The keyword is “Electability”
During the past four years I have been addicted to the daily news on TV and in local and national newspapers. On one of those days, a thought that had previously escaped me suddenly appeared: There are only two possible scenarios that could prevent Donald Trump from winning re-election.
The first of these is the indisputable proof that Donald Trump has committed treason, that he has sold out his country and his supporters for his own personal gain. Unfortunately, in spite of his defying congressional subpoenas, the findings of the Special Council and his abuse of the Emolument Clause, that has not happened.
The other scenario concerns the electability of the muddled field of 24 Democratic candidates who are running for president. There is only a slim chance that any of them can beat Trump. They are suggesting a multitude of controversial, distracting and costly ideas, which are neither urgent nor today’s issues. The person whom the Democrats need is Michelle Obama. She can articulate our immediate concerns and she can captivate an audience. She is admired throughout the world; she’s smart; she’s tough and she’s electable. She is the Democratic rock-star who would change the complexion of the entire presidential campaign, not only for the Democrats but in the Republican’s response to her. Her phrase, “When they go low, we go high” two years ago proved that she can go toe-to-toe with Trump and his game of words. If she says she doesn’t want to run, then she should be drafted. The Democrats certainly need her but the country, at this moment in time, needs her more.
Ret. First Lieutenant
Mount Pleasant politicians have been talking, talking, talking about affordable housing since people realized that Mount Pleasant is a great place to live and are/were willing to pay higher prices than in other areas.
Task Forces, Study Groups, Focus Groups, Initiatives, Special Committees, CRABS, BS Sessions, et al. have all concluded that land prices are too high for affordable housing.
It is apparent that there will have to be government subsidies-subsidies rather than taxes. So that politicians won’t say things like “You mean that after a year all that Focus Group wants to do is raise taxes.” “Not on my watch.” “I was not elected to raise taxes.” “Not in my backyard.” Etc.
The most qualified council member is Tom O’Rourke. He thinks big. He knows how governments work. And works in the best interests of his constituents. He has made a land use/affordable housing proposal which seems to be worth consideration.
His fellow committee members have reacted predictably.
Nothing will change and there will never be affordable housing in Mount Pleasant as long as politicians limit their thinking and prioritize self interests.
A July 10 “Letter to the Editor” explains, in quite detail, the mission and legislative mandate of Mount Pleasant Waterworks (MPW) and his letter asks the question “how could you (MPW) get involved in the cell phone business and committing MPW’s customers’ money to supply a “monopole” to the cell phone providers?” This has everything to do with a rusty, old, ugly and unused water tower that somehow is now considered an antique icon, even if its current neglected state can be considered suspect, whose only current purpose is its height for current cell phone antennae, as opposed to the modern monopole being proposed to replace the water tower, its height, and current cell phone antennae installation.
Ya gotta remember that this “antique tower” is located in the environs of the Old Village, where, by definition, old antique icons tend to be acceptable and the new monopoles are not; as a matter of fact most, if not all of the recent cell towers and monopoles, have been met with resistance by nearby communities and usually are eventually approved with circuit court intervention “for the public good”.
The real question now is whether the current water tower is a dangerous threat to the area due to its condition, and, as usual, now we follow the money.
Does MPW take down the tower, if it is dangerous, and how much does that cost? Do we leave the tower in place and, if it still a viable structure, does MPW continually monitor its condition and continue with the cost of upkeep? These are fiduciary decisions to be made by MPW as part of their responsibilities and have nothing to do with the fact that it is currently being used for cell phone antennae or any potential monopole replacement, if the the tower is deemed dangerous and must be removed. MPW’s responsibility is all about the costs of two alternatives that have nothing to do with cell phones; tower removal, or tower renovation and continuing maintenance, and costs with income from the current cell tower users. If the letter writer is concerned with “money”, MPW should finalize and report on all of their “due diligence” efforts and publicly report the conclusions of these comparative studies and end this continuing drama that now apparently, according to the letter writer, has MPW in the cell tower business, and once again, adds to the drama that currently is Mount Pleasant on almost everything.
Response to ‘Carville commentary’
Facts are crucial to any responsible discussion and while facts are easily discernible by those who value them, they escaped Mike Schwartz’s “quote” (mis)attributed to James Carville. Schwartz’s disdain for the liberal philosophy is oft repeated in this newspaper, but this time I found it necessary to provide Schwartz with links that do not support the validity of his prefacing quote.
Your opinions are your own, Schwartz, but do not attempt to bolster them with fiction. You lose credibility.
Most mornings at first light I walk several miles of beach on Isle of Palms. This year as I dispose of trash and recyclables, the barrels are not overflowing. When the contractor in past years got around to finally doing his job almost as much trash was left on the ground as dumped. Our council has contracted with a company that honors a contract by dumping on a schedule and cleaning up around containers giving our residents and visitors a place to dispose of litter responsibly.
Thanks to our council we have a company that cares about our island and goes beyond what is required of this important job.
Isle of Palms