Our Common Good


Conservative Sen. Jim DeMint is resigning, and Stephen Colbert wants the job. All he wants us to do is tweet #SenatorColbert at Gov. Nikki Haley.Want to help make #SenatorColbert a reality? Check out Colbert’s pitch here.
Reblog/share/like this if you want Senator Colbert to happen.

“Tweet @nikkihaley & tell her why I belong in the US Senate. For one, I wouldn’t just block legislation, I’d body-check it! #SenatorColbert”
For our money, we want Alvin Greene back in. Here’s why:



Conservative Sen. Jim DeMint is resigning, and Stephen Colbert wants the job. All he wants us to do is tweet #SenatorColbert at Gov. Nikki Haley.

Want to help make #SenatorColbert a reality? Check out Colbert’s pitch here.

Reblog/share/like this if you want Senator Colbert to happen.

“Tweet @nikkihaley & tell her why I belong in the US Senate. For one, I wouldn’t just block legislation, I’d body-check it! #SenatorColbert”

For our money, we want Alvin Greene back in. Here’s why:




Dana Milbank writes:

… [A] large number of patriotic Americans, mostly from states won by Mitt Romney last week, have petitioned the White House to let them secede. They should be careful about what they wish for. It would be excellent financial news for those of us left behind if Obama were to grant a number of the rebel states their wish “to withdraw from the United States … .”

Red states receive, on average, far more from the federal government in expenditures than they pay in taxes. The balance is the opposite in blue states. The secession petitions, therefore, give the opportunity to create what would be, in a fiscal sense, a far more perfect union.

Among those states with large numbers of petitioners asking out: Louisiana (more than 28,000 signatures at midday Tuesday), which gets about $1.45 in federal largess for every $1 it pays in taxes; Alabama (more than 20,000 signatures), which takes $1.71 for every $1 it puts in; South Carolina (26,000), which takes $1.38 for its dollar; and Missouri (22,000), which takes $1.29 for its dollar.

The states least likely to join in the Medicaid expansion also happen to be among those whose residents are in the greatest need. The poor and uninsured in these parts of the U.S. will likely continue to go without unless their political leaders have changes of heart. Texas had the highest rate of uninsurance in the nation last year: 24 percent, according to census data compiled by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. In Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Louisiana, it was 20 percent. Nineteen percent of Mississippians were uninsured in 2011. Nationally, 16 percent of people had no health insurance last year. In Massachusetts, which enacted a comprehensive health care reform program in 2006, only 4 percent of residents are uninsured. States that refuse to cover more poor people will do so despite the fact that Uncle Sam will pick up most of the tab. From 2014 to 2016, the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost of covering newly eligible people, after which the share will gradually go down to 90 percent in 2022 and later years.

As Politico points out, whether or not the health reform law is able to operate as it was intended — and expand coverage to about 30 million previously uninsured Americans — largely depends on the extent that governors agree to cooperate in their states. But some Republican governors have already made it clear that they don’t plan on playing nice during Obama’s second term

Since the Republican takeover of the House in 2010, voting laws restricting access to the ballot began passing in states across the country. But until two months ago, they had received little national attention. Now, a federal judge has blocked Ohio’s “right church, wrong poll” law that discounts provisional votes cast in the wrong precinct. In Florida, residents incorrectly removed from voter polls for being noncitizens have had their voting rights restored. And a federal court rejected Texas’s voter ID law on Aug. 30. Series about voting rights, such as MSNBC’s “Block the Vote” continuing segment, are now being aired during primetime TV news.

Behind the turnaround is a network of civil rights and advocacy groups, along with branches of the federal government, that have been battling these laws as they crop up. In Ohio, the Obama campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party sued Republican Ohio Secretary of State John Husted alleging that the restriction on early voting violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

Litigation by the Advancement Project, a national civil rights organization, spearheaded another Ohio suit that challenged the state law that provisional votes mistakenly cast in the wrong precinct could be discounted. The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania has led the charge against that state’s voter ID law.  
The Brennan Center has advocated for voting rights from Wisconsin to South Carolina. 

The Department of Justice itself, along with other advocacy and civil rights groups, challenged Florida’s so-called “voter purge,” which removed thousands of eligible voters from the rolls in an attempt to crack down on noncitizens voting. The program was reversed on Wednesday.

A South Carolina lawmaker and the author of a voter ID law considered discriminatory by the Justice Department testified in federal court Tuesday that, while crafting the bill, he had responded favorably to a racist email in support of the measure.

State Rep. Alan Clemmons acknowledged his reaction in the second day of arguments before a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia over whether the law violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The federal trial over South Carolina’s voter identification law got under way Monday with a state senator insisting his work on the law was aimed at fighting fraud and instilling public confidence in the election system.

During morning testimony, state Sen. George “Chip” Campsen III cited examples of fraud that he took into consideration while drafting early versions of South Carolina’s law. These included vote buying, voter rolls indicating a woman who showed up at the polls had already voted, and press reports of voters being registered in both South Carolina and North Carolina.

But under questioning from Justice Department attorney Anna Baldwin, Campsen, a Republican, said the examples he gave did not involve the type of fraud that requiring photo identification would address.

"None of the examples you gave in your testimony involved incidents of impersonation?" Baldwin asked.

"Correct," Campsen answered. He also said he could not find cases of voter impersonation in South Carolina, but added that the state lacks the tools to root them out.

In South Carolina, a yearly income of $16,900 is too much for Medicaid for a family of three. In Florida, $11,000 a year is too much. In Mississippi, $8,200 a year is too much. In Louisiana and Texas, earning more than just $5,000 a year makes you ineligible for Medicaid.

Governors in those five states have said they’ll reject the Medicaid expansion underpinning Obama’s health law after the Supreme Court’s decision gave states that option. Many of those hurt by the decision are working parents who are poor — but not poor enough — to qualify for Medicaid.

A federal judge has dismissed a federal lawsuit in which Nebraska and six other states tried to block part of the federal health care law that requires contraception coverage.

U.S. District Judge Warren Urbom of Lincoln dismissed the case Tuesday, saying the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the action challenging part of the Affordable Care Act.

The problem is it’s like when you give something to a child. They’re always going to figure out how they can get away with a little more.
South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley • In a written statement, explaining her reasoning for slashing the budget of the state’s rape crisis center budget. Crisis centers only help a small portion of residents, and distract from the state health department’s goal of providing treatment to all residents of South Carolina according to Governor Haley. ”Being raped is traumatic enough, but having to navigate that system, going to court by yourself, going to the hospital for a really intrusive and painful exam by yourself is horrific,” counters South Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault executive director Pam Jacobs, adding, ”Unfortunately, that’s the solution rape victims may be in if this veto is not overridden.”   source (viafollow)

The House Ethics Committee officially reopened Wednesday an ethics complaint that accuses South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley of illegally lobbying for two previous employers before she became governor.

Bartee, who is a retired U.S. Secret Service agent, is one of four candidates for Oconee County sheriff. He is accused of trying to arrange to have retired circuit Judge James C. Williams Jr. kidnapped.

Bartee is accused of trying to arrange the kidnapping after Williams filed an action asking for a judgment on whether Bartee was qualified to run for sheriff. The action also asked for an injunction against creating ballots with Bartee listed as a candidate.

Bartee was to compete in the June 12 Republican primary, along with current Oconee County Chief Deputy Terry Wilson and former sheriff’s captains Donnie Fricks and Mike Crenshaw.

This is a president that is trying to create distractions. There is no war on women. Women are doing well.

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, appearing on The O’Reilly Factor is continuing to deny that the GOP is waging a war against women and their civil rights.

What are you meaning by “well,” Haley?

Is it “well” that all of the drops of people in the labors force were women, or that 88 percent of jobs that went to anyone during the recession went to men?

Haley, in your own state, women are only paid 76 cents of every dollar that a man makes, and only own 28% of businesses, even though women make up over half of the state’s population!

Nikki Haley, if this is what you mean by women doing “well,” I would hate to see what it means when women are “struggling.”

(via thepoliticalfreakshow)


Two well-placed legal experts have independently told Palmetto Public Record they expect the U.S. Department of Justice to issue an indictment against South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley on charges of tax fraud as early as this week.

A highly ranked federal official has also privately confirmed rumblings of an investigation and possible indictment of the governor, though the official was not aware of the specific timeframe.

Yesterday, Palmetto Public Record exclusively reported that the Internal Revenue Service has been investigating since March of 2011 the Sikh worship center run by Gov. Haley’s father. At least five lawsuits have been filed against the Sikh Society of South Carolina since 2010, alleging that the group bilked contractors out of nearly $130,000 for the construction of a new temple.

Gov. Haley is reported to have managed the temple’s finances as late as 2003, and our sources believe any indictment would center on what happened to the missing money.

Nikki Haley and the Temple Loan: Where did the money go?

But if and when the indictment comes down, what will it say? The investigation began with the Internal Revenue Service looking into evidence that the Sikh temple run by Gov. Haley’s father violated its tax-exempt status by supporting Haley’s bid for governor, but that’s not a criminal offense. So what did the IRS investigation turn up that got the Justice Department involved?

In 2009, the Sikh Society of South Carolina took out a $750,000 loan from BB&T Bank with the help of bank president Mike Brenan. The purpose of the loan was to build a new temple on the Sikh Society’s land in Chapin, but for some reason the contractors never got paid. At least five lawsuits have been filed against the Sikh Society since 2010, alleging that the group bilked contractors out of nearly $130,000.

Meanwhile, the new temple sits half-complete off Broad River Road as weeds take over the abandoned construction site. In order to recoup their money, the contractors have asked a judge to foreclose on the temple and sell the land, leaving the Sikh Society without a place to worship.

So what happened to the money? Did it “disappear” into the Randhawa family’s million-dollar waterfront home on Lake Murray, or (as our sources have speculated) did some of it go into the governor’s campaign account? Whatever happened to the money, we do know what happened to Brenan: Gov. Nikki Haley appointed him to the state Board of Education.

With creditors closing in, the Sikh Society began asking its worshipers and other members of the community to donate money — ostensibly to finish building the temple, but in reality to pay off the society’s mass of outstanding debts. Donors are asked to mail checks directly to the Randhawas’ house, even though Gov. Haley’s father isn’t the society’s registered agent.