Posted on Thu, Jun. 25, 2009
Sanford’s trade mission to Argentina contradicted U.S. policy
Editors Note: S.C . SLED Clears Governor Mark Sanford for Three Love Affair Trips to Argentina in 12 Hours. People there are pot holes in the Capital of our state that are 12 Years Old… So what do you think is going on here?
By KEVIN G. HALL
McClatchy Newspapers
When South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford added a stop in Argentina to his trade mission to Brazil last June, the side trip should have raised eyebrows because he was undertaking a trade mission that the U.S. government was unwilling to make.
Although the Republican governor described the visit in a statement Thursday as “an entirely professional and appropriate business development trip,” Argentina has been a financial pariah since it defaulted on its international debt after its decade-long effort to peg its currency to the U.S. dollar collapsed in late 2001. Argentina effectively told its creditors it was their fault that they’d lent to the nation and declined to pay or restructure much of its foreign debt.
Sanford said Thursday that he would repay South Carolina taxpayers for the $8,000 cost of his trip to Argentina.
The Commerce Department halted high-level trade missions to Argentina after Argentina reneged on its debts. A Commerce Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly, confirmed that Sanford’s visit contradicted federal policy.
While he was in Argentina, Sanford met a former Argentine vice president whose administration had a falling out with Bush administration and had drawn close to Venezuela, a Cuba ally and a U.S. foe.
Sanford, not the U.S. Commerce Department, contacted the U.S. Embassy for quick help in setting up meetings with Argentine officials as he was modifying his trip to Brazil. Sanford was able to meet with Daniel Scioli, the governor of the province of Buenos Aires, Argentina’s manufacturing and agriculture base.
Scioli (pronounced she-OH-lee) was vice president until 2007, and he used that post to win election as governor of the country’s most important province. He’s a former offshore powerboat racer who lost his right arm in a boating accident.
A Spanish-language press release, dated June 26, 2008, and still on the Web site of the U.S. Embassy in Argentina, said that Sanford and Scioli “shared ideas and opinions about how to expand commercial exchange and investment in their districts.”
Argentina didn’t agree to pay its debt to the Paris Club, made up of the 19 richest nations that provide loans to developing countries, until last September. In a Sept. 2 statement, the State Department called Argentina’s willingness to repay “an important first step” toward creating opportunities for investors to return to Argentina.
It’s not clear how Sanford, whose state generates 1.5 percent of all U.S. exports, arranged a meeting with the governor of Argentina’s most important agricultural state. A Scioli aide declined comment, saying the Argentine governor’s team didn’t want to deal with a distraction with imminent provincial elections in Argentina.
Sanford’s office wasn’t answering calls from reporters on Thursday.
Sanford’s tearful news conference on Wednesday suggests that trade wasn’t the opportunity the South Carolina government sought in Argentina. Sanford has said the business trip was a legitimate effort to boost farm interests, but U.S. farmers are among those most hurt by Argentina’s refusal to pay off its debts.
A group called the American Task Force Argentina continues to press for resolution. Among members it lists on its Web site are farm groups such as the American Corn Growers Association, the Independent Cattleman’s Association of Texas and the Cattle Producers of Washington.
—————-
Miami Herald Media Company
http://www.miamiherald.com
Inquiry submitted to the Office of the Governor of South Carolina Regarding the SLED Statement Today
July 2, 2009
Text of an inquiry submitted to the Office of the Governor, Care of: Joel Sawyer, Scott English (submitted via e-mail)
2 July 2009
Joel,
On behalf of SCHotline:
Did the U.S. Department of State contact Commerce and your office to try to discourage the state from making that leg of the trip?
Thank you for your attention to this message.
Regards,
Michael S. Smith II
Contributing Editor, SCHotline
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Governor Mark Sanford | No, entendías mal: No dije que hacia fuera iba de excursión en el rastro apalache
July 2, 2009
Governor Mark Sanford -- Pen and Paper
By Michael S. Smith II
SCHotline Contributing Editor
A former copy editor and features writer for the Evening Post Publishing Company, Mr. Smith, a Republican, is editor of The Palmetto Times (www.palmettotimes.com). He resides in Charleston.
Team McMaster: More Buffoonery-for-Fodder
June 30, 2009
“The Palmetto State: It’s Back to Politics as Usual.”
By Michael S. Smith II
A former copy editor and features writer for the Evening Post Publishing Company, Mr. Smith, a Republican, is editor of The Palmetto Times (www.palmettotimes.com). He resides in Charleston.
In recent days, rather than focusing on the question of whether South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is fit to remain in office for the remaining 18 months of his term, many Republican gubernatorial candidates, along with several South Carolina newspapers, transitioned the focus to Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer’s political career. That is until Attorney General and likely Republican gubernatorial candidate Henry McMaster on Tuesday announced he has requested an investigation of the governor’s activities, citing the governor’s admission of additional liaisons with Maria Belen Chapur as the driving force behind his decision.
After the governor announced “I’ve been unfaithful to my wife,” Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer, who is hardly what one could call a member of Columbia’s “elite” Sanford crony class, refused to leverage the governor’s shocking admission of adultery as an opportunity to throw Mr. Sanford under the bus.
Despite the lieutenant governor’s tame, if not supportive response to the shocking details surrounding the governor’s unannounced jaunt to Argentina — during which the state was left without an executive officer who could respond to any emergent situations that may have arisen while the governor was with his paramour in South America — Sanford-ally Henry McMaster is quietly mounting attacks against Mr. Bauer. Why? McMaster seems to believe it’s the best way for him to divert his party’s attention from his own prospective derelictions of duty — specifically: His purely political decision not to initiate an investigation of his friend Mark Sanford’s activities when he should have.
A sampling of what’s afoot was recently offered by The New York Times. In a June 28 piece titled “South Carolina Politics Looks Past Affair to Its Effects on Governor Race,” it was reported McMaster aide Trey Walker has put on his political boxing gloves, taking potshots at the lieutenant governor a la Twitter.
According to the report, Mr. Walker was speaking as a “political operative” when he expressed his opinion that Andre Bauer should not be permitted to take over the governorship. In his words, replacing Sanford with Bauer as governor would be tantamount to allowing “a disaster to be replaced by a catastrophe.”
What about the opinions of all those South Carolinians who have twice voted to position Mr. Bauer a heartbeat — or tryst in Argentina as it may turn out — away from doing just that? Mr. Walker, in the words of Sir Winston Churchill: “It’s a fine thing to be honest, but it is also very important to be right.”
As is often stated in response to such shenanigans, “Opinions are like …,” well you get the point — and it’s obvious Mr. McMaster has plenty of both in his camp, none of which are doing him any service as of late.
When it comes to members of the Sanford team who have exercised exceptional lapses in judgment during recent months, the guilt does not rest with Mr. Sanford alone. Anyone remember Mr. McMaster’s overblown response to Craigslist being used to market salacious services offered by America’s prostitutes? (See http://www.palmettotimes.com/SC.wmv )
So why have so many South Carolina newspapers supported Mr. Sanford’s decision to stay in office? The answer is quite plain: Contrary to the governor’s claims, Sanford’s decision does not maintain a level-playing field for the upcoming gubernatorial contest. Instead, it strengthens McMaster’s candidacy. And newspapers stand to gain the most from another political victory captured by another cowboyish, lone-wolf-wannabe Republican figure. After all, the antics of so-called “imperial” presidents and governors make for catchy headlines that sell really, really well (i.e. “W.”; Sanford).
If South Carolinians think Governor Sanford provides ample entertainment as an elitist narcissist who has demonstrated tremendous disdain for public opinion, not to mention the opinions of Republicans serving in the General Assembly, they’re going to love what Mr. McMaster and his crew will offer in the way of buffoonery-for-fodder.
Obviously we’re back to politics as usual here in the Palmetto State. Given such, this South Carolinian wonders just how damaging it may be to Mr. McMaster’s, Mr. Walker’s and Gov. Sanford’s political careers if there is in fact some truth to the rumor that the U.S. Department of State discouraged the Sanford administration from organizing its 2008 commerce junket in Argentina, the same trip the governor is refunding the state for because he visited with “Maria” while there. Will Mr. McMaster be able to claim he has been on the right side of history if the governor did in fact defy such a request from the federal government in order to make a meeting with his lover possible? (One wonders if McMaster will bother to instruct SLED to look into this aspect of matters.)
It’s obvious the state’s official trade meetings in Argentina were specious at best, but were they a deceptive ploy at worst? Should Mr. Sanford compensate the state for all participants’ expenses, and not just for his own?
Did Mr. McMaster spend adequate time assessing whether or not he should investigate the governor’s behavior, or has justice taken a backseat to Mr. McMaster’s own desires? That’s a question South Carolinians should be asking themselves and their elected officials right now. They’ve twice answered the question of whether Mr. Bauer has what it takes to lead our state if Mr. Sanford cannot.
FOX NEWS RECORDS UNPRECEDENTED TOP 10 OUT OF 10 PROGRAMS IN CABLE NEWS FOR 2ND QUARTER… ON PACE TO BE NETWORK’S BEST YEAR EVER…
THE O’REILLY FACTOR 3,191,000
HANNITY 2,345,000
GLENN BECK 2,053,000
ON THE RECORD W/GRETA 1,950,000
SPECIAL REPORT W/BRET BAIER 1,889,000
FOX REPORT/SHEP SMITH 1,783,000
THE O’REILLY FACTOR (RPT) 1,579,000
AMERICA’S NEWSROOM BILL HEMMER & MEGYN KELLY 1,399,000
YOUR WORLD W/NEIL CAVUTO 1,389,000
STUDIO B W/SHEP SMITH 1,169,000
Compliments to Druge Report
http://drudgereport.com/
A message from Governor Mark Sanford
June 30, 2009
A message
from Mark
Follow the Governor
|
Lifelong Consequences of Love Storm
June 29, 2009
By Anne Badgley, MEd
The love triangle involving SC’s First Lady Jenny Sanford, her husband Mark Sanford and his Argentine mistress reveal grief that is hard to bear, even from a distance. Just the thought of the Sanford boys during these last few days is painful.
At the first of last week, media across the country kept asking, “Where’s the governor?” Who knew the answer was not necessarily a place, but a state of mind. Mark Sanford was on a “love high”. In essence, doped up on infatuation.
Many asked, “Has Mark Sanford lost his mind?” Well, yes.
His uncharacteristically disoriented news-conference confession was a sure sign of his physiological condition. Anthropologist Helen Fisher describes well what happens during romantic love. The most primitive regions of the brain are activated in a way similar to, but even more powerful than, a cocaine high. Obsession blurs the lines of what is important, and if sex becomes involved the effects multiply.
The Governor’s lack of ability to put the priorities of life into perspective was confirmed as Jenny Sanford told the AP that her husband repeatedly asked her permission to visit his Argentine lover after the affair came to light. When Mark Sanford packed a bag, turned off his cell phone, and jetted to Argentina, emotionally and physiologically he was anywhere but in his “right mind”.
Through it all, on the other hand, Jenny Sanford has displayed the characteristics of love that hold families and cultures together – a love that provides the satisfaction that the human soul longs for in the long run.
She apparently cares enough about herself and her children to not allow her husband to continue to live at home, but she also cares enough about him to be willing to work on saving their family.
Her written statement, in response to her husband’s actions, expresses a love that is real:
“I would like to start by saying I love my husband…I believe wholeheartedly in the sanctity, dignity and importance of the institution of marriage…We reached a point where I felt it was important to look my sons in the eyes and maintain my dignity, self-respect, and my basic sense of right and wrong. I therefore asked my husband to leave two weeks ago…I believe enduring love is primarily a commitment and an act of will, and for marriage to be successful, that commitment must be reciprocal…I believe Mark has earned a chance to resurrect our marriage….Psalm 127 states that sons are a gift from the Lord and children a reward from Him. I will continue to pour my energy into raising our sons to be honorable young men. I remain willing to forgive Mark completely for his indiscretions and to welcome him back, in time, if he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance.”
There is a lesson to be learned from this sad situation. Our culture has abandoned standards – boundaries – for human relationships and sexual activity. Whether we’d like to admit it or not, “innocent relationships” can easily go awry. Infatuation can set in, leading a person to an obsession, almost an addiction, to “being in love”. But, infatuation generally wears off within a year or two, and if sex has become part of the picture, the consequences could last a lifetime.
As we have seen played out, time and again, the ramifications of sex outside of marriage are far beyond what contraception can fix. Families, school, jobs, friends… even an entire state… can be affected.
That’s why we’ve devoted our lives’ energies to helping teens in this state know and understand the difference between love, lust and infatuation – the essence of abstinence outside of marriage. When they know what they’re facing, they have the ability to stay in their “right mind” and make choices that are ultimately best for them.
Anne Badgley, founder and CEO of Heritage Community Services, is author of Heritage Keepers® Abstinence Education. Research indicates that a year after the program, students initiated sex at a rate half that of similar non-program students.
Opinion: Andre Bauer Is Ready To Be A Great Governor
June 29, 2009
by Jim Miles
The damage from our breakdown in government will be felt for years to come, along with the glare of negative national publicity. As disheartening as Mark Sanford’s actions were, the one bright spot was Lt. Governor Andre Bauer’s handling of this crisis.
The Charleston Post and Courier, which reported that Bauer should have been notified of Sanford’s absence, went on to say that his careful handling of the entire incident is cause for “more respect for the Lt. Governor,” noting that the citizens of South Carolina are “comfortable with the idea that he can serve in the Governor’s stead, if needed.”
In fact, Andre Bauer IS ready to step into the Governor’s Office. He has worked tirelessly to prepare himself in case he is called on, and has matured into one of our state’s most capable public servants of the last generation. He has boundless energy, enthusiasm, and a work ethic along with dogged-determination, sheer perseverance, and a record of get-it-done cooperation and good, solid common sense.
For over a year, as I worked closely with Bauer as his Chief of Staff, I came to realize that Andre Bauer is an extraordinarily capable leader, probably the most effective I have worked with since Gov. Carroll Campbell. His work on behalf of the senior citizens of the state is just one example of his ability to make a real difference and get things done. Bauer has dozens of other significant accomplishments which aren’t as well known, ranging from shorter lines at the DMV to his rulings as President of the State Senate, which have blocked $2 billion in proposed new taxes.
When I left that position to rejoin the private sector recently, I told friends and associates that Andre Bauer was ready to be a great governor. Now it appears that he could be called upon to serve as Governor sooner rather than later. With the growing likelihood that the office could soon be vacated by resignation or otherwise, Bauer could be putting the same leadership skills which reformed the Office on Aging to work for all of state government.
Our unemployment rate is better than 12%, a desperate situation that calls for the full attention of our state’s leaders. Whether it is next week or next year, I believe Andre Bauer will be – and should be – our next Governor!
Sanford’s Got to Go
June 28, 2009
By Michael S. Smith II
“I’ve been unfaithful to my wife.”
Those were the last words most Republicans expected to hear from South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford. For many of us, words like “shocking” just don’t do the trick when describing our feelings about this news. For Democrats, although words like hypocrite may not have been on the tips of their tongues last week, they will be soon enough.
Unlike the political god I presumed he might be when I, then a politically-green 20-year-old, first met “Mark” at his Sullivan’s Island home during his first gubernatorial campaign, Mr. Sanford’s revelations last week demonstrated he is a mere mortal who is capable of exercising exceptionally poor judgment. His intentions to stay in office for the remainder of his term further exemplifies this reality, and this decision is galvanizing his party in South Carolina during a pivotal time for Republican politics.
In their June 26 piece titled “Political Future of Sanford is Weighed After Admission,” New York Times journalists Robbie Brown and Liz Robbins recounted U.S. Congressman Mark Sanford’s response to the news of Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky:
“‘He lied under a different oath, and that’s the oath to his wife,’ Mr. Sanford said at the time on CNN. ‘So it’s got to be taken very, very seriously.’”
After watching Governor Sanford admit he has been cheating on his wife, my initial thought was that the governor, given his statements about Bill Clinton’s affair, would be wise enough to recognize staying in office is an option — for the time being — which will only cause more pain for his family and friends, not to mention other problems for his party. However, through an exchange of e-mail correspondences with the governor’s director of communications that day, it became clear my assessment was, in fact, just as baseless as my assumption that Mark Sanford was a leader whose record was beyond reproach. (During the morning of June 24, the day Mark Sanford admitted he has been unfaithful to his wife, I received a call from one of my sources who wanted to provide me information about Mark’s jaunt to South America. The caller advised Mark Sanford was visiting his girlfriend while in Argentina, but I dismissed the information as a disgusting rumor.)
Days later, given the growing rumors of one senator’s knowledge of Mr. Sanford exploits with another “other woman” than “Maria,” I guessed the Cabinet Meeting scheduled for Friday, June 26, would serve as the forum for a resignation announcement. Wrong again.
Since Friday afternoon I have discussed the questions of whether Gov. Sanford should submit his resignation, or whether the General Assembly will muster the will to launch an impeachment if he does not, with Republican state legislators, political strategists and fundraisers.
One prominent political strategist stated: ”He’s finished, and he should resign.” Then, echoing the sentiments shared by several politicians, and as if to concede some flawed logic inherent in his aforementioned assertion, he noted: ”This is a personal issue, and, as far as I know, he probably hasn’t done anything that will warrant removing him from office.”
Following the news of Mr. Sanford’s decision to reimburse the state for expenses associated with an official state trip to Argentina, on which Mr. Sanford spent time with his mistress, one state senator called me. He explained: “Unless there is something to the rumor that the administration ignored a request from the State Department that they not send a trade delegation to Argentina, there probably isn’t anything the General Assembly would discover that would merit serious discussions about removing the governor from office.”
The senator then explained it is unlikely enough members of the General Assembly will get behind an effort to impeach the governor in the first place. Why? Taking that step could prompt the press to examine rumors of their own personal lapses in judgment, he said. He then chuckled while adding: ”Trust me: This sentiment is shared by the senior-most ranking members of both parties who are serving in the General Assembly. The political will just isn’t there for very personal reasons.”
Despite the governor’s abhorrent behavior, too many South Carolina GOPers are still demonstrating a desire to follow in the governor’s footsteps — they have followed Mr. Sanford’s path into a state of denial. The guy is actually likening his story to that of David’s in the Bible. This, after his wife repeatedly told Mr. Sanford not to go to Argentina to visit his girlfriend there.
Too many conservatives in South Carolina have become blind to what’s really at stake — public perceptions of both the GOP and efforts to reform state government in South Carolina led by conservatives in the General Assembly.
While discussing the prospects of what Democrats will do to ensure Mr. Sanford does resign in disgrace — something Sanford recently told one state senator he refuses to do because of the legacy that would be left “for my boys” — Republicans seem unwilling to consider their Democrat colleagues in the South Carolina General Assembly will be anything but collegial. They’re wrong.
South Carolina Republicans must realize their assumptions that Democrats will be polite about this matter for much longer are a veritable ticking-time bomb. Their blind hope will fail them.
Republicans must encourage Mr. Sanford to reconsider his position, if for no other reason than a forced-resignation will only further disgrace the governor’s legacy, along with that of our party.
Much as it is time for the South Carolina General Assembly to begin tackling the hard issues confronting our state, it’s time for Republicans to deal with the primary issue confronting their party in South Carolina. That issue is the need for someone among them to get the following message through to Mark Sanford: It is time to resign.
The public rarely appreciates the sorts of equivocations emerging from statements issued by far too many South Carolina Republican “leaders” in recent days. What’s more, the DNC wants blood. And it is foolish for Republicans to believe the DNC will not be sending the following message to all Democrats who are or will be running gubernatorial campaigns in South Carolina: Don’t count on much help from the national party unless Mr. Sanford’s is spilled.
Once the real debate begins there will be little room for anything but decisiveness from members of the S.C.GOP. Before that debate begins, they need to decide what values are important to their party. After all, as Democrats will submit to the public in the weeks ahead: Mark Sanford, the foremost representative of the S.C.GOP, “lied under a different oath, and that’s the oath to his wife. So it’s got to be taken very, very seriously.”
A resident of Charleston, S.C., Mr. Smith, a Republican, is a former copy editor and features writer for the Evening Post Publishing Company. He is editor of The Palmetto Times. (www.palmettotimes.com)
-#####-
SCHotline.com
By Jeffrey Sewell
Contrary to Coble , Finlay’s and Gantt’s comments this is NOT a good deal for the city This property is worth $50 a foot once cleaned up and marketed. At a minimum it is worth $30 a foot so the City sold it for $16/foot and called it a good deal.
Once people think this through, they are going to realize we just gave SCE&G a big bundle of cash for no reason other than we don’t have professional advice in use for city property sales.
