The Worthwhile Company, Inc.
Does your growing business need an IT dept.?
The Worthwhile Company can help!
Software Applications - Network Support - More!
Visit our Advertisers!
HOME | Contact Editor | Forum | Directory | Search | Advertise | Tell-a-Friend
June 3, 2006 | 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?



The Common Voice
Where you help make the national headlines!
Visit our Advertisers!



 :: Jonathan Pait
 :: Benj Buck

 :: Mike Cubelo
 :: Doug Kendall
 :: Jimmy Moore
 :: 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.

AND ACTION: South Carolina, you can still let Lindsey Graham know your pain
Joe from Edisto Island writes:
5/26/2005 6:53:28 PM
On Fox News "Special Reports w/Brit Hume"; Charles Krouthammer (sp?) just said that with the action of the Dems today, i.e. filibustering against Bolton and not calling it a filibuster, "it obvious that the Democrats have pulled the wool over the eyes of Linsey Graham" when the senator walked out of their meeting with the gang of 14 claiming that "now the senate can get back to the business of saving social security, dealing with Iraq and dealing with the needs of government".

"it's obvious from the action of Harry Reed and his Democrat cronies that they have no plan for social security and have no plan for Iraq and the ony thing they know how to do is pull the wool over the eyes of Senator Graham." Charles Krouthammer.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Vic from Simpsonville writes:
5/25/2005 6:38:45 PM
It all depends on what "agreement" means in congress. But at least someone made an effort to forge an agreement.
[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Al from Florence writes:
5/25/2005 3:59:26 PM
This column is passionate but short-sighted. If you carefully consider the agreement, power is not vested in a liberal minority but in 7 Democrats who are not closely aligned with their party leadership and who have nothing to gain by permiting a filibuster over any judicial nominee. After all, the Democrat minority can't win any legislative benefits for them and the Republican majority won't. Those 7 Democrats are in safe seats or represent states where they are not intimidated by radical narrow issue groups. If we accept these 7 at their word there's nothing Reid, Shummer, Boxer, Kennedy or Murray can do because they've promised to vote for cloture. And if they don't, bang.
[ reply ]
Vic from Simpsonville writes:
5/25/2005 2:05:59 PM
My comments on extremism were not about you, Benj, and I was directing those comments toward ALL guilty persons on The Hill. Once again, I ain't talking about you . . .

And, no, I do not expect immediate agreement between opposing idealogies, on any divisive issue. The whole point was that the cooler, moderate heads were/are needed to work to reach agreement. The extremists, left and right, are doing their damndest to keep the noise and dust stirred up. The 14 who brokered the compromise acted more like professionals and adults than did their aislemates.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Benj from Taylors writes:
5/25/2005 1:55:55 PM
Vic, look at what is taking place in this discussion... which I'm loving by the way.
1.) Politician makes a move
2.) I comment on his move
3.) You commnet on my comment

In other I made comments, which certainly are based on what I think is right (I hope you don't think I opperate on what I think is wrong), to which you call mindless extremism, which I am assuming you say based on what you think is right.

Understand, I do not refuse enertaining other's advise and consent. Otherwise, SC Headlines would be open only to those who share my idealogical persuasion. I listened to Graham's explanation for his compromise. I asked for your explanation for the compromise. You can call me (I don't take it personally by the way) extreme all day long (again, based on your own reasoning), but I will call you sensitive.

To think that when you disagree with me, I am forcing my version of truth roughshod over you, is being too sensitive. Do you really expect us to live in a world where everyone must agree? No, of course you don't, or you wouldn't have disagreed with me in this forum.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Vic from Simpsonville writes:
5/25/2005 1:32:54 PM
"Benj from Taylors writes:
5/25/2005 11:52:29 AM

. . . What seems to be the club of mindless, wild-eyed extremism? Thatís a radical statement to make as one who is trying to come across as non-extreme."

Excuse me? What's radical about it? I am no mugger, either, but I can recognize a mugging when I see one. I won't define extremist/extremism for you- go to your dictionary of choice. I apply that description to anyone on whom it fits- left, right, red, blue, pro, con, Yankees, Red Sox, whatever.

When your vision- and thus, your mind- becomes so narrow that you cannot see the tree for the bark (never mind the forest), when you determine to force your version of truth roughshod over others, with only the barest of numerical majority, when you see such scorched earth parliamentary tactics as just and proper and refuse to entertain advise or consent from any but those who are your idealogical clones, then I am comfortable labeling you as "extreme."

I use "you" in the broader sense- not aimed at YOU, personally, Benj.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Benj from Taylors writes:
5/25/2005 11:52:29 AM

First, let me defend myself. I think you read over a very important word "seems." Before you get all emotional and tear into me, take a deep breath and read carefully. I'm the first to admit that I am baffled. What these seven Republicans have done doesn't make sense; as an intelligent person I'm sure you're going to help the rest of us understand. People have targeted L.Graham amongst the seven, because he has presented himself as a conservative.

Now, my question for you. What seems to be the club of mindless, wild-eyed extremism? Thatís a radical statement to make as one who is trying to come across as non-extreme. Is it the fact that I have taken a stand that opposes you and therefore you canít tolerate it? Maybe youíre all stirred up because you are anti-conservative and pro-moderate? If so, I can respect that, but look whoís being mindless and extreme.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Benj from Taylors writes:
5/25/2005 11:50:08 AM
[VIC of Simpsonville wrote the following on another forum.]

"Now I will say this, I respect a leader when he goes against the grain when he has his peopleís best interest in mind. After all, acting on principle as opposed to partisanship is respectable. However, for a Senator to make the people back home mad for personal advancement is intolerable. Senator Graham seems to have betrayed his constituents for his own profit. And to be honest, I don't understand what that profit is at this point." [emphasis added]
Then how can you assume he is acting "for his own profit?" Has it now gone so far, and gotten so bad that nothing matters- to most of the fools in congress and most of the fools who elect them- more than wielding the club of mindless, wild-eyed extremism?

My way or the highway. With me or against me.

What a load. Compromise is not a dirty word, people. Rabid, narrow-minded extremism of any flavor is for idiots. Intelligent people seek compromise and consensus to resolve polarizing issues- anything less just leads to more divisiveness, more meaningless noise and more counterproductive eye-scratching and hair-pulling. The so-called "nuclear option" was an amazingly stupid thing to ever consider. It would damage congressional relations for some time to come and established a foolish and dangerous precedent for bullying something- anything- through the Senate, by brute force.

We need more moderates. Their knees don't jerk so hard it kicks their brains out of gear. I'm satisfied my best interests were served.

[ reply| Previous in thread ]
Joe from Edisto Island writes:
5/24/2005 3:56:11 PM
FAX a copy of your check to the Thomas Ravenel for U.S. Senate campaign fund directly to Senator Graham's office along with a reminder of a quote from former Senator Fritz Hollings; "We already have term limits... it's called ELECTIONS!"
[ reply ]

Daily Poll

Which story are you most tired of?

Senator William Jefferson accepts bribe.
Barbaro breaks a leg in Preakness.
Hayden to lead CIA.
Bird flue scare.
The search for Jimmy Hoffa's remains.

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.