Comments on: The company Clyburn keeps http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/ REINVENTING THE S.C. POLITICAL SCENE Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:09:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Rob W. http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/#comment-82000 Rob W. Tue, 20 May 2008 18:31:53 +0000 http://www.palmettoscoop.com/?p=1846#comment-82000 Roy G Biv- I entirely accept your premise that hiring a convicted felon bribe-taker is different than hiring someone who's been accused/ indicted for wiretapping, and I appreciate you giving me the chance to better explain myself. If we had to choose between the two, of course we'd want the alleged wiretapper instead of a guy who takes bribes. However, two circumstances that make these two hiring decisions about equal, at least in my mind: 1. Matricardi, when he was hired, had admitted to committing the act he was indicted for (he said it was legal for him because of the Freedom of Information Act, which sounds crazy to my non-lawyer mind). This takes a bit of the punch out of the argument that "we don't even know if he committed the crime"; he was an admitted wiretapper, not an alleged one. The courts just had to figure out if he had the right to weasel out of the consequences (it turned out, he could weasel out of the state but not the federal charges). 2. Matricardi wasn't hired as a low-level constituent service staffer, but as the Executive Director of the SCRP. Who you appoint as your leader says a lot about you; that person is supposed to be "above reproach", and should set an example for the entire organization. I've never met Mr. Matricardi and this story is all I know about him, so he might be a very responsible and honorable man. But if you hire someone with his history, it's telling everyone your party isn't concerned with following the law. Hiring someone as a foot soldier, however, doesn't send the same message; it just says you're willing to give an ex-con a menial but important job as a small part of your organization. The "culture of corruption" charge the Dems used in '06 was able to stick not because low-level staffers had criminal backgrounds, but because the leadership (both official and unofficial) of the Republican Party contained people who appeared to have a disregard for the law. Of course Democrats have the same problem in their party (or they will if they are in power long enough); but junior staffers aren't the problem. Politically, at least, the leadership is the problem. Roy G Biv- I entirely accept your premise that hiring a convicted felon bribe-taker is different than hiring someone who’s been accused/ indicted for wiretapping, and I appreciate you giving me the chance to better explain myself. If we had to choose between the two, of course we’d want the alleged wiretapper instead of a guy who takes bribes. However, two circumstances that make these two hiring decisions about equal, at least in my mind:

1. Matricardi, when he was hired, had admitted to committing the act he was indicted for (he said it was legal for him because of the Freedom of Information Act, which sounds crazy to my non-lawyer mind). This takes a bit of the punch out of the argument that “we don’t even know if he committed the crime”; he was an admitted wiretapper, not an alleged one. The courts just had to figure out if he had the right to weasel out of the consequences (it turned out, he could weasel out of the state but not the federal charges).

2. Matricardi wasn’t hired as a low-level constituent service staffer, but as the Executive Director of the SCRP. Who you appoint as your leader says a lot about you; that person is supposed to be “above reproach”, and should set an example for the entire organization. I’ve never met Mr. Matricardi and this story is all I know about him, so he might be a very responsible and honorable man. But if you hire someone with his history, it’s telling everyone your party isn’t concerned with following the law. Hiring someone as a foot soldier, however, doesn’t send the same message; it just says you’re willing to give an ex-con a menial but important job as a small part of your organization.

The “culture of corruption” charge the Dems used in ‘06 was able to stick not because low-level staffers had criminal backgrounds, but because the leadership (both official and unofficial) of the Republican Party contained people who appeared to have a disregard for the law. Of course Democrats have the same problem in their party (or they will if they are in power long enough); but junior staffers aren’t the problem. Politically, at least, the leadership is the problem.

]]> By: Sandhill http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/#comment-77839 Sandhill Sat, 17 May 2008 00:52:32 +0000 http://www.palmettoscoop.com/?p=1846#comment-77839 As if people needed another reason to suspect that members of congress are all corrupt. As if people needed another reason to suspect that members of congress are all corrupt.

]]> By: Roy G. Biv http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/#comment-77753 Roy G. Biv Fri, 16 May 2008 22:54:22 +0000 http://www.palmettoscoop.com/?p=1846#comment-77753 Wait a minute....Clyburn hires a convicted felon who took a $50,000 bribe as a government official. And Rob W. sees the SCRP's hiring of someone under investigation as morally equivalent? Hogwash. That is all. Wait a minute….Clyburn hires a convicted felon who took a $50,000 bribe as a government official. And Rob W. sees the SCRP’s hiring of someone under investigation as morally equivalent?

Hogwash.

That is all.

]]> By: The 7-10: Anthony Palmer http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/#comment-77562 The 7-10: Anthony Palmer Fri, 16 May 2008 19:52:17 +0000 http://www.palmettoscoop.com/?p=1846#comment-77562 I don't think Clyburn is invincible, but I do think he is too politically intimidating to draw a credible challenger. I don’t think Clyburn is invincible, but I do think he is too politically intimidating to draw a credible challenger.

]]> By: loulou http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/#comment-77483 loulou Fri, 16 May 2008 18:38:38 +0000 http://www.palmettoscoop.com/?p=1846#comment-77483 At least forewarned is forearmed unlike some of the public officials out there with things like this subject to come forward at any given time. Many of our public officials are involved in bribes and extortion. Keep watching the news people.......... At least forewarned is forearmed unlike some of the public officials out there with things like this subject to come forward at any given time. Many of our public officials are involved in bribes and extortion. Keep watching the news people……….

]]> By: Rob W. http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/05/16/the-company-clyburn-keeps/#comment-77316 Rob W. Fri, 16 May 2008 16:58:47 +0000 http://www.palmettoscoop.com/?p=1846#comment-77316 It's one thing to hire an ex-con to do some constituent service for you; it's quite another to hire someone as your Executive Director while he's awaiting trial, which is what the SC GOP did in 2002/2003 with Edmund Matricardi. The Republican Party appointed him to the very important sounding title AFTER he had been indicted on state charges for wiretapping and listening in to a Democratic conference call; although the state charges were eventually dropped, Mr. Matricardi ended up pleading guilty to the same offense on the federal level. Link (from before he fessed up): http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9501E7DB1639F937A15752C0A9659C8B63&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Insert comment here about a glass house and stones, or a pot and kettle, etc. Clyburn, by the way, is bulletproof both in and outside of his head; he got 64% of the vote in '06, so he's pretty safe unless it comes out that he personally is a crook (which he's not). Even then he might not have too much trouble. It’s one thing to hire an ex-con to do some constituent service for you; it’s quite another to hire someone as your Executive Director while he’s awaiting trial, which is what the SC GOP did in 2002/2003 with Edmund Matricardi. The Republican Party appointed him to the very important sounding title AFTER he had been indicted on state charges for wiretapping and listening in to a Democratic conference call; although the state charges were eventually dropped, Mr. Matricardi ended up pleading guilty to the same offense on the federal level. Link (from before he fessed up): http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9501E7DB1639F937A15752C0A9659C8B63&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Insert comment here about a glass house and stones, or a pot and kettle, etc.

Clyburn, by the way, is bulletproof both in and outside of his head; he got 64% of the vote in ‘06, so he’s pretty safe unless it comes out that he personally is a crook (which he’s not). Even then he might not have too much trouble.

]]>