Category Archives: SC News/Commentary

Anti-choice posters banned from State House

Posted on by

Columbia Christians for Life issued this press release today. Steve Lefemine (who often travels with large posters with photos of bloody fetuses) and Johnny Gardner (who prefers the doll-on-a-stick prop) for years have been fixtures at public gatherings and at the State House.

*****************

BANNED FROM SC STATE HOUSE:
“Jesus,” “Ten Commandments,” “Pre-Born” and other signs no longer “the people’s house”

Contact, Steve Lefemine, (803) 794-6273

On Wednesday, April 29, officers with the SC Bureau of Protective Services (State Capitol police) stopped two Christian pro-life ministry leaders, who for years have been lobbying the Republican-majority SC Legislature to pass SC Personhood bills to END abortion in South Carolina, from entering the SC State House with Biblical and Pro-Life signs, as had been allowed for multiple years (digital date-stamped photos going back to 2005 are available).

Johnny Gardner, dir., Voice of the Unborn was even prevented from taking a small baby stroller with two baby dolls, into the Capitol. Steve Lefemine, dir., Columbia Christians for Life was stopped from using two signs in the Capitol, one sign saying, “JESUS Saves, Forgives & Heals” and then the “Ten Commandments” with all 10 listed; and a second sign, with a photo of an 8-Week Pre-Born Baby and then “ABORTION KILLS CHILDREN” on one side, and on the other side, an enlarged House Roll Call budget vote in 2002 that funded abortion, birth control, and sterilization (as the SC House and Senate continue to do each year to this day).

Gardner and Lefemine were shown copies of SC Code Sec. 10-11-330 which prohibits disorderly conduct, and also prohibits anyone “to parade, demonstrate or picket within the capitol building.” Notwithstanding this statute, free speech expression in the form of signs has been allowed inside the State House in both the First Floor and Second Floor lobbying areas that are open to the public, for a number of years. The ban applies to all signs except those displayed at news conferences held in the Capitol.

Gardner and Lefemine have worked in the State House for years attempting to influence the Republican-majority SC Legislature to do their God-given duty and protect pre-birth humans from being murdered in the wombs of their mothers. Despite more than 50 bill co-sponsors in the SC House, and more than a dozen in the SC Senate, the Republican leadership in the SC House and SC Senate is not supporting the legislation. Neither is Republican Governor Mark Sanford. The 11-year-old personhood legislation to END abortion in SC was first introduced in the SC House and SC Senate in 1998.

Gardner and Lefemine were able to enter the Capitol Building on April 29 after leaving their items behind. Upon investigation, Lefemine learned that a number of parties had agreed to begin enforcement of the sign ban, including the Sergeant at Arms for the Senate, and the Sergeant at Arms for the House, the Field Commander for the Bureau of Protective Services, and others. Noticeably absent from the list of those involved in this decision to chill free speech in what has previously been known as “the people’s house” was the State House Committee chairman, who has scheduled a Tuesday, May 12 meeting in the Blatt Building, Room 318, to address the matter. (Time TBD est. approx. 2 PM) Comment by the public is planned.

3e7d89

Gilda for Governor?

Posted on by

rallygilda

Gilda Cobb-Hunter (D-Orangeburg) speaks at the People’s Stimulus Rally April 1 at the State House.

*****************

It’s been seven long years since a movement to draft Gilda Cobb-Hunter to run for governor ran into a roadblock: the prospective candidate herself. “South Carolina isn’t ready for a black woman to be governor,” she said. She declined to enter the race against Jim Hodges, and Mark Sanford was elected governor.

The buzz among friends who know her best is that she is open to reconsidering a run for governor or, perhaps, taking on Sen. Jim DeMint for his US Senate seat.

A lot has changed in seven years, not the least of which is that we have a black man in the White House. White men — from president, to governor to the legislature — have proven their inability to meaningfully address the problems facing our state and nation; it may well be time for Gilda to reconsider her earlier hesitancy.

The Democratic Party is fielding some nice guys to contend for its nomination for governor. Sen. Vince Sheheen of Camden, Rep. Harry Ott of Calhoun County, and Mullins McLeod of Charleston are names being mentioned. But they don’t resonate with the demand for substantive change that could inspire new South Carolina voters. We can’t expect their candidacies to be far removed from the traditional Democratic strategy of playing to the right of center to pick off a couple of percentage points from the Republican vote. This is the “Republican Lite” strategy that has failed for the past 30 years.

But what if a bold candidate spoke to the 43 percent of South Carolinians who did not vote in the last election?

To put it in perspective, McCain got 1,034,896 votes in South Carolina’s last general election; Obama got 862,449. That adds up to 1,897,345 South Carolinians who voted. Sitting it out were 1,472,048 of the voting-age population (24 percent of them registered voters) who didn’t vote. That’s an untapped market of 43 percent of folks in this state who could vote but chose not to.

We only need to mobilize 12 percent of the people who don’t vote to turn the state blue. Of all the Democratic candidates mentioned, Gilda has the magic to make this happen. She is the one person in the legislature who be counted on to vote in the interest of working people, minorities and the disenfranchised. Her candidacy for governor or US Senate would inject a level of enthusiasm into the race — helping all Democratic candidates — that nobody else could provide.

What do you think? Email scprogressivecaucus@earthlink.com to voice your opinion. Should Gilda run for governor, US Senate, or stay in the State House?

gilda2

Sign spotted at a rally a few years ago suggests how loved Gilda is among her constituents.

Alice, Mad Hatter, Rabbit, Queen and Courtier Infiltrate Tea Party With No Nukes Message

Posted on by

By Tom Clements, Columbia

Well, we couldn’t resist taking advantage of the call to the fringe to gather at the South Carolina capitol to protest on tax day. As the whole event here was definitely down the rabbit hole, we decided to go in tea party costume and take a no-taxes-for-nuclear-socialism and no-taxes-for-nuclear bailout to the center of the rally. While there was some concern that our message might get mixed in with the rest of the “messages,” we kept it focused on no-taxes-for-nukes, and I think we pulled it off.

tea

Leslie Minerd, Tom Clements (in rabbit suit), Susan Corbett and Tim Liszewski

To much notice, we worked our way through the crowd and were eventually able to get almost behind the speaker’s podium on the steps of the state capitol, before a couple of thousand angry people protesting against, well, I couldn’t quite tell. Most were too slow to notice that we were protesting the kind of big government they might love, but there were a number of perplexed looks once they paused to read our signs.

Our Rabbit even hopped up and shook Sen. DeMint’s hand right after he spoke, carrying a no-nuclear-pork sign, and the Rabbit tried to shake Gov. Sanford’s hand but the pro-nuke gov scurried off down his usual rabbit hole and back into his wonderland when he noticed that the Big No-Nukes Bunny was approaching.

Anyway, we made it out alive and it was some fun to carry the no-nukes message into the thick of the rally here.

A Comment About Comments

Posted on by

As I posted here yesterday, the SC Progressive Network‘s web site and this blog were hacked twice recently, resulting in our site being down for several days. Both times, the site had to be restored, and some files were lost in the shuffle. Three blog comments were among them, but have since been retrieved. I’m posting them below, hoping to clear up any confusion among those frustrated that their comments disappeared.

Comment on More anti-choice BS
by Lisa Krempasky
Gosh, I had a comment here pointing out extensive flaws in your post. You deleted it. Hmmm….wonder why. If my arguments were wrong why did you not refute them?

Comment on More anti-choice BS
by Becci
Your post was not removed; our site has been hacked — twice in a week — and we’ve lost files. If you care to repost, please do. Your comments are welcome, but I won’t engage you in debate, as I find it pointless arguing with people who use God as a political tool. I visited your site, so I have a clue how you’ve derived your ideology. You are entitled to your views, of course, but please don’t impose them on me or other women who believe differently.

Comment on More anti-choice BS
by Tina Luna
Lisa in my experience blogs like this are not looking for facts or the truth but are just pushing an agenda. Anyone that puts light on the facts would in anyway refute their ultimate goal of pushing their false premise must be silenced. These same people that always cry for free speech in fact are for censoring speech when it disagrees with them.

For the record, this site does not — and will not — censor anyone’s comments, unless they are threatening or clearly offensive (not just obnoxious). To date, we have not done so. To see examples of postings that we’d remove if we believed in that sort of thing, see our YouTube channel here.

Much as we may disagree with some of those comments, we believe in open and free dialogue. We sometimes wish the comments were more respectful, but it is not our job to police what people say.

To those who want to add their two cents on this blog, you should know that certain words will divert your comment into the spam queue until it gets admin approval. That may take several hours, so if your comment doesn’t appear immediately, please be patient; it eventually will be posted. That is probably what happened to William Hamilton yesterday. He made a comment that was flagged as spam, and posted a second comment making the same point. Both comments were retrieved from the spam queue and posted.

We encourage folks to share their thoughts here and on YouTube, and welcome divergent perspectives. We also welcome any essays, videos or photos you think might be of interest to the progressive community in South Carolina. Send items you wish to share to becci@scpronet.com.

Finally, a big thanks to our tech wizard, Steve Hait, for getting our web site up and running after both hack jobs, and for working to make the site more secure.

Becci Robbins
SC Progressive Network Communications Director

People’s Stimulus Rally Makes Waves

Posted on by

rallypic

On April 1, thousands rallied at the State House in Columbia to urge Gov. Mark Sanford to accept the stimulus money for South Carolina. The rally was organized by the SC Progressive Network. Here are some links to videos, photos and a sampling of news clips of the event.

Thanks to everyone who turned out to make the rally such a huge success!

Sorry this is so late in coming, but the Network’s web site, and this blog, were hacked twice in a week, and it has taken us some time to fix the problem. Funny that we were hacked just as news of this event was making headlines here and nationally. Whether coincidence or not, the timing could not have been worse. Just when traffic was at its peak, those tuning in to our site were greeted with what amounts to digital graffiti that included threats and expletives. We regret any confusion or offense it may have caused.

Becci Robbins
SC Progressive Network Communications Director

To view comments about this video, click here. Truly sad. And scary.

To view photos from the rally, see the Network’s photo album here.

April 2, 2009, NPR Morning Edition

SC Governor Being Pressured to Take the Stimulus

April 2, 2009, WLTX-TV

Hundreds Rally to Urge Governor to Take Stimulus

April 2, 2009, AOL-TV

Crowd Shots from the People’s Stimulus Rally

April 2, 2009, WOLO-TV

Time is Running Out for Sanford’s Stimulus Decision

April 2, 2009, BET.com

Protesters in South Carolina Demand Gov. Take Stimulus Money

April 2, 2009, The State

Rally urges Sanford to ‘Take the money’ – Educators, students, lawmakers rally at State House

April 1, 2009, WIS-TV

Protesters Hope Sanford Takes the Money

April 1, 2009, WBRV

Saga Over Stimulus

April 1, 2009

Hundreds Show up to Protest

It’s all about Mark Sanford — again

Posted on by

By Joseph Neal
(Rev. Neal served as Co-chair of the SC Progressive Network for a decade)
Guest Columnist, The State

Author and pastor Rick Warren begins his transformative book, The Purpose Driven Life, with a simple statement: “It’s not about you.”

As Gov. Mark Sanford engages the General Assembly in political gamesmanship over accepting federal stimulus dollars, his actions should prove to South Carolinians that despite his words to the contrary, it’s not about you.

Don’t be confused. Whether or not the governor accepts the money has nothing to do with the potential impact on you, your family or your quality of life.

So, to the more than 4 million residents of our state, it’s not about you.

To the 1,000 to 6,000 public school teachers facing layoffs if the money is rejected, it’s not about you.

To the hundreds of thousands of school children facing larger class sizes, fewer gifted and talented course offerings and fewer textbooks and supplies, it’s not about you.

To the business owners who rely on state government or the workers it employs to survive, it’s not about you.

To the 241,000 residents currently unemployed, it’s not about you.

Even to the 601,868 of you who voted for Sanford in the 2006 general election, it’s not about you.

And especially to the 170 members of the General Assembly, it’s not about you.

If nothing else, this continuing controversy should confirm once and for all that the governor does not have — and has not had — the best interest of South Carolinians at heart. For six years, the governor has used his bully pulpit to mislead and misinform residents, resulting in alternating tides of fear and anger.

He has manufactured controversies and exaggerated differences with the General Assembly for the sole purpose of either garnering more power for himself or defunding and destabilizing state government. Those are the only two end products of his political agenda.

The debate over school vouchers is nothing more than a vehicle to limit funding to public education by diverting it elsewhere. The governor’s persistent calls for eliminating the personal income tax is merely a means to take away the most stabile revenue source — even in a downturn — for state government.

With the controversy surrounding the stimulus money, the governor gets to accomplish both goals. The stimulus bill affords the governor new-found power to shape the budget debate. And he has used his position to catapult himself into the national spotlight. At the same time, he has more authority than ever to severely limit or destabilize state government. For Sanford, the stimulus debate, as the political pundits say, is a perfect storm.

Sanford does not believe in the power of government to better the lives of citizens. The governor does not believe in the responsibility of government to be a safety net for those who are less fortunate or cannot help themselves.

His attacks on state government will have the net effect of shrinking our state’s middle class. This is particularly troubling for African-American residents, who hold a greater share of managerial positions in state government than in the private sector.

The governor’s attacks on public education threaten to exacerbate economic and racial disparities in our state. Education is our society’s greatest equalizer. Keeping our residents poor and ignorant makes the state attractive only to those types of businesses that will keep them in subjugation.

Rev. Warren’s words were intended to remind us to move beyond being self-absorbed and find God’s purpose for our lives by helping one another. This is particularly true for anyone desiring to be a public servant. So, Mark Sanford, enough. It’s not about you.

Rev. Neal represents Richland and Sumter counties in the S.C. House.

Abortion access in SC at risk, especially for the poor

Posted on by

By Becci Robbins

Communications Director, SC Progressive Network

SC legislators meet Jan. 28 to discuss a bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound, be given “certain written materials” and wait 24 hours before obtaining an abortion, a move opponents say poses a prohibitive burden for many poor and working women.

What’s wrong with this picture? I’ll tell you: these gents are debating what goes on in my uterus. Some of them have been doing this for years. Hard to believe, but they somehow feel entitled to making decisions about the most intimate details of my health and welfare. As a grown woman, I find their presumption insulting.

Seriously. Imagine a group of women discussing how long men should wait before being allowed to have a vasectomy, or whether they should be given Viagra, and under what circumstances. Now stop laughing and imagine that these women had the power to make these choices for men.

Fat chance.

Continue reading →

Tribute to Harriet McBryde Johnson

Posted on by

Today’s New York Times Magazine ran a piece by Princeton bioethics professor Peter Singer to honor Charleston lawyer Harriet McBryde Johnson, who died in June. Singer, a leader in the animal rights movement, and Johnson, an activist with a national profile in the disability community, sparred over the years in public forums and in private emails, all the while maintaining a mutual respect.

Johnson was a longtime member of the SC Progressive Network, and was honored with the organization’s Thunder and Lightning Award in 2004. To read an earlier post recognizing Johnson’s death, click here.

*****************

By PETER SINGER
New York Times Magazine

I met Harriet McBryde Johnson in the spring of 2001, when I was giving a lecture at the College of Charleston. Her brand of Southern etiquette prescribed that if you’re not prepared to shoot on sight, you have to be prepared to shake hands, so when I held out mine, she reached up from her powered wheelchair and took it with the three working fingers on her right hand. She added that she was attending my lecture as a supporter of Not Dead Yet, the disability rights organization that a year and a half earlier blockaded Princeton University’s Nassau Hall in protest against my appointment as a professor of bioethics. I told her I looked forward to an interesting exchange.

My lecture, “Rethinking Life and Death,” was a defense of the position that had aroused such vehement opposition. I pointed out that physicians routinely withdraw life support from severely disabled newborns, and I argued that this is not very different from allowing parents to decide, in consultation with their doctors, to end the life of a baby when the child has disabilities so serious that the family believes this will be best for the child or for the family as a whole.

When I finished, Johnson, who was born with a muscle-wasting disease, spoke up. I was saying, she pointed out, that her parents should have been permitted to kill her shortly after her birth. But she was now a lawyer, enjoying her life as much as anyone. It is a mistake, she said, to believe that having a disability makes life less worth living.

Our exchange of views continued for a few minutes in the lecture theater, and by e-mail afterward. Years later, when I read her autobiographical book, “Too Late to Die Young,” I wasn’t surprised to see “arguing hard” listed among the pleasures of her life.

Continue reading →