/27/2005 8:47:27 PM
It is funny how ideologues always think that their adversaries must have a hidden agenda, because they cannot see the other side of the issue, and assume there must be something not being said. I am sure there as folks asking "what is Ralph's hidden agenda?"
[ reply ]
David from Greer writes:
4/27/2005 12:30:49 PM
Upstate Never is my personal name for these environmental whackos.
[ reply ]

Daily Poll

What should be South Carolina''s main area of concern?

More job opportunities
Domestic violence
Illegal alien control
Improved education
Tax relief

Have a poll idea?
Members can submit their own polls. Sign on and join the fun!

  South Carolina Headlines
Made possible by The Worthwhile Company, Inc.