Carolina Politics Online

Rep. Joe Wilson acknowledged Tuesday that he’s under investigation by the House ethics committee for his use of travel funds while on at least one congressional trip to Afghanistan.

Wilson, a South Carolina Republican in a tough re-election fight with Democrat Rob Miller, said the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct — the official name of the ethics panel — is looking into his purchase of six goblets for $12 while in Afghanistan in August 2009.

“As a member of the House Armed Services Committee visiting troops in Afghanistan, Wilson was provided $13 a day for travel expenses,” said Pepper Pennington, his congressional spokeswoman.

“Wilson purchased six small tokens of his appreciation — under $2 each — for Afghanistan (war) veterans and their families,” Pennington said.

McClatchy

Oh, puh-leeeeze.  12 stinking dollars?  When I first saw the title of this very biased “Pravda” article “‘You lie’ Rep. Joe Wilson probed for use of travel expenses” I thought I was actually going to read about real abuses of travel expenses, like $100,000 flights for him and 60 of his friends and stays at 5 star resort hotels, because we all know that never happens…..

Do you know what this is?  This is the Ethics panel opening up an investigation over $12 as vengeance against him for shouting “You lie!” during the state of the union address earlier this year.  They want to try to damage his reputation right before the election to help Miller’s Congressional run against him.  And why else would McClatchy even take time writing an article on it unless they were going to point out the absurdity of the whole thing?  Those people really do deserve to be labeled state run media.   What a pathetic waste of time and resources.

Miller, a former Marine Corps captain who served in Iraq, has called Wilson’s trips to Afghanistan junkets

Naturally, because everyone knows that Afghanistan is on the top of everyone’s list of vacation hot spots to throw away money on luxurious junkets.

Mount Pleasant — A group of 10 rallied Monday morning on Johnnie Dodds Boulevard to denounce Sen. Lindsey Graham for his support of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan.

Staff members from Operation Rescue-Insurrecta Nex, an organization that wants to make abortion illegal, stood outside in the heat for the “Beating, Burning and Hanging Lindsey ‘Benedict Arnold’ Graham in Effigy” protest.

“Lindsey Graham claims he’s a Christian, but he’s a traitor,” said Randall Terry, the group’s director. The protesters said Graham is using babies as part of his political game.

Graham’s office would not comment on the protests but said in a prepared statement that although he does not agree with Kagan’s legal or judiciary philosophies, Graham does think she is qualified, has good character and understands the difference between being a judge and politician.

The Post and Courier

An entire ten people?  Oh yeah, that must have really rattled ole Lindsey.  They sound like a bunch of kooks to me.  Graham is using babies as a political game?  Uh, how about looking at yourself in the mirror Mr Terry.  You sound like an idiot.

As I said before, there are certain battles you fight and others you don’t.  The Kagan nomination isn’t one of them.  The Democrats have 59 seats in the Senate, plus a few of the moderate Yankees who have already given Kagan their blessing, so the numbers are more than there for confirmation and they have enough to break a filibuster.  Attempting to filibuster Kagan would be absurd and it would only backfire on the Republican Party and the Democrats would undoubtedly return the favor the next time a Republican president nominates a Supreme Court justice.  If they want to vote against her in an up and down vote, that’s fine.

Kagan’s appointment to the court does not shift the balance.  She won’t be any more or less radical than her predecessor.  Those ten people have a right to have their protest, but they are just wasting their time.  They have zero chance of stopping the Kagan confirmation and Lindsey Graham doesn’t give a crap about their complaints.

Democratic U.S. House candidate Rob Miller proposed slashing Congressional pay and perks, part of a plan to win back voter trust.

Miller’s plan would also cut federal spending by 3 percent to 5 percent, exempting military, veteran’s affairs and homeland security budgets.

“Hard working South Carolinians, men and women, have lost faith in Washington,” Miller said. “Everybody is tightening their belts. It’s long past time for Congress to lead the way.”

Miller’s plan would cut Congressional pay by 10 percent, and he said he would reject any raise until the federal budget is balanced. Miller would also eliminate Congressional perks, such as cars, cell phones and some paid mail, known as franking.

The State

Gutsy plan.  Very gutsy, but I’m liking it.  Words are one thing, though.  The real question is what is Miller’s plan to build a consensus in Congress to get this achieved?  Can he get 217 other members of the House and 51 members of the U.S. Senate to take a ten percent pay raise?  I’m skeptical.  I do think, however, that the proposed three to five percent cuts in Federal spending are fairly realistic, but even that is a tall order.  We know how the Congress critters love to spend other peoples’ money.  Nevertheless, these goals will not be achieved without members of Congress who will push for them.  You get one elected here and one elected there and eventually you have the numbers you need.  If Rob Miller were to stay true to his word it puts us one step closer to some type of reform.

Members of several local tea parties say a resolution passed this month by NAACP delegates condemning elements of racism within the nationwide grassroots movement is misguided and unfair.

The NAACP resolution calls upon “all people of goodwill to repudiate the racism of the tea parties, and to stand in opposition to its drive to push our country back to the pre-civil rights era,” said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington bureau.

The resolution will not become official unless it is ratified by the group’s board of directors in October. A spokesman for the NAACP in Washington said that until then, the group will not release the text of the document.

Mary Amonitti has attended several meetings and rallies organized by the Hilton Head TEA Party and has been a member of the NAACP for most of her adult life, founding a chapter in suburban Philadelphia in the 1990s, she said.

The tea party’s values — lower taxes, smaller government and personal responsibility — cut across racial boundaries, she said. Those who accuse the tea party of racism are merely trying to discredit the movement without engaging the issues it represents.

The resolution is evidence the NAACP is no longer a nonpartisan organization, she said.

The Beaufort Gazette

Bingo!  This is what I’ve been getting at for a long time now.  The NAACP has ceased to be an organization that advocates the betterment of black Americans, but instead has become nothing more than a political arm for the Democratic Party.  Racial equality overall has been achieved in this country.  We have our first black president for God’s sake.  That doesn’t mean that there aren’t still racists and bigots out there.  Those people will always exist, but the days of white schools and black schools and white restrooms and black restrooms are long behind us.  The NAACP stirs up controversy when there isn’t any in order to keep the funding coming in so the guys at the top can keep their power.  They have a vested interest in keeping racial tensions alive, not ridding us of them.

“During the time President Bush was in office, they made all sorts of statements about him that were untrue — vicious statements, calling him names,” Amonitti said. “I never saw where the NAACP resolved that their members were disrespectful of the office of the president.”

Julian Bond, the recently retired chairman of the NAACP is complete crackpot.  He was infamous for making outrageously over the top accusations about the right wing and the Republican Party, frequently referring to them as the Taliban wing of American politics.  Where were the NAACP resolutions criticizing Bond’s outrageous accusations during his 12 years as chairman?

The NAACP shares some of the same concerns of the tea party, said Elijudah Beni Yisrael, president of the Hilton Head Island-Bluffton branch of the NAACP. But the manner in which some tea party supporters have gone about highlighting those problems is alarming, he said.

“They’re trying to stir up distasteful feelings between blacks and whites,” he said.

How so? What evidence does Mr. Yisrael have to back up his accusations?  Because they criticize the policies of a black president?  Is nobody not of color permitted to do so? The Tea Party Express threw Mark Williams overboard after he wrote his racially tinged letter directed at the NAACP on the heals of their resolution against the tea party, did they not?  It seems to me that the tea party is willing to hold its members accountable for distasteful actions, but the NAACP is not.  The only group to stir up distasteful racial feelings was the NAACP with their loony resolution!

Daniel Denton, a supporter of the Beaufort Tea Party, said such views are not representative of the movement.

“I think if you look at any organization, you’re going to find a few wackos,” he said. “But to pass a resolution criticizing and condemning the entire movement and the issues they stand for was, I think, uncalled for.”

The whole point of that resolution was to get attention and get themselves in the news and it worked.

Congressman Joe Wilson (R) and his Democratic challenger Rob Miller are trading barbs as the race for South Carolina’s Second Congressional District is heating up.  Miller sent out a press release yesterday accusing Wilson of accepting $5,000 in campaign donations from disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.  Likewise, the Republicans have attacked Rob Miller for accepting thousands in donations from the radical leftist group Moveon.org.  South Carolina Adjutant General Stan Spears condemned Miller yesterday morning for accepting donations from the very same group that ran the “General Betray Us” ads in 2007.  Miller is retired from the U.S. Marine Corps.

The Republicans are claiming that Miller’s accusations of Wilson accepting Abramoff money are false and I searched around the FEC Web site and was not successful at finding any myself, however I did find several donations from Moveon made to Miller.

SUMMERVILLE — Councilman Walter Bailey said he wants to make a statement about the federal government’s lack of action on illegal immigration.

“I don’t think the federal government is doing enough to secure the border,” he said.

Bailey, who said illegal immigrants are taking jobs from legal residents, is proposing an ordinance that would bar anyone in Summerville from housing or hiring illegal immigrants.

The proposal, which will be up for an initial vote Wednesday at a Town Council meeting, lists grievances against illegal immigrants that include crime, taking jobs and creating a drain on town resources.

Councilwoman Kima Garten-Schmidt supported the proposal Monday at a Finance Committee meeting, but Councilman Aaron Brown opposed it.

Brown questioned the need for such a town ordinance and wondered about the potential burden of enforcing it.

“I think we could create a problem for ourselves,” he said.

The Post and Courier

We’re going to see a lot more of this in the wake of the Arizona law and the frustration that has been brewing for several years now over the Federal government’s lack of action in enforcing immigration laws.  I’m not sure if any ordinance Summerville passes will be able to stand up in court, however.

If you are someone who follows national politics closely, you may have heard of Lou Barletta.  He is the mayor of Hazleton, Pennsylvania and currently a candidate for Congress.  Barletta gained political fame (or notoriety, depending on how you look at it) for signing a city law that made it illegal to rent housing to illegal aliens within the city limits back in 2006.  The law was struck down the following year by a federal judge who declared the law was unconstitutional as it was pre-empted  by federal law.  I imagine a similar challenge will hit Summerville if they follow through with their  proposal.

Of course, they may already know this and this might be just be a ploy to bring further attention to the problem.  I guess we’ll see how it plays out.

COLUMBIA — Conservatives in U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson’s district are facing facts: They’re angry that he voted for the 2008 Wall Street bailout, but they know opposing him could send his Democratic opponent to Congress.

Exhibit A is GOP gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley, who declared in April that Wilson should “absolutely not” get another term but said Thursday that she now supports his re-election.

“This is about electing the most conservative candidate,” Haley spokesman Rob Godfrey said. “In November, Congressmen Wilson is clearly the most conservative of those two candidates.”

Wilson, best known for shouting “you lie” last year while President Barack Obama was addressing Congress, is in a rematch against Democrat Rob Miller.

Wilson beat him two years ago with 54 percent of the vote, and this year’s contest is one of the nation’s most expensive U.S. House races, mostly because of the money that poured in to him and Miller after Wilson taunted Obama. Wilson’s most recent campaign finance report, filed May 19, shows he’s raised nearly $4 million while Miller has raised nearly $2.4 million. Their next reports are due next week.

Jane Kenny, organizer of the Tea Party Patriots of Bluffton at the foot of Wilson’s district near Beaufort and Hilton Head Island, said there’s no question that tea party activists are unhappy about Wilson’s bailout vote.

But, she said, “at this point in time we have a choice between Mr. Miller and Mr. Wilson. Mr. Miller is telling us he supports the Obama agenda, so by default, Wilson is our man.”

The Post and Courier

I don’t think Joe Wilson has a whole lot to worry about.  Unlike Barrett, who in my opinion ended his political career when he voted for the bailout, I agree that Wilson will escape the fury.  The first point is what Ms Kenny already stated.  If you are a conservative or even a moderate in Wilson’s district and your alternative to Wilson is a candidate who supports the incredibly unpopular Obama agenda, who are you going to vote for?  You’re going to vote for Wilson.

Second, as much as his behavior at the State of the Union address helped fuel Rob Miller’s candidacy, ironically it may have actually saved Wilson.  While he took a lot of flack over the “You lie!” outburst, people are realizing he was right.  Obama is a liar.  He marketed himself as this enlightened politically centrist figure who could bridge the gap between an increasingly divided America.  In actuality he’s become more polarizing than George Bush and he turned out to be the radical leftist that smart people like me knew he would be.

Right now, Democrat is a dirty word.  We’re in a total 180 from where we were politically the last two election cycles.  The momentum has been and I think will continue to be behind the GOP all the way up to Election Day and that will put Wilson over the finish line regardless of the mistakes he’s made.

Congressional candidate Jim Pratt won the Republication nomination in a recount in which he was certified as the winner over Nancy Harrelson by 111 votes.  Pratt will now face Congressman Jim Clyburn in the November election.  Harrelson ran against Clyburn in 2008  Clyburn handily defeated her, receiving 67.5% of the vote.  The district is a gerrymander special, carved out to specifically elect a black Democrat.  It encompasses the cities of Columbia, Florence, Sumter, and North Charleston.  The Cook Partisan Voting Index scores this seat as D+12 which puts it pretty handily in the Democrats’ column.  Although it’s not impossible for there to be an upset, especially with all the anti-incumbent angst this year, I don’t expect to see Mr. Clyburn leaving Washington.

Yes, Scott was the first black Republican elected to public office in South Carolina since 1900, when he first won a seat on County Council.

He’s the only black Republican in the Legislature today, and he likely will be the only black Republican in Congress if he wins the general election in November.

But Scott is quick to dismiss that sort of talk, and has been loath to discuss race at all during his congressional campaign. He claims no interest in being the “only” or the “first” black anything.

“My goal is just to be the guy that I’ve always been,” he said at his Allstate Insurance Co. office in West Ashley the day after his victory in the runoff election.

The Post and Courier

Why can’t the racist media talk about Tim Scott’s qualifications and vision instead of constantly focusing on the fact that he is black.  Who cares?  Nobody voted for Tim Scott because he is black.  Tim Scott didn’t set out to become the first black Republican to represent South Carolina in Congress since Reconstruction.  He ran to advance an agenda he thinks will be beneficial to South Carolina’s First District.  I like Scott because he wants to repeal health care deform and restrain the growth of government.  That’s all I would have needed to know if I lived in that district.

The media is overwhelmingly leftist.  That has been confirmed by study after study.  It’s a simple fact.  It is also the left that claims to be the side of the political aisle that believes in equality in every aspect of life, so why then is it always the left that is constantly bringing up race?  All we’ve heard since the South Carolina primary is how Tim Scott was the first black Republican State Representative in 100 years and how he’ll be the first Congressman from South Carolina in over a century.  What we should be hearing about is what Tim Scott intends to do as the next Congressman from the First District.

The racist media really needs to get over this fixation they have.

In his first public remarks since endorsing business owner Andy Patrick in the race to represent Hilton Head Island in the state House, Sen. Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, criticized incumbent Richard Chalk’s three terms in Columbia, saying island residents “have not had effective representation in the last six years.”

Before a capacity crowd at the Spanish Wells Club, Davis questioned Chalk’s accomplishment as the District 123 representative. Despite residents’ substantial contributions in tax dollars, Davis said, Chalk was “not at the table” of House leadership.

“When you’re getting no highway dollars and no funding for education, you have to ask why that is,” he said.

Davis also attacked Chalk’s voting record, questioning his judgment for voting three times for a bill that would have given state incentives to The Sembler Co. to build a retail shopping center in Beaufort and Jasper counties. The bill ultimately died in the Senate.

“If it had succeeded, there’s no way local businesses could have competed with that,” Davis said. “I have not heard a good explanation of why he voted for it.”

The Island Packet

State Representative Richard Chalk (R-Hilton Head) has been forced into Tuesday’s run off election by business man Andy Patrick.  I’m with Senator Davis.  We need a changing of the guard.  Chalk’s record on fiscal issues is abysmal.  The South Carolina Club for Growth is a resource I rely on quite a bit when evaluating an incumbent’s reelection.  They are a pro-growth group that is very critical of our elected representatives when it comes to their support of economic growth policies, or lack thereof.

For 2009 Chalk received a score of 29 from the CFG giving him a grade of F.  It works just like high school: A, B, C, D, F.  Chalk flunked.  For the 2007-08 legislative session his prospects were a bit brighter.  He got a grade of C-, but following that up with an F shows he is moving in the wrong direction.  When it comes to sustaining the vetoes of Governor Sanford to rein in wasteful and pork barrel spending, Chalk has been less than reliable.   Beaufort County could do worse,  but they could do a heck of a lot better.

Patrick, on the other hand, has what I consider to be an acceptable vision on government spending.

State spending has been out of control over the last few years. The cornerstone of the budget discussions should be wasteful spending and the danger of unfunded liabilities. How much money lawmakers allocate to government programs and how those dollars are spent should be vigorously debated.

This year fiscally conservative lawmakers should do more than fight wasteful spending on government programs. They need to stand up for their core governing philosophy — that the private sector grows the economy better than the government.

I fear the economic strategies of our state government will only delay the much needed economic recovery. The free market principles that created the very strength to make us a world power are under attack and being compromised. To expand the economy, we need to grow the private sector, not grow the size of government.

http://andypatrick.org/state-spending/

Chalk infers he should be reelected because he has the support of the House leadership.  Having the support of Bobby Harrell is the biggest reason I can think of for NOT supporting someone’s reelection.

Reached Saturday, Chalk pointed to a letter of support signed by House Speaker Bobby Harrell and House Majority Leader Kenny Bingham released Thursday as evidence of his status among House leaders

Andy Patrick is new leadership.  Richard Chalk is the status quo.

Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin endorsed First District congressional candidate Tim Scott on Saturday.

Scott faces fellow Republican Paul Thurmond on Tuesday in the GOP run-off election.

The endorsement was apparently first announced on Facebook. Palin wrote that Scott is a “pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-development, commonsense conservative who’s been endorsed by the Club for Growth because of his solid commitment to the principles of limited government and fiscal responsibility.”

The Post and Courier

You can say what you want about Sarah Palin, but the woman has a significant amount of influence among Republican voters and her endorsement carries weight.  She took Nikki Haley from last place to first place overnight in the gubernatorial race.

For Immediate Release – June 8, 2010

SUBJECT: South Carolina 1st Congressional Candidate Katherine Jenerette Endorses Tim Scott

Katherine Jenerette for Congress, First U.S. Congressional District, South Carolina

Web Site: http://www.jenerette.com

Bio: http://www.jenerette.com/2010_bio

Katherine Jenerette Official Campaign Photos: http://jenerette.org/photos/

E-mail: uscongress@msn.com Tele contact: (843) 685-5476

For More information Contact: Stephen R Maloney, National Spokesman Jenerette for US Congress Campaign
Phone: 412-952-9232 e-mail: TalkTop65@aol.com

Katherine JENERETTE ANNOUNCES ENDORSEMENT of Tim SCOTT for CONGRESS

NORTH MYRTLE BEACH – Katherine Jenerette, Horry County Candidate for the 1st Congressional District seat being vacated by Rep. Henry Brown, held a press conference late Tuesday night to announce that she will endorse SC Rep. Tim Scott in his bid for Congress.

“I would like to congratulate Tim Scott in his finish in today’s primary election. Tim and I spoke shortly after his primary win was announced this evening and after that conversation I have decided to fully endorse the candidacy of Tim Scott to be the next United States Congressman for the First Congressional District of South Carolina.”

I felt that the right thing to do was to decide which candidate, in my judgment, would do what was in the best interest of the 1st District in the long run. I wanted to be certain that whoever I selected to endorse would be someone who shared my values and beliefs – my Commitment to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of rights – my belief in the sanctity of human life, including my views concerning the difficult questions of abortion, euthanasia, physician assisted suicide and protection of the unborn. I wanted to be certain that the promises made to our veterans and our active duty servicemen and women would be kept. I needed to know that who I supported would provide leadership on a wide range of topics, such as education, fair tax, social security, and they would ensure that our senior citizens would have access to the best medical care and receive support in their time of need during these changing times. I needed to know that the many local issues of tourism and hospitality, flood and disaster planning and the complexities of our district were foremost on the agenda of who I endorsed. And finally, I wanted to know that the people of Horry and Georgetown counties would not be forgotten once the votes were counted and the election was over. This is my home and these people are my neighbors.

Tim Scott shares my conservative platform and will carry a plan of legislative agendas forward; therefore I have decided to fully endorse the candidacy of Tim Scott to be the next United States Congressman for the First Congressional District of South Carolina.

Here are some of the many reasons why I have endorsed Tim Scott:

#1) I know that Tim will carry the conservative message from the First District voters to Washington, DC.
#2) I know that Tim will cut wasteful government spending, watching every precious taxpayer dollar.
#3) I know that Tim will fight to win the war on terror, and support our military so that America can continue to lead the free world.
#4) And I know that after getting to see and hear all of the all the Congressional candidates over the past few months, Tim Scott is the most effective advocate for conservative change, which is why I am honored to join his team.

I want to thank my husband and my four children for the support, encouragement, energy and love they have shown throughout the campaign. I want to thank my many supporters and volunteers who became my staff and consultants – I also need to thank the thousands of voters throughout the district who stood with me and made it clear that they think it’s time to take a stand on the issues and put forward a clear vision and legislative agenda to carry to Washington.

I encourage all of the voters of the First Congressional District to support Tim Scott and get out the Vote during the run off election in two weeks.

= = = = = ### = = = = =

Tune in Monday on Memorial Day at 7:00pm Eastern time to watch Katherine Jenerette on FOX Business’ America’s Nightly Scoreboard with David Asman. As part of an episode-long salute to veterans, David Asman kicked off the May 28 edition of Fox Business’ America’s Nightly Scoreboard by hosting four veterans who are running for Congress – South Carolina’s Katherine Jenerette, Florida’s Allen West, Michigan’s Brian Rooney, and Adam Kinzinger from Illinois.

Asman described them as a “refreshing voice that is rising up” and “veterans who want to kick out the incumbents and take their place in D.C.,” adding that they are among “nearly two dozen vets” who are “looking to take back Congress and making a real difference.” The show will be broadcast again on the Memorial Day program.

This is not the questionnaire that CPO sent out to the First Congressional District candidates, but one sent out by the Jenerette campaign regarding her views on the issues.

North Myrtle Beach, SC — First District Congressional Candidates Katherine Jenerette’s response to recent questions from the media.

Q1) What do you think most separates you from your eight primary opponents? What sets you apart?

Answer: When you mix motherhood, a USC education with an army paratrooper and years of experience in Local State and Federal government in South Carolina you could end up with a Congressman who is more than just a pretty face in a skirt and high heels on C-span. That’s pretty different.

Q2) Specifically, what would be the first two or three things you would do in your first year in office, if elected?

Answer: The first two or three things I intend to do is a list of about two-dozen things starting with the Economy and Jobs and a lot in-between. I don’t have to tell the people what our problems are in South Carolina – they know it, we’re almost broke from too many taxes and a lot of people are plain scared of losing the jobs they have and the answer isn’t in Washington except to get the Federal government red-tape-bureaucracy as far away from small businesses and stop taxing peoples hard earned money.

Second, we have to get our National Security Agenda on track and that starts with securing our borders because if we can send unmanned aircraft drones thousands of miles away to take out targets in Afghanistan we can certainly build a fence along our border with Mexico. Arizona is on the right track and the Federal Governments policies on borders, visas and immigration is screwed up.

Third, I intend to reintroduce my fellow Congressman – especially Speaker Nancy Pelosi – to the U.S. Constitution, and I figure after a while even Pelosi will get tired of me whistling Dixie to her and learn something about us Carolina girls ability to stand our ground up-close and personal.

Q3) What do you consider your single most important experience that has prepared you to serve in Congress?

Answer: I’d say the single most important thing was my years as a U.S. Congressional Field Representative for the First District which gave me a ton of experiences about our needs and the needs of the average person in the district. That experience shaped my principles: As a congressman I won’t just be representing the right, left or either extreme or the people in the middle – I will represent all the people of my district and that includes the richest businessmen and it includes single-moms with kids who are trying to get them through school to educate them and the ordinary people like me who go to work and pay their taxes and wished their government wasn’t so dang big.

Government is supposed to be about people. I’ve always thought that the bigger the government, the smaller the individual – and that one small voice is always important, because when we lose that, we lose what the American dream is all about.

Q4) What do you feel has been the most overlooked issue in this campaign?

Answer: I think that when fifty percent of your jobs and working people are involved with the Tourism Economy which I call “Industry without Smoke Stacks’ I figure that issue should be up there on the list with the Ports of Georgetown and Charleston harbors. I felt that issue was overlooked and it needs to be part of the conversation – it only came up in the context of the Louisiana Oil Spill and like it on not, tourism is what we do best: Carolina Sun, Sand and Food and Charleston hospitality is who we are.

###

SHORT BIO INFORMATION FOLLOWS

Date of Birth: May 31, 1968

Family: (Husband, Van; son, Christian David, 17; three daughters, Benjamin Elizabeth, 14; Drake Katherine, 13; and Wilson Gabrielle, 9).

Residence: North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

Occupation: Adjunct Professor of History, U.S. Army Reserve Officer – Paratrooper

Education: BS Coastal Carolina University; MS University of South Carolina.

Public offices: U.S. Congressional Field Representative 1st District, SC; North Myrtle Beach Planning Commissioner; North Myrtle Beach Mayors Advisory Council; Horry County Planning Commission Envision 2025 Committee

Katherine Jenerette for Congress, First U.S. Congressional District, South Carolina

Web Site: http://www.jenerette.com Bio: http://www.jenerette.com/2010_bio

Katherine Jenerette Official Campaign Photos: http://jenerette.org/photos/

E-mail: uscongress@msn.com Tele contact: (843) 685-5476

Charleston native Shepard Fairey, creator of the legendary “Hope” poster of Obama which skyrocketed him to artist stardom over night, is apparently not pleased with Obama’s performance in the White House so far.

But the artist, whose stylized portrait was emblematic of change, said he hasn’t been wowed by Obama’s performance in the White House thus far.

“Obama is to me a quality human being and someone that, given the limitations of the two-party system, that’s trying to do a good job,” Fairey told Niteside at a book signing at the Brooklyn Museum on Sunday.

“But I have to grade the whole thing on a curve because the two-party system to me is not yielding the results I want to see.”

NBC

Tragic.  I mean, if Obama has lost Shepard Fairey, he’s lost America.

From a press release from the Jenerette campaign:

North Myrtle Beach, SC — GOP First District Congressional Candidates Tim Scott and Katherine Jenerette teamed up on Wednesday to decry the federal government’s decision to siphon millions of dollars away from the Department of Defense budget to erect a monument to Ted Kennedy in Boston, Massachusetts.

“I don’t know of any Taxpayer Paid shrine or mausoleum to any politician in Massachusetts or South Carolina that can stop an RPG or IED or an AK-47 round in Iraq or Afghanistan ,” said Jenerette a veteran of the Persian Gulf War and a former U.S. Congressional Aide. “But if that $20 million can help save one single American soldier’s life downrange in Iraq or Afghanistan, it’s worth it to keep it in the U.S. Defense Department budget and not siphon it off for the Sainthood of Ted Kennedy or anyone else.”

At least $19 million has been siphoned from the U.S. Defense Department budget to pay for the Kennedy shrine, which could ultimately end up costing taxpayers as much as $80 million.

$80 million of our money while we have a $12 trillion deficit over our heads all just to eternally enshrine Chappaquiddick Fats?  Ted Kennedy deserves a shrine to his memory, why, for being a politician?  Being a Kennedy?  The bulk of his political career was made from of his family’s name mixed with two parts corruption and three parts Chivas Regal.  A lot of “to do” is made of the Kennedys, but they were probably the most corrupt political family in the history of our nation and Teddy was no better.  The only significant accomplishment the man made to this country was spearheading the expansion of the nanny welfare state.

There are few leaders in American history that deserve to have their heads enshrined in stone for future generations.  These were men who faced great odds and brought down enormous threats, men like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln and as much as I may disagree with his domestic policies, Franklin Roosevelt.  These were extraordinary men whose legacies shaped the future of our nation in unimaginable ways during their time.  Ted Kennedy couldn’t carry their jock.

The National Club for Growth has given their blessing to State Representative Tim Scott (R-North Charleston) for the Republican nomination for South Carolina’s First Congressional district.  If you are a fiscally conservative candidate and can snag the endorsement of the Club for Growth, that is a huge deal.  They are a very influential group among the right and can provide funding and media.

Scott joins Senator Jim DeMint and State Representative Jeff Duncan, candidate for SC-03, among the elite group of endorsed candidates.

Club for Growth PAC today announced its endorsement of State Representative Tim Scott in South Carolina’s first Congressional district Republican primary, to be held June 8.

“Tim Scott has fought for the principles of individual liberty and limited government in South Carolina, and he is ready to do the same in Washington,” said Club President Chris Chocola. “He has fought the same battles in Columbia that need to be fought in Congress: for less spending, lower taxes, and school choice. Tim Scott has spent his life living and defending the American dream, and we are proud to help him continue that work in the U.S. House of Representatives.”

“I’m honored to receive this endorsement from an organization that clearly stands for the values of limited government that are shared by the people of South Carolina’s First District,” Tim Scott said. “I will continue to work to cut government spending, lower taxes and increase individual liberty.”

Tim Scott has been recognized as beinging the only candidate to sign the “Repeal It!” pledge, a commitment to fight the government takeover of healthcare and to sponsor and support legislation with real reforms that will lower healthcare costs withouth growing government.

The Club for Growth also brings extensive fundraising potential to help candidates get thier message of smaller government to voters. Scott is the 11th candidate Club for Growth PAC has endorsed in the 2010 election cycle. He joins Senators Jim DeMint (S.C.) and Tom Coburn (Okla.), Senate candidates Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Pat Toomey (Pa.), and House candidates Kevin Calvey (OK-05), Tom Graves (GA-09), Tim Huelskamp (KS-01), Mike Pompeo (KS-04), Robin Smith (TN-03), and Jeff Duncan (SC-03).

So my mailbox has been the recipient of an onslaught of press releases from angry Republican Congressmen and candidates over the passage of health care deform last night.  I am not going to post every single one of them so I am just going to put up snippets of each one and whose office they were sent from.

Congresswoman Virginia Foxx (North Carolina’s 5th Congressional District)

“Now more than ever we need sensible health care reform,” Foxx said. “That’s why it’s so sad that the Democratic majority forced this overhaul through. This bill is bad medicine, plain and simple. It’s chock full of government mandates, $569 billion in job-killing tax hikes and $1.2 trillion in new government spending.”

In addition to increasing taxes by $569 billion, the final health overhaul slashes Medicare by $523.5 billion. It also includes nearly $200 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage. There are more than 40,000 seniors in North Carolina’s 5th Congressional District who enjoy the benefits of Medicare Advantage.

Katherine Jenerette (Candidate for South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District)

It’s a set up guys. Obama and his brain trust are out in front on this one. They put the ‘thou-shalt-purchase’ clause in the bill deliberately knowing every freedom-loving, red-blooded Republican AG would charge. They intend to have the Republican’s object to this in bit-and-pieces instead of a full frontal attack that the ENTIRE Bill is unconstitutional.

We Republicans bit the bait real good, but, it was a Trojans horse covered with shiny stuff like the abortion debate; deliberately set to get our attention. While all along, ‘Obamanistas’ fully expect that the Supreme Court will strike down the parts that mandate a person will buy insurance or they will pay through the nose to BigFed one way or another. There are bigger problems ahead, so save some ammo.

We had a saying when I was in the desert in the first Gulf War, ‘It’s not just the mouse that ran through the tent you need to worry about – it’s the viper that’s chasing the mouse you better be afraid of.’

When the Supreme Court decision is finally made – with the anticipated ruling, the bumper sticker “I Heart Socialized Medicine” liberal crowd will pull out the already prepared Round Three plan: Public Option in tandem with the Federal Government picking up the tab incrementally to offset the loss.

Scott Keadle (Candidate for North Carolina’s 10th Congressional District)

Congressional candidate Scott Keadle today called on North Carolina’s Attorney General Roy Cooper to join other states’ attorney generals in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform bill passed by Congress late last night.

Currently, Attorney Generals from Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Washington have announced plans to do so. Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum announced this morning that he would file suit on behalf of Floridians.

Keadle said, “The health care reform legislation passed by the U. S. House of Representatives last night violates the U.S. Constitution and infringes on each state’s sovereignty. North Carolina should join the other states and file a lawsuit to protect the rights and the interests of its citizens.”

“The 10th District citizens overwhelmly are opposed to this legislation, and they deserve legal representation from our state’s top lawyer to fight on their behalf,” he said.

State Representative Jeff Duncan (Candidate for South Carolina’s 3rd Congressional District)

As I watched the health care debate, it was my hope that Congress would have considered legislation that would lower costs and improve access by offering free market solutions. I hoped Congress would have remembered the Constitution of the United States and realized they were leading our nation away from our founding principles

Instead, we witnessed a 2,700 page bill rammed through Congress by using a mixture of backroom bribes and procedural tricks. Instead of passing a transparent bill that would help rejuvenate our economy, thousands of small business owners are left wondering if this health care bill will be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

With the passage of this flawed health care bill we witnessed free market ideals substituted for more government bureaucracy. The federal government will be hiring approximately 16,000 new IRS agents just to enforce the new tax element of this legislation. In addition, this bill will make major cuts to Medicaid and Medicare and ask private citizens and doctors to pick up the tab. Ultimately, I believe this health care legislation is too expensive and is clearly unconstitutional.

Congressman Patrick McHenry (North Carolina’s 10th Congressional District)

“Today’s vote means the President will sign federal funding of abortions, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, 19 tax increases and $500 billion in Medicare cuts into law. His so-called health care ‘reform’ plan raises premiums, ignores lawsuit abuse and adds billions to the federal deficit.

“This is an anti-jobs bill. Instead of helping businesses create jobs it will increase federal spending, raise taxes and slow economic growth.

State Representative and gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley (R-Lexington) got into an impassioned debate with State Representative Bill Herbkersman (R-Bluffton) over lending $10 million to the Heritage Golf Tournament, a PGA event that occurs yearly in Beaufort.  Herbkersman wants the money “in case” the tournament can’t find a sponsor next year.  Haley was adamantly against the loan noting it as an improper role of government and complete fiscal irresponsibility when the state has already made billions in cuts due to the economy.

My opinion on this, I am in agreement with Haley.  Herbkersman is talking about an event that won’t take place until next year.  That is plenty of time to find a sponsor for the event.  In fact, Herbkersman may have just ensured that there is no sponsor next year.  If all the potential sponsors now know that South Carolina will pay out the $10 million to bail out the event, why should anyone sponsor it? A sponsorship is only valuable to the company if they feel they will get a return on their investment. This economy could dampen those prospects.

A few weeks back I sent out some candidate questionnaires to the 13 candidates running for Congress in South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District.  They were lengthy and very detailed and I felt would be a great source of information on each candidate running in both the Republican and Democratic primaries.

Unfortunately, to date I have only received one back.  I am disappointed in the response because I am not one to give softball questions (which may be why I only got one back) and I think these questionnaires could be used as excellent educational resources for those of you wanting to read up on the candidates running.  But, without further ado, here are the responses from Republican candidate Paul Thurmond.  It’s a long read, but well worth it.  If you wanted to know it, the answer is probably here.

Health care and insurance costs have been rising steadily each year.  What is your opinion of the current proposal that is currently being reconciled between the House and Senate?  What, if anything, would you propose differently to help bring down health care costs?

I cannot and will not support a plan, like the one offered by Congressional Democrats that is currently being considered.  Should either the current House bill or Senate Bill be enacted before I am elected, I will work to repeal these bills when I get to office.

The current proposals, increase government control while doing nothing to address the biggest problem with our system- rising costs. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Obama Administration’s own actuaries have said that the Democrats’ plan would raise costs for American families, and raise the amount we spend on health care in general.

Instead of forcing people into plans they may not want and out of the plans they currently enjoy, we should enact real reform that decreases costs for all Americans while focusing on patients instead of government. I would support a plan that increases the number of insured Americans while decreasing the cost everyone pays.  Such a plan will include reforming allowing people to buy plans across state lines, and providing states the tools necessary to lower health care costs. Unfortunately the Democrats’ plan does none of these.

Do you feel that the Federal government has an obligation to provide a public health insurance option for those who cannot obtain their own?

Long ago, our government created health care systems to provide quality care for the elderly, and the chronically poor.  These long-standing commitments cannot now be broken.  That said, we also must recognize the reality that currently nearly half of the funding spent on health care is spent by the federal government, and that spending is increasing at a rate much higher than the dollars being spent by the private sector.

If another government run insurance plan were created, what little health care cost containment we have now, would be completely lost and we would forever surrender 1/6^th of our economy to the Federal government.  What we should do, instead, is focus on lowering the cost of health insurance so that those who cannot afford it now can do so in the future.

The current Congress has come under heavy scrutiny over its spending practices.  The current National Debt is over $12 trillion and the debt ceiling was recently raised to over $14 trillion.  Does this concern you?  Why or why not?

The current Democrat controlled Congress and White House makes the fundamental mistake of thinking that they can spend our way out of the current recession.  They spent 2009 passing trillion dollar bill, after trillion dollar bill and when President Obama’s budget, the health care bill and the cap-and-trade bills are combined they have threatened to raise taxes by $3.6 trillion over the next decade.

This spending and taxation are unsustainable, we must enact across the broad cuts in spending and taxation.  On the spending side, Congress needs to sunset duplicative government programs, eliminate under-performing agencies, and address the runaway spending of entitlements.  On the tax side, we must create an environment where small business is allowed to expand, hire more employees and become more profitable.

For the 2009 fiscal year 62% of the Federal budget was allocated towards Social Security, Medicare, and defense, the three biggest expenditures of the Federal government by far.  These percentages are increasing each year.  How can the Federal government continue to fund these programs at their current rate particularly with Medicare having a projected insolvency date of 2017 and Social Security in 2037? (these figures come from a May 13, 2009 publication in the Wall Street Journal)

There is not a government program more important to the future of our nation than the Department of Defense, Social Security and Medicare are individually.   One of the explicit powers of the Federal government mentioned in the Constitution is providing for the common defense and as I said previously, we have made long-term commitments to our senior citizens, and I will not allow these commitments to be broken.

However, the fact that these programs are important does not mean they are without waste, fraud and abuse.  Congress must take a line-by-line review of these programs in order to eliminate these cost overruns.  The savings we see from these cuts must not be used to pay for new Federal spending.

At a time when our servicemen and women are putting themselves in harm’s way in order to protect our freedom and security, we must cut carefully.  Ensuring we do not repeat the mistakes of the 1990s where the Defense budget was cut to the point that we found ourselves unable to effectively protect our servicemen and women after September 11^th.  In fact, defense spending, as a percentage of GDP, has been falling since the 1960s.

The world has been witnessing increased aggression from nations like Iran and North Korea. Do you agree with the idea of the Monroe Doctrine that the United States has an obligation to police the world against these types of perceived threats?

As the last remaining Superpower, the United States has a responsibility to deal proactively with nations that have the potential to harm our citizens or international stability.  In many corners of the world, the only appeal for peace understood by dictators is a stern call from our Secretary of State, or a United States aircraft carrier, parked off their coast.

While I am uncertain if any appeal will be heard by the current rulers of Iran and North Korea, we must use all available options to calm the threat posed by these rouge states.  In doing so, military force should be the last resort, used only when international dialog, economic sanctions and all other options have been proven fruitless.

Were Israel to launch an attack against Iran over their goal of uranium enrichment capabilities, how should the U.S. respond?

Israel is the United States top ally in the Middle East and I am deeply concerned about an Iranian regime that continues to defy the United Nations and the international community by developing a nuclear weapons program.  I support all international efforts to eliminate this development that poses a grave threat to Israel and to the United States. I support every option available to prevent Iran from achieving success with its nuclear weapons program and would have co-sponsored and supported the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007, the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, and the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act.  I support Israel’s right to determine its security needs by its own standards.  I also find it unhelpful for other governments, such as Russia and China to conduct back door dealings with Iran and at the same time try to dictate when Israel should or should not use force.

South Carolina’s unemployment rate is over 12%.  What can the government do to bring that number down and help put people in our state back to work?

Government should not be in the business of job creation.  Government should be in the business of creating the environment where small businesses are allowed to flourish by giving them the tools to succeed.  I would advocate allowing credit to be made more available to small businesses as well as encouraging small business tax credits.  I would also work to defeat harmful policies such as climate taxes, cap-and-trade, card check and government run health care legislation that have frozen the level of confidence that small business have which has resulted in small businesses not hiring new employees.  Also transportation and infrastructure projects would immediately help create new long lasting jobs in areas such as high speed rail and modernizing America’s bridge and highway systems.

Do you feel it is in the best interest of the United States to continue sending foreign aid to other nations despite our rising national debt?

I feel that strategic foreign aid is an investment of tax payer dollars for the national security interests of the United States.  I support a strong system of transparency where the public is entitled to know where every dollar of foreign aid is spent.  I strongly support former President George W. Bush’s vision for the Millennium Challenge Corporation.  His criterion for foreign aid through the MCC was only to nations that demonstrated: good governance, economic freedom, and investments in their citizens were eligible for foreign aid. By using this model for partnerships it allows developing nations to be strategic allies of the United States and prevents them from becoming havens for terrorism.

Some have criticized NAFTA saying it is responsible for the loss of manufacturing jobs in the U.S.  Do you agree or disagree with that sentiment and what is your overall opinion of NAFTA?

Trade pumps more than $45 billion into the South Carolina economy every year and employs more than 260,800 South Carolinians.  Almost all of these dollars flow through the Port of Charleston and the Port of Georgetown from countries with which we have trade agreements.  Additionally, while trade is often demonized as an American jobs killer, the facts do not support this argument, since the enactment of NAFTA, only 3 percent of job losses can be attributed to free trade.

Instead of returning to the failed protectionist policies, we must create a climate that incentivizes companies to move their manufacturing operations to South Carolina.   The first step in this process is fighting against harmful policies such as a cap and trade tax, card check and government run health care legislation all of which will kill more manufacturing jobs than trade ever has.

Were you supportive of TARP, the automotive bailout, and the stimulus bill and/or do you feel they have been effective?

Washington repeatedly touts statistics which they claim prove that the Stimulus and the bailouts have worked.  But even if these facts are to be trusted, the only thing they can tell us is that these bills just kick the can down the road.  Avoiding tough questions to stay in office, while saddling future generations with debt, has unfortunately become the rule in Washington. Instead, these issues should be addressed head on to truly solve problems before they become unmanageable.

I do not believe these skewed statistics and judge these programs to be failures.  TARP was supposed to bring back responsible lending in this country, yet homebuyers and small business owners still find it nearly impossible to secure credit.  Our domestic automakers are once again turning profits but have become wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Federal Government.  The Stimulus was touted as necessary to keep unemployment below 8 percent.  South Carolina’s unemployment rate for the past few months has hovered above 12 percent.

Instead of government enlargement, we need to remove government from the private sector.  Give the freedom to build the cars that the American people want to buy at a price they can afford back to American car companies.  Jobs can be created by allowing businesses to spend more of their capital on growing their business and less spent to pay the tax man.  Finally, Wall Street needs to learn that the Federal Government is not their insurance agent.

If I had been in Congress, I would have voted NO on TARP, NO on any automotive bailout, and NO on the Stimulus.

Should the Federal government raise taxes to make up for the rising Federal budget deficits?

No.  Increasing taxes will only stifle innovation and economic growth.  Without this growth, our tax base will shrink as businesses lay off existing workers or forgo hiring new workers, which also leads to more government expenditures due to the payout of unemployment benefits.

As a real world example of this fact, the Obama Administration’s proposal to increase the top two tax brackets from 33% and 35% to 36% and 39.6%, respectively.  According to the Administration, this tax increase will make the “rich” pay their fair share while helping to balance the Federal Budget.   However, when the facts are examined, it is evident that 44% of small business owners would see a tax increase due to this proposal.  As such, this targeted-at-the-rich tax increase will in fact hit those which are responsible for 80 percent of new hires.

Should the Federal government cut spending to balance the budget?  If so, what specifically should it cut?

Yes.  We cannot return fiscal order to our government without making cuts to the Federal budget.  The first step should be ending duplication in Federal programs.  While, the Federal government should help retrain workers to capture new job opportunities, it is absurd that there are 15 different Federal entities managing 165 different job-training programs, similarly there are 342 economic development programs run by the Federal government through 13 autonomous government entities.  Cutting the duplication out of these programs could save billions of dollars in overhead and administrative savings alone.  This is just a first step; we must also cut those Federal Departments which only serve to further their own interest.  For example, of every taxpayer dollar which finds its way to the Department of Education, 30 cents never leave D.C.  Instead these funds are used to pay Washington bureaucrats.

Would you be in favor of a Constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget by the Federal government?

Congress should be forced to live within its means, just as every local government, state government and American family already does.  I applaud our Senators Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint for leading this charge in the Senate and when elected, I promise to sponsor or cosponsor an Amendment to our Constitution requiring a balanced budget.

Do the American people have a reasonable expectation to privacy?

Our Founding Fathers wrote strong protections against government intrusion in our daily lives into the Constitution; and if elected I will place my hand upon the Bible and swear to uphold those protections.  Our nation now faces an enemy which uses tactics and strategies that our national security apparatus have never encountered and were certainly never envisioned by our Founding Fathers.  However, these new threats do not make our Constitution obsolete and I will spend my time in office ensuring that our government continues to maintain a responsible balance between security and privacy.

Do you agree or disagree with the TSA’s push to deploy more full body scanners at airports across the country?

TSA’s efforts to deploy more full body scanners will be another tool to increase aviation security.  The current magnetometers in the Nation’s airports – which detect only metal objects – are antiquated and are a 1970s solution to the current day security challenges.  While the whole body scanners may not be the silver bullet, they far surpass the abilities of the Nation’s current airport screening technologies.  Whole body imagers can detect liquids, powders, gels, ceramics, small improvised explosive devices and likely would have detected the explosive on the Christmas Day Detroit terror bomber.  While passengers may have legitimate privacy concerns, privacy issues are being addressed with the TSA and no passenger will ever be forced to undergo whole body scanning.  Pat downs remain an option.

Should TSA engage in profiling?

TSA’s Behavior Detection program is a relatively new layer of aviation security.  Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs) observe passenger behavior at airport checkpoints and throughout airports in uniform and in plain clothes.  Based in part on Israel’s human factors layer of security, BDOs are trained to detect certain behaviors in the stressful airport environment to determine if a passenger may have ill intent. While the BDO program would not be considered profiling, it is an important step in engaging passengers directly within the confines of U.S. law.

Should illegal immigrants in the country be given a pathway to citizenship and what can be done to stop the flow of illegal immigration?  Should it be stopped?

We are a nation of immigrants. However, without the rule of law, our nation loses the vital character imbued in it by the Constitution.   Rewarding those who enter our country by breaking these laws with amnesty degrades the value of citizenship and damages our country.

Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states, “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States….”  In terms of providing for the general Welfare, what does that mean to you?

To me, government should provide for the people that which they cannot provide for themselves.  Too often the Federal government is considered the first option when in fact it should be considered only when the private sector, local government and state government have proven themselves incapable of handling a problem.

What, in your opinion, is the primary role of the Federal government and have they stayed within or strayed from the constraints of that role?

The primary role of the federal government, as laid out in the Constitution, is to foster a society where all Americans are free to use their inalienable rights. What the Federal Government cannot do, though it has increasingly been attempted (resulting in outsized deficits, an unmanageable debt, and increasing dependents on government largesse), is to guarantee individual outcomes. If elected, I will fight to ensure that the Federal Government is one that promotes strong families, individual achievement, growth in the economy, and everything that makes America the exceptional country that it has been since 1776. But I will also strongly oppose government that replaces these things with bureaucracy and unaffordable government from Washington that ignores what makes this country great.