PDA

View Full Version : Good for the Democrats lol


newtothegame
06-11-2010, 12:04 AM
This couldn't have been better written if it was a movie script lol



Clyburn Calls on Feds to Probe South Carolina Senate Candidate



Published June 10, 2010

| Associated Press



The No. 3 Democrat in the U.S. House called on federal authorities Thursday to investigate how an unemployed South Carolina military veteran entered and won the state's Democratic primary for U.S. Senate.

"Here is Alvin Greene, unemployed, he goes into the Democratic headquarters and pays $10,000. That's no little bit of money for an unemployed person," House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said. "This guy, who is he? Where did he come from?"

Greene, 32, stunned the Democratic Party establishment Tuesday night when he handily defeated Vic Rawl, a four-term state lawmaker and former judge, for the party's nomination. Rawl, who had campaigned little but already raised $186,000, was forced to scrap a fundraiser planned for Thursday night.

Greene has not reported any fundraising, run any ads, or put up signs or a website in his challenge of Republican U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint. He had been considered such a long shot that neither his opponent nor the media bothered to check his background, which includes a November arrest on a charge of felony obscenity.

"There are a number of things that are taking place in the South Carolina political process that I find suspicious," Clyburn said. "I believe there's a coordinated effort to circumvent state and federal laws and seriously subvert the electoral process. Something needs to be done."

Greene, who says he left the military last August after 13 years in the Army and Air Force, has said he paid the $10,440 filing fee by saving up two years of his service pay. On Thursday, Clyburn said he's skeptical Greene paid the fee himself and demanded that federal authorities investigate where the money came from.

Clyburn said state law makes it illegal for candidates to let someone else pay their filing fee if their candidacy is intended to damage another candidate.

Party officials asked Greene to sit out of the race after The Associated Press reported he faces a felony charge, which stems from a University of South Carolina student's complaint that he showed her a pornographic website, then talked about going to her room at a university dorm.

But Greene insists he's staying put.

"I am a legitimate candidate," Greene said Thursday, in response to questions about Clyburn's investigation request. "There's no need for it."

Arriving for interviews at a Columbia television station Thursday afternoon in a dark suit, driven in a hired car, Greene marked a stark contrast to the day before. On Wednesday, Greene greeted a reporter at his childhood home in Manning, clad in a T-shirt and sweat pants.

Greene would be required to report campaign spending to the Federal Election Commission, which regulates federal campaign finances. But the cash for the filing fee itself is given directly by candidates to the state party they wish to represent, and that money isn't subject to FEC filing requirements, officials with the agency said Thursday.

That answer doesn't satisfy Clyburn, who suspects there is more to be learned about Greene's pursuit. Clyburn also raised concerns about the possibility of a whisper campaign to encourage voters to pick the ballot's first name, which happened to be Greene's. He wants anything "untoward" in the race to be investigated.

"He's been paid to stay in it, by somebody," Clyburn said. "I just think this is a ploy by someone to dishonor and embarrass the Democratic Party."

Joel Sawyer, executive director of South Carolina's Republican Party, said Clyburn's allegations are evidence that the state's Democrats know they can't defeat DeMint.

"The Democratic Party is grasping at straws, and making absurd accusations to cover for their laughable incompetence in vetting candidates," Sawyer said. "That being said, if they're not even going to bother doing basic things like checking to see if their candidates have pending felony charges, we're feeling pretty doggone good about November already."

In Washington, the head of the committee to elect Democrats to the Senate tried to distance himself from the South Carolina primary results.

"South Carolina is not a place I'm focused on a lot," said Sen. Robert Menendez, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. "I'm simply saying the DSCC is not engaged."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/10/clyburn-calls-feds-probe-south-carolina-senate-candidate/#content

mostpost
06-11-2010, 12:48 AM
This couldn't have been better written if it was a movie script lol



Clyburn Calls on Feds to Probe South Carolina Senate Candidate



Published June 10, 2010

| Associated Press



The No. 3 Democrat in the U.S. House called on federal authorities Thursday to investigate how an unemployed South Carolina military veteran entered and won the state's Democratic primary for U.S. Senate.

"Here is Alvin Greene, unemployed, he goes into the Democratic headquarters and pays $10,000. That's no little bit of money for an unemployed person," House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said. "This guy, who is he? Where did he come from?"

Greene, 32, stunned the Democratic Party establishment Tuesday night when he handily defeated Vic Rawl, a four-term state lawmaker and former judge, for the party's nomination. Rawl, who had campaigned little but already raised $186,000, was forced to scrap a fundraiser planned for Thursday night.

Greene has not reported any fundraising, run any ads, or put up signs or a website in his challenge of Republican U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint. He had been considered such a long shot that neither his opponent nor the media bothered to check his background, which includes a November arrest on a charge of felony obscenity.

"There are a number of things that are taking place in the South Carolina political process that I find suspicious," Clyburn said. "I believe there's a coordinated effort to circumvent state and federal laws and seriously subvert the electoral process. Something needs to be done."

Greene, who says he left the military last August after 13 years in the Army and Air Force, has said he paid the $10,440 filing fee by saving up two years of his service pay. On Thursday, Clyburn said he's skeptical Greene paid the fee himself and demanded that federal authorities investigate where the money came from.

Clyburn said state law makes it illegal for candidates to let someone else pay their filing fee if their candidacy is intended to damage another candidate.

Party officials asked Greene to sit out of the race after The Associated Press reported he faces a felony charge, which stems from a University of South Carolina student's complaint that he showed her a pornographic website, then talked about going to her room at a university dorm.

But Greene insists he's staying put.

"I am a legitimate candidate," Greene said Thursday, in response to questions about Clyburn's investigation request. "There's no need for it."

Arriving for interviews at a Columbia television station Thursday afternoon in a dark suit, driven in a hired car, Greene marked a stark contrast to the day before. On Wednesday, Greene greeted a reporter at his childhood home in Manning, clad in a T-shirt and sweat pants.

Greene would be required to report campaign spending to the Federal Election Commission, which regulates federal campaign finances. But the cash for the filing fee itself is given directly by candidates to the state party they wish to represent, and that money isn't subject to FEC filing requirements, officials with the agency said Thursday.

That answer doesn't satisfy Clyburn, who suspects there is more to be learned about Greene's pursuit. Clyburn also raised concerns about the possibility of a whisper campaign to encourage voters to pick the ballot's first name, which happened to be Greene's. He wants anything "untoward" in the race to be investigated.

"He's been paid to stay in it, by somebody," Clyburn said. "I just think this is a ploy by someone to dishonor and embarrass the Democratic Party."

Joel Sawyer, executive director of South Carolina's Republican Party, said Clyburn's allegations are evidence that the state's Democrats know they can't defeat DeMint.

"The Democratic Party is grasping at straws, and making absurd accusations to cover for their laughable incompetence in vetting candidates," Sawyer said. "That being said, if they're not even going to bother doing basic things like checking to see if their candidates have pending felony charges, we're feeling pretty doggone good about November already."

In Washington, the head of the committee to elect Democrats to the Senate tried to distance himself from the South Carolina primary results.

"South Carolina is not a place I'm focused on a lot," said Sen. Robert Menendez, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. "I'm simply saying the DSCC is not engaged."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/10/clyburn-calls-feds-probe-south-carolina-senate-candidate/#content
Well it's obvious that Rawls, the official Democratic candidate, did not take Greene seriously enough. Perhaps it is true that Republicans crossed over and voted in the Democratic primary so as to give DeMint an easier opponent, but frankly it doesn't sound as if either Rawls or Greene has much on the ball.

Something similar happened in Illinois several years ago, but I can't remember the details. If I find them I will post.

newtothegame
06-11-2010, 01:19 AM
Well it's obvious that Rawls, the official Democratic candidate, did not take Greene seriously enough. Perhaps it is true that Republicans crossed over and voted in the Democratic primary so as to give DeMint an easier opponent, but frankly it doesn't sound as if either Rawls or Greene has much on the ball.

Something similar happened in Illinois several years ago, but I can't remember the details. If I find them I will post.

Huh??? The "official democratic candidate" ???? I thought that was decided by the voters in the primaries? You might of been better served to use the wording from the above article....Greene was not part of the "ESTABLISHMENT", which would infer that Rawls was the "ESTABLISHMENT" candidate.
I have said many times previously...its time for the ESTABLISHMENT to go!!!!
Now as for Greene, I don't live in SC nor do I care who they pick to respresent them. But maybe, just maybe...they are tried of the ESTABLISHMENT as well....????? :lol:

mostpost
06-11-2010, 10:51 AM
Huh??? The "official democratic candidate" ???? I thought that was decided by the voters in the primaries? You might of been better served to use the wording from the above article....Greene was not part of the "ESTABLISHMENT", which would infer that Rawls was the "ESTABLISHMENT" candidate.
I have said many times previously...its time for the ESTABLISHMENT to go!!!!
Now as for Greene, I don't live in SC nor do I care who they pick to respresent them. But maybe, just maybe...they are tried of the ESTABLISHMENT as well....????? :lol:
I think you're quibbling over a word. Rawls was a previous office holder and was slated by the democrats. Establishment? Official? same thing as far as I'm concerned.
Since you think it's time for the establishment to go, I guess if you lived in SC you would be voting against DeMint. :rolleyes:

GaryG
06-11-2010, 11:07 AM
DeMint was going to win big anyway, so this is not a critical issue. It is kind of funny though to see the "party of change" nominate some yahoo with no experience who is facing felony charges. He sure does have the look of a jacklighted deer.

ArlJim78
06-11-2010, 11:16 AM
Clyburn should be investigating the democratic party of South Carolina. Are they that weak and brainless that this guy Greene looks to the voters like the best Democratic alternative?

What is it with South Carolina anyway? you had the Sanford escapade, the wacky charges lobbed at Haley the Rep govenor nominee, and now this guy Greene?

Weird wild stuff down there.

boxcar
06-11-2010, 12:31 PM
Something similar happened in Illinois several years ago, but I can't remember the details. If I find them I will post.

You wouldn't be thinking of BO, would you? :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

boxcar
06-11-2010, 12:33 PM
Huh??? The "official democratic candidate" ???? I thought that was decided by the voters in the primaries? You might of been better served to use the wording from the above article....Greene was not part of the "ESTABLISHMENT", which would infer that Rawls was the "ESTABLISHMENT" candidate.
I have said many times previously...its time for the ESTABLISHMENT to go!!!!
Now as for Greene, I don't live in SC nor do I care who they pick to respresent them. But maybe, just maybe...they are tried of the ESTABLISHMENT as well....????? :lol:

People tend to misread these election results. This is far more of an anti-establishment than merely anti-incumbent mood that is driving these results.

Boxcar

bigmack
06-11-2010, 01:10 PM
Drink in what Robert Klein had to say about South Carolina.

Punch-in 3:10

S0XTYP3JU0U

newtothegame
06-12-2010, 01:00 AM
I think you're quibbling over a word. Rawls was a previous office holder and was slated by the democrats. Establishment? Official? same thing as far as I'm concerned.
Since you think it's time for the establishment to go, I guess if you lived in SC you would be voting against DeMint. :rolleyes:
Well since this was the democratic primary....I wouldnt have a choice to vote out DeMint now would I?
The point of the story was not about mine or your wording. Its about the process and what the people think of that process.
You, NJ, and the other libs keep THINKING that the things that have happened recently in elections are just a drop here and there. Mass....done...Virginia, Hawaii...and look at the problems Reid and Boxer are having. And in Utah I believe another incumbent (R) got the boot.
I am ALL for what is happening. And if DeMint were to get caught in the Incumbents must go wave that seems to be happening across this country (whether you want to see it or not), then SO BE IT!
Now I know people like Dog will come on here and tell me, "nothings going to change and if I think it is then I must be dumber then a box of rocks". And that may be true....but the one thing I know to be fact is that if the current members in congress are not changed, it will NEVER change. It's about time the PEOPLES voices are heard. And you can call them "racist" tea baggers, whatever you wish. But it does not change the fact that this government was intended to be run by the people for the people of the people.!

Tom
06-12-2010, 11:14 AM
You wouldn't be thinking of BO, would you? :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

Post of the month!!!!!:lol:

mostpost
06-12-2010, 05:09 PM
Post of the month!!!!!:lol:
Must be a slow month. No, this happened long before Obama.

boxcar
06-12-2010, 05:19 PM
Must be a slow month. No, this happened long before Obama.

And with him, too. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

kenwoodall2
06-13-2010, 01:58 PM
Rawls and Clyburn are incumbents, which I hate. So I'm on the Veteran's side.
Political parties do not want real people in office. In a TV interview (he is a lousy interviewee, so what?) he said his issues were education and unequal justice. Based on my justice experience and his "felony obscenity", I would vote for him!