The Republican Obama Effect

I read an interesting article today Whatever happened to the Black Republican Wave:

This was supposed to be ''the year of the black Republican.'' Google the phrase and you'll get more than 20,000 results, most of them ending with a question mark. Prompted largely by a May 10 New York Times article, ''Black Hopefuls Pick This Year in GOP Races,'' media outlets pounced on the Great African-American Republican Narrative of 2010. Chock-full of Tea Parties and history (''the most black GOP candidates since Reconstruction''), the story was not only eminently discussable, it was also a perfect platform on which to stack another favorite talking point: the Obama effect. Despite very different political views, black Republicans were inspired by Barack Obama's victory and were now throwing their own black hats into the ring.

Conservatives, especially, welcomed the news, heralding more than 30 black Republicans running for Congress as proof that the right isn't racist. ''[This] shows that conservatives have no barriers to entry except on policy and philosophy,'' wrote Ed Morrissey on Hot Air.

But then came the primaries. In Alabama, Les Phillip, who made waves with ads saying President Obama ''played with terrorists,'' got crushed by both his white opponents. Even white incumbent Parker Griffith, a former Democrat who switched parties last year, beat Phillip by 17 points. Baptist minister Jerry Grimes lost in North Carolina's 1st district, and Lou Huddleston, who won a Cumberland County North Carolina Republican Party straw poll in February, got walloped in the 8th district. Despite his years of service as an aide to Colin Powell, Huddleston proved no match for Tim D'Annunzio, a businessman who raised money with ''machine gun socials.'' (For $25, supporters got a plate of barbecue and the opportunity to shoot an Uzi.) In Mississippi, Fox News analyst Angela McGlowan, endorsed by none other than the Sarah Palin, lost to both her competitors, catching only 15 percent of the vote.

There are still dozens more primary elections to come, but, so far, it seems voters in the South are less excited than the news media about 2010's crop of black conservative candidates.

In South Carolina - of all places - there is a Republican candidate for the first that is African American, Tim Scott. So far, he hasn't faced the race baiting his fellow candidate Nikki Haley has. The polling, while sparce has him ahead. But will the polling pan out? Despite high flying endorsements from groups like the club for growth and the scandal ridden head of the minuteman, Jim Gilchrist, can Scott pull ahead of the scions of two of South Carolina's leading political families - the Campbells and the Thurmonds? Even without such well knowns, the race is crowded (9 total are running). For Scott then perhaps it's just a matter of surviving to the eventual run off. And more importantly can he over come what has thus far proven to be a Bradley Effect on the right? We'll find out tomorrow.

***

As a side note, it's interesting to see the final campaign finance reporting as it shows Tim Scott for congress having paid $5450 to The Mace Group LLC for website and "messaging." The Mace Group also operates and maintains Will Folks outfit -- FITSNews who has been very supportive of Scott's Campaign and published many reports on Scott. But just to show you how incestuous and byzantine SC politics are -- Scott also hired Starboard Communications owned by Walter Whetsell, a direct competitor of the proprietor of FITSNews.

Jake Knotts, Nikki Haley and the peril of SC Politics

Ben Smith earlier today noted an article by CBN's David Brody regarding the religion of Republican Gubernatorial front runner Nikki Haley. Those questions and the underlying implications were magnified this evening by what I witnessed at this evenings broadcast of Pub Politics.

[For the record Pub Politics had "technical issues".... with their sound/p.a. equipment, at the bar. so that will probably translate into their not posting the what was web streamed.]

If you don't know, it was tweeted, retweeted and subsequently is already on CNN. I was there, he then reiterated directly to me, and Corey Hutchins of the Free Times among other folks. Sen. Jake Knotts said (paraphrasing) we've already got a rag head in the white house we don't need one in the Governor's mansion. Because in my mind rag head is an unpleasant, derogatory stereotype that - post 9/11 - was used in reference to Arabs and Muslims - I asked him to clarify, did he mean Sen. Sheheen, Vincent is of Lebanese Catholic heritage and is the democratic front runner or Nikki Haley - the Republican front runner who was born and reared a Sikh of Indian origin who is his natural antagonist.

Without reservation he said he was not referencing his colleague Mr. Sheheen, but was in fact talking about Nikki Haley. To paraphrase and not use Sen. Knotts colourful language he went on to say that her father owned the local Sikh temple and imply that she was possibly receiving funds from extra-national sources, and on and on and so forth. At this point most of my companions at the table were light headed with disbelief at what we were hearing but came to reality when we realized it was Jake Knotts, and when he himself reminded us that he didn't give a damn he tells the truth and what he believes, which is pure Jakie -- he does speak his mind.

I ordered another beer and watched as Corey cornered Jake furiously typing on the qwerty keypad on his phone, while Wes Donehue was trying - unsuccessfully - to dissuade the Senator from speaking with the local reporter. I imagine the Free Times will have something up soon with the treasure trove of quotes that Hutchins received from the free wheeling Senator.

What followed was a flurry of phone calls by operatives on both sides of the aisle and the reactions, and denouncements that the national media have already picked up. Ah South Carolina Politics -- what a swamp.

The Rise of Liberaltarianism

David Cameron and Nick Clegg (L) during a VE day ceremony in central London Photo: REUTERS

One only has to look across the Atlantic and at the coalition government rising from the ashes of last weeks British election to realize that there's something afoot. While the conservatives under Cameron won a plurality of seats in Parliament it wasn't enough to govern outright. For the first time since 1974 elections resulted in a "hung parliament."

Recognizing the Tories plurality, but noting their own strength - the intervening time has seen the Liberal Democrats flex their muscles in hashing out a coalition with the Tories. Already the details of the coalition emerging are promising for centrists and perhaps even liberaltarianism.

The face of politics in Britain and the soul of British conservatism is evolving.

Election Day Open Thread, Columbia edition

As the old saying goes vote early and vote often.

Polls open at 7am in Columbia, and close at 7pm. Check the State here for a map of polling places. We're voting for Mayor, one at-large member, and districts 1 & 4. The District 2 election is on hold for voting rights violation -- which considering the history of the voting rights act and the persons who are responsible for the violation is ironic.

What's your experience at the polls today. Who are you voting for? See any problems? It's an open thread.

Waldo whacks Boy Fogle... again

My friend Waldo leads an almost Quixotic quest to show just how hypocritical, underhanded, and shady the world of political blogging in South Carolina is. Most are blogger-cum-consultants, being paid to spin daily what their masters feed them while offering the pretense of being "news" outlets, by posting fluff to drive traffic, as opposed to being opinion sites. Well, at least one acknowledges his site is more opinion than fact.

Any who, today Waldo offers us what can only be an exhaustive breakdown of the homophobia-for- hire which is Adam Fogle's Palmetto Scoop, a wholly owned subsidiary of former representative, now super consultant, Rick Quinn.

Full disclosure: Fogle "outed" me as anonymous blogger in 2008... because having prior been featured on The State Newspaper online as blog of the week and having linked to the blog on my facebook page says I strive for anonymity. (that's about as sarcastic as I get folks)

Healthcare, Abortion, individual liberties, and going forward

Protesting against HCR and BHO. Photo: Astrid Riecken/Getty Images

It's been pretty quiet around these parts as I've been thinking about the recent Health care reform law that was signed by President Obama. After more than a year of debates that from the beginning were wildly uncivil and filled with smoke and mirrors the first step of reform has been completed - but the job is far from done.

In the end beyond death panels the two biggest concerns were the supposed loss of liberty with the notion that this is a healthcare take over (which persists in the postmortem of the bill passing) and that this law now somehow expands federal funding of abortion.

The first concern, which is the nebulous argument of the "loss of liberty" is even more nuanced than that about abortion. Many anti-reformist say that this is a Government Takeover of Healthcare, and say that the federal government can't mandate folks buy a private product.

This actually caused a flame war on the facebooks as I was arguing in favor of the mandate on a friend's mother's wall. (My friend's mother supports reform as well).

Current Jurisprudence actually lends to the credibility of the Federal Government not only mandating the purchase of insurance through the commerce clause but taxing individuals for not purchasing it vis - a -vis Congress' constitutional authority to levy a tax, fines, fees, what have you and this particular enumerated power is very broad. I'm not going to spell out all the specifics but through the magic of the internet provide you a link to a .pdf file from Congressional Research Service on the constitutionality of mandates. Enjoy. It's interesting to note that most folks hemming and hawing about loss of personal liberties in the healthcare debates were very quiet and supportive, and still are, of the Patriot act and all the personal liberties it abridged.

And to date I've yet to find anyone who can explain to me how a government telling you to purchase a private product is a takeover of that industry. Anyone care to explain that one?

Now for... abortion. I'm pro life -- any many ways probably more pro-life than my coreligionists, but that can be explained later. The Senate language for community health centers did not provide language which excludes abortion. In every other instance in the senate bill of funding for specific healthcare programs exclusionary language was used. Many on the far right of the pro - life movement pounced on this one line exclusion and the snow ball effect ensued.

In the end this caused a nasty divide pitting the USCCB against a bunch of Nuns and the CHA.

Who's right.

Well many would argue that it's the Bishops, not just because they're bishops, but because they're right. For many Catholics it's a simple matter of obedience, the Bishops' lawyers (who increasingly come from far right blindly ideological organizations) wouldn't advise the Bishops wrongly, and the Bishops wouldn't promulgate their decision based on false or misconstrued information so they must be right... right.

On the other hand you have the nuns who have been driving as far left as they can since the SVC and who are more likely to be seen escorting women to abortion clinics than praying for them or offering them the assistance they would need in prenatal care, while a foil to the Bishops and a P.R. boon for left leaning catholics, substantively because of such escort services don't have much credibility in this argument despite their best intentions and the great works they do helping the poor. And the Catholic Health Association ... well they're a hospital, and like other industries will suffer and benefit under reform, in this case hospitals and physicians will benefit more with federal subsidies so their support of the reform law has the appearance of impropriety.

Let's get one thing straight. All three groups, the Bishops, the Nuns, the hospitals -- wanted to see healthcare reform. All three don't want to see federal funding of abortion, and yet they devolved into a pissing match over the absence of one sentence regarding community healthcare, and then the fall out and recriminations over Bart Stupack getting an executive order reinforcing the language in the senate bill and reaffirming the Hyde amendment.

For my own part, while the E.O. was nice, the critics were right -- it was a piece of fluff. BUT it wasn't fluff because of the Obama is the most pro abortion meme - but because it's unnecessary, Hyde stands.

Simply put there was no abrogation of Hyde in the text of the bill. The mere absence of Hyde like language from the community health centers portion of the bill does not change the fact that funding for community health centers, while now being increased, still goes through HHS contra what Kathleen Parker argues today in the Post. From Mother Jones.

pro-life groups say the funding for the community health centers funding will be exempt from the Hyde Amendment because it's not being spent through the normal appropriations process. It’s true that these funds will reach the centers through a different legislative route, but it doesn’t matter. As Jost has explained in a detailed analysis (PDF), all of the community health clinic money is going to end up in the same "pot" at the Department of Health and Human Services. And, he writes, since all HHS funding “is subject to the Hyde Amendment, these funds cannot be used to pay for abortions."

Kathleen is right about one thing -- they Hyde Amendment is reupped annually on appropriations bills for HHS. But the Amendment applies to all funds at HHS, not just those appropriated at that one time in that one act, otherwise abortion access would already be possible with the subsequent bills that provide extend additional funding to HHS and it's programs.

The bill has passed, the only thing to do now is work on strengthening legislation to protect life and expand coverage while battling costs. Daivd Frum who has received more than his share of flak from the right of his party recognizes this and has come up with some common sense conservative steps going forward that will further reform the system. More and more conservatives are stepping up to bat against the Beck/Limbaugh Tea Party movement, and offering constructive critiques and ways forward. Personally I yearn for further enactments of the Wyden-Bennett proposals for reform, and yearn absolutely yearn for the day when the following four things happen: the employer based health care system is abolished, health insurance companies can sell plans across lines, health insurance companies exemption from anti-trust laws are ended, and when we end the abortion debate once and for all and some smart insurance types come up with an eye-med like company to cover all manner of 'reproductive health,' from birth control and IVF to elective abortions and gender reassignment surgeries.

Columbia wants Google Fiber (so does the rest of SC)

I read with excitement about how folks in Columbia (and Greenville by the way, and I'm sure some other fellow SC communities) are getting über-excited about Google Fiber.* How can we not? In this new century, much like our Automakers in the last, Google represents American creativity, enginuity and leadership. Besides, the way things are our internet service providers are terrible monopolies who really could give a hoot about their customers -- have you called Time Warner and tried to get a cable guy to come out? What about AT&T and their technicians?

My excitement didn't last long though. It gave way to disapointment. I thought: as good as Google is we South Carolinians shouldn't have to sell ourselves in quirky marketing gigs for higher speed internet access, or even access at all. Because it was only last year that our State's leaders (in what was the saddest, most undervalued giveaway in the state's history - worse than when we thought we could plug state budget holes by selling large portions of state property) sold 90% of ETV's broadcast bandwidth to two companies, Clearwire and BridgeMaxx for the low low price of $143 million over 20 years. (Yeah I mentioned this yesterday briefly)

That's $7.15 million a year, and when our state has a budget of $5 billion that's 0.143% of our annual budget, if you view the state's budget like others, then that money accounts for 0.034% of our state balance sheet. I call that a give away, don't you?

Wow, had they thought about it reasonably... had they stood up to the state's communications monopolies - here's looking at you Ma Bell and Time Warner - we wouldn't have to be so excited about convincing Google to come here to set up a living lab for their high speed internet. If a bit more sunlight had been thrown on to the process of putting out the bid let alone awarding the contracts, who knows perhaps Google would gladly have approached us. Instead we sold a public trust for less than pennies on the dollar, only to see those two companies do what.... >>crickets<<

*It's funny that Columbia has a Facebook Group dedicated to Google Fiber, granted they're the number one social media site... but Google does have it's own social media sites with Buzz and Orkut.

The FCC must have been watching the happenings in SC

According the Huffington Post, the FCC is unveiling sweeping changes to America's National Broadband Plan. This was a key component of the Obama Administration's Recovery Act. It has the potential to effect more than 100 million households in the country and will increase the connectivity/download speeds to more than 100 megabits per second... that's really really fast.

In their efforts to modernize the plan though it looks like they are mimicking the efforts of South Carolina's legislature.

Over the past three years in South Carolina the legislature has looked for a way to sell off the excess bandwidth of the ETV system. One of the biggest concerns the republican dominated legislature faced was a belief that they must sell the bandwidth into the private market because otherwise it would be government intervention... you know the drill. The plan would have been quietly put through had it not been for the efforts of the Progressive Network and their executive director Brett Bursey. Their efforts though noble, were fruitless and the legislature sold off the bandwidth in two twenty year contracts valuing $143 million.

The two companies who were awarded the contract in October of 2009, Clearwire and BridgeMaxx, have no information about their plans for South Carolina's Broadband Spectrum available on their websites. Other than press releases dated from mid 2009 when the committee recommended the state make the deal with the two companies there's not been a peep.

Hopefully these two companies, who are poised to also reap the benefits of the proposed FCC changes, will be a bit more visible than they have been in the Palmetto State.

A Pink Success!

The Pink Party was last night, and it was a total success. After weeks of meeting and planning, and this past week stressing out - it went off without a hitch. The facilities looked marvelous, the food and drinks were delicious. We honored Mayor Bob for the 20 years of support he's given the LGBT community and gave the floor to the candidates, and they were spot on. I don't have the exact breakdown between the two honorees, but we raised $13,000.00.

I met a lot of interesting campaign insiders from campaigns and candidates who were not being honored last night, not because we were against them - but because it was a party geared towards the mayoral race. I can say this, there is a ground swell of interest amongst candidates, local and statewide to have a pink party for them. (If any of you are reading this visit the Contact page of the Vote Pink! website and e-mail us) I can say, and I hope I'm not saying it prematurely, that there will be at least one more pink party this year -- so stay tuned.

But for now, with the party behind me, I can reorient my life and focus on other projects, including writing this blog more often -- I promise! That and reading. But before I do all that, I'm headed to Cheraw for a nice quiet break.

(Photos will be forthcoming!)

SVILUPPO: I may be too exhausted from the Pink Party to dish the mad details, but local favourite The Shop Tart wasn't. Check her post for deets and pics. And yes, I wore that pink bow tie and I'm fine with being a cliche.

Upcoming Birthday

It's all I can do to make it through this week, with the Pink Party fast approaching my brain has been focused like a laser, and it'll be sweet relief once that's over and done with. Then I get to look forward to a weekend that'll be just as packed with a birthday party, a trip to Cheraw, and a Sunday night Oscar party hosted by a yard sale with legs.

So I'll be looking forward to serene quiet of my 27th Birthday next Wednesday, March 10. It'll be serene because I'll be joining the YACs in a Vesper service. It'll be a great relief compared to these hectic days.

Seeing Red, feeling Blue? Vote Pink!

It's been a hectic past month, part of the reason I've not been blogging much. We're down to the wire and in just two days it'll be time to Party and help raise money for two worthy candidates to succeed Mayor Bob in Columbia.

If you're in town Thursday night, and you want to come out and celebrate Mayor Bob, and support "The Steves" then come to 701 Whaley.*

*A $50 donation is suggested at the door.

They've bought enough rope

The Financial Times has an interesting article on the Greek Crisis and how it's coming to America. It's worth a read and I'd encourage you to Check it out. The following though reminded me of an historical quote:

the Chinese have sharply reduced their purchases of Treasuries from around 47 per cent of new issuance in 2006 to 20 per cent in 2008 to an estimated 5 per cent last year. Small wonder Morgan Stanley assumes that 10-year yields will rise from around 3.5 per cent to 5.5 per cent this year. On a gross federal debt fast approaching $1,500bn, that implies up to $300bn of extra interest payments – and you get up there pretty quickly with the average maturity of the debt now below 50 months.

Know which quote I'm talking about? It's from Lenin. The Capitalist will sell us the rope with which we will hang them. As for the Chinese, well we know about our delicate relationship with them.

The article argues, almost convincingly, that the Keynesian free lunch does not really exist.

Deficits did not “save” us half so much as monetary policy – zero interest rates plus quantitative easing – did. First, the impact of government spending (the hallowed “multiplier”) has been much less than the proponents of stimulus hoped. Second, there is a good deal of “leakage” from open economies in a globalised world. Last, crucially, explosions of public debt incur bills that fall due much sooner than we expect

I said almost because what Mr. Ferguson fails to mention, and sadly probably on purpose, is that we've been deficit spending for the better part of the last decade. It's called two unfunded wars - which by the way is a foreign investment like international aide if you will... where you give and get nothing in return, the largest (unfunded) entitlement expansion since Medicare - which did nothing to actually address any real costs associated with senior medical care or the price of drugs. It was in fact a give away to the insurance industry. Oh yes and who can forget the tax breaks to correspond with these spending increases... hello!!! Spending increases, not cuts!! You cut taxes you cut spending there's a correlation folks.

$757 billion, the majority of which has yet to still be spent, is still a drop in the bucket compared to the profligate - orgiastic spending spree this country has been on for the last decade.

If we learned anything from OJ Simpson it's that you've got to believe the lie and it must become your truth, so it obviously is for Mr. Fergusun, who's no stranger to revisionism, and his framing of the current mess the world is in. Why after all, they say, should you let the truth come in the way of your smear.

But false premise aside the conclusion that Mr. Fergusun draws is for the most part right.

Explosions of public debt hurt economies in the following way, as numerous empirical studies have shown. By raising fears of default and/or currency depreciation ahead of actual inflation, they push up real interest rates. Higher real rates, in turn, act as drag on growth, especially when the private sector is also heavily indebted – as is the case in most western economies, not least the US.

This administration, unlike the last, shouldn't and can't afford to blithely believe that GDP will continue to grow at a pace constant with inflation. The fear of the Great Recession was real. The damaging spending that we've inflicted this past decade, along with the fear created by the recession has raised real interest rates and growth will probably be lower than expected.

We'll end with Mr. Fergusun who notes,

On reflection, it is appropriate that the fiscal crisis of the west has begun in Greece, the birthplace of western civilization. Soon it will cross the channel to Britain. But the key question is when that crisis will reach the last bastion of western power, on the other side of the Atlantic.

Evangelical Leader: Quit Moralizing, focus on Discipleship

An interesting and provocative article about Gay Marriage hit the Christian News Wire. Meet House Church Leader Ken Eastburn:

"Creating a moral America is not God’s goal nor should it be ours. Instead, the Bible is clear that our focus should be to make disciples and seek first the Kingdom of God."

But he doesn't stop there. He challenges the very modern, American, liberal Christian understanding of the Kingdom of God as something that can be created on terra firma as a Christianesque Utopia:

"It is a common mistake for Christians to spend time, energy and resources in advocating for a morality that is consistent with their faith," says Eastburn, "But at the end of the day our goal, the command given to us by Jesus Christ, is to make disciples. When our time and energy is spent on moralizing a secular nation, we are sacrificing our ability to obey Christ's command."

He continues with a very traditional argument which to our ears sounds out of place as well as Provocative:

"Many Christians have their faith intertwined with their nationality and, as a result, believe that their efforts to legislate a specifically Christian morality are glorifying to God. But just the opposite is true. No matter how good America becomes, people are still separated from God by sin. The only agenda we should be spending ourselves on is the redemption offered through Jesus Christ."

Very Interesting. You're not going to save or evangelize people through legislation, only through personal outreach.

That's why it's been so strange for marriage equality supporters to see laws, liberal laws that carve out HUGE exceptions for religious groups and persons of faith from participating in same sex unions, the bills still fall in the face of an unwarranted out cry from religious groups. How is it an infringement upon your religious liberty to say that you don't have to participate, support, or celebrate a same sex union? If the state takes a neutral position on homosexuality how does that impede on your ability or the strength of your message to convince people of your position?

The Great (fire)Wall of China

“The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization..."

- Karl Marx

Besides a cool quote by Karl Mark, Reason Magazine has an interesting article on how to utilize the WTO against the Chinese government to open them up, not to corporate interest (though that's a component), but to the virtues and vices of the freedom of speech. Their argument is based around the elements of the Treaty China signed to join the WTO:

When China joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 it agreed that foreign service companies would have the same access to markets in China as domestic companies do. Now the European Union and the U.S. Trade Representative office are considering an argument that the Great Firewall violates China’s obligations to permit free trade in services under its agreements with the WTO. Last year, in a working paper titled Protectionism Online: Internet Censorship and International Trade Law, the European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE) think tank argued that “WTO member states are legally obliged to permit an unrestricted supply of cross border Internet services.”

The idea here is to use their recent spat with Google as grounds to file a complaint with the WTO. The argument goes that state censorship violates the free trade agreement as it interferes with the ability of the Internet giant and other web companies to provide a service to the Chinese people. The article goes on to explain that while a ruling in a hypothetical complaint with the WTO doesn't guarantee compliance that it does in turn allow for legal retribution in the forms of tariffs on Chinese products.

Their is hesitation by the American Trade Representative to pursue this option which is reflective of the Administration's delayed reaction earlier this year to the hacking of Google by Chinese government officials. Because of the extremely close interdependency of the Sino-American economies any negotiation with China must be labeled: fragile, handle with care.

Can hipsters be Conservatives?

John Guardiano bemoans the temerity of the young "Hipster Cons" as he calls them at David Frum's site. It beggars the question, Can a hipster be a conservative? My answer is, yes.

I've written before about hipsters... it's my own personal obsession to which I've come to the conclusion I myself am one, though I bemoan the fact that I am one, which makes me even more of a hipster -- ooooh, how meta.

Back to the point. I've written before about Christian hipsters, whether they're Evangelical or Catholic, so it's safe to assume that the definition of hipster is not limited to the ironic youth of Brooklyn though there are certain schematas consistent with all class/degrees of hipsters.

Who Guardiano classifies as 'hipsters' is up for debate* - what he calls temerity, a term of derision, put neutrally or positively would best be described in hipster speak as a search for personal/collective authenticity.

To borrow from my posts on Christian hipsters and quote Rabbi Avi Weiss:

"people are looking for a dialectic, people are looking for a commitment that is grounded but not one that is stagnant. The other part of the dialectic is an openness but not without limits."

This is true for all hipsters.

*Conor Friedersdorf actually wrote a post at the American Scene questioning what a hipster is and if he could possibly be one. Take it from me: If you have to ask people if you are a hipster, you probably are a hipster.

Bring on the Trains?

Today President Obama went with Vice President Biden to Tampa to announce an $8 billion dollar investment in Rail Infrastructure through the ARRA.

As many of you know, I love the idea of trains. I love how versatile, and efficient they are as an economic development engine as well as a mode for public transit. So you can imagine how happy I was to hear of the announcement today and the commitment by the President to funding the expansion of high speed rail by budgeting an additional $1 billion dollars every year for the next five years.

So what 31 States get a portion of the $8 billion dollar pie dolled out today? CNN said the approved projects are

• San Diego-Los Angeles-San Luis Obispo in California
• Oakland-Sacramento in California
• Portland-Eugene in Oregon
• Seattle-Portland in Washington and Oregon
• Chicago-St. Louis in Illinois and Missouri
• St. Louis-Kansas City in Missouri
• Minneapolis/St. Paul-Madison in Minnesota and Wisconsin
• Madison-Milwaukee in Wisconsin
• Milwaukee-Chicago in Wisconsin and Illinois
• Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati in Ohio
• Detroit/Pontiac-Chicago in Michigan, Indiana and Illinois
• Tampa-Orlando in Florida
• Raleigh-Charlotte in North Carolina
• Washington-Richmond in the District of Columbia and Virginia
• Raleigh-Richmond in North Carolina and Virginia
• New York City-Albany-Buffalo in New York
• New York City-Montreal in New York and Quebec, Canada
• Boston-New York-Washington in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and the District of Columbia
• Brunswick-Portland in Maine
• Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania
• Springfield-East Northfield in Massachusetts
• New Haven-Springfield in Connecticut and Massachusetts

Noticeably absent from the list are any rail projects in South Carolina, although North Carolina has two projects funded as does.... CANADA??!?!?!??

But what about South Carolina? The Charlanta mega region is one of the largest growing economic geographies in the nation, and it includes the upstate of South Carolina! Two years ago I blogged about a little noticed article in The Spartanburg Herald Journal about an effort by SC Public Railways and the Department of Commerce to re evaluate the rail systems in South Carolina, so what was determined?

Well much like the little noticed article in the Herald Journal the produced report, by Wilbur Smith and Associates, received just as little fanfare... actually none, though it contains some golden nuggets for rail enthusiasts and those interested in -- you know economic development, and, oh, job creation.

The report itself is available online in seven parts here (filed under "R") I'll link to the Executive Summary at the bottom of the post. One of the more interesting points from the report on my first glance was

12.1.2 Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor

Route costs for the Upstate line are estimated in a report from U.S. DOT’s Volpe Center at $1.2 to $1.4 billion. Based on 80 percent federal funding and half of the route lying in South Carolina, the state’s share would be approximately $140 million.

12.1.3 Commuter Rail

Charleston has applied to the State Infrastructure Bank for $206 million for capital costs. An active investigation of service between Columbia and Camden is ongoing. Capital costs were estimated at $80 million in a prior study.

I threw the Commuter Rail bit in as a tease, the meat and potatoes is that estimate for the High Speed Rail Corridor. If Obama is budgeting $1 billion every year over the next 5 years, which of the SC Congressional Delegation is going to stand up for our economic interest and push for funding of this vital corridor. And even if they do - will anyone in the General Assembly respond in kind? Rail. Economic Development. Jobs.

SC State Rail Plan Executive Summary

SC Reality TV

I'm not a huge fan of Adam Fogle, or his "Palmetto Scoop" never have been - never will be. But he does manage to get a decent story every now and then. Monday he reported that a reality TV show is probably looking to film in SC soon.

Apparently it's a new season of Oxygen's Bad Girls Club. All I have to say is -- has Joe Taylor heard about this? Per Fogle an ad on Craigslist is soliciting casting recruiters.

But if you want to see a reality show based in Columbia, SC you don't have to even turn on the TV -- just go to Drinking in the Morning where you'll see Aaron Johnson and Grant Robertson, owners of the F Stop in 5 points, doing truly unscripted programing. Seriously, hilarious stuff.

Speaking of Aaron and Grant they're running for Mayor and City Council respectively. What's really interesting is that Mr. Robertson has a fighting chance against incumbent Tamieka Isaac Devine. Devine has been hurt politically, as all incumbents have been, by revelations of the city's fiscal mismanagement and two personal financial scandals last year regarding improper loans through the Sumter Columbia Empowerment Zone.

As always Waldo sums it up just right

My old blog friend Waldo Lydecker summed up the oppositional response to last night's SOTU. In his acerbic, yet witty way - he managed to show exactly what's wrong with the Grand Old Party (emphasis on OLD).

SOTU '10

In case you missed the SOTU, and how could you - you had the ability to stream it on your iPhone? - Ben Smith has the full text.

Andrew Sullivan has a round up of the salient SOTU Reax.

I watched it on Cable, and followed the twitter reactions.

Watching the SOTU? There's an App for that.

Continuing with the tech trend that help catapult him to office, President Obama's white house released last week an app for iPhone and iTouch users. The White House even provided a nifty video featuring Press Secretary Robert Gibbs (you can watch it at the bottom of the post).

The release corresponds with the SOTU, and coincidentally with the release of the new Apple touch pad computer - the iPad (insert joke here). I'll leave it to the conspiracy theorists to divine the meaning, especially for the White House's relationship with Apple's main rival Google. When this administration began many questioned the cozy relationship between DC and Mountain View, but recently there was a small spat between the administration and google over America's hesitant reaction to Chinese hackers.

But I will say this - as a Droid user, where's my app. The President himself uses a blackberry still -- where's the app for that? I know that the iPhone is popular, but it's only 19% of the market share of smart phones and that figure should fall to about 10% in 2012. I won't complain too much -- google's versions of apps have always been web based - and at least the white house is planning on releasing a mobile web version of whitehouse.gov soon.