The House Judiciary Committee considered two important bills the other day. One was a travesty, hiding under the guise of criminal domestic conduct punishment. The other bill was nonsense, but the animal-lovers loved it, since it made cockfighting a felony.

            "Hmmmmmmmm," sez the ever-helpful, eternally incendiary, State Rep from District 66 (Orangeburg), Gilda Cobb-Hunter to herself, "I smell a chance for face time, here. The opposition owns the Judiciary committee and they just made fighting chickens a felony. AND they just dumped my spousal abuse bill. Oh I know, the bill is full of liberal nonsense, and I know there is a bill which will be submitted by someone else that will make wifebeating a felony and I know we've asked for stuff that won't hold up under scrutiny in the current bill, but I can send at least two or three bombshells over at the Republicans this way. And... It SOUNDS great!"

            And so she directs a local Columbia reporter to the story. At this point, it becomes murky. We don't know if the reporter was suggested to interview, or it was her own doing that she decided to talk to the most opinionated Republican in the House. It is relevant, but that's a fact we'll have to live without.

            In any case, our reporter winds up in the office of House Judiciary Committee pezzanovante, Rep. John Graham Altman (R-Charleston).

            Now, I have known John Graham for many, many moons - since I was a cub anchor/reporter for WCBD-TV-2 under the wonderful and, unfortunately late, Red Evans. Red loved Altman, because he would always say what he thought, regardless of whose ox got stabbed. He ALWAYS made a great story. You could set your clock by the number people he insensed as they exploded, one by one, during any given day.

            But John Graham Altman is no buffoon. His manner and his answers, if not carefully crafted, are targeted and meant to impress. He does not suffer fools lightly, either.

            So now, we must ask the unpopular question - did this young (at least to me) reporter understand that Altman would see right through the political statement that she asked as a question? And make no mistake about it, it was a political statement asked as a question - WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT, COCKFIGHTING LEGISLATION OR SPOUSAL ABUSE? She could have asked him, WHEN DID YOU STOP BEATING YOUR WIFE? - the famous lawschool question - if you say you never beat your wife, then you did something else - if you say you never stopped, then you are still beating her - if you say you're not married, then you might be a pervert - and on and on. If you say that cockfighting is more important, then spousal abuse is not. If you say spousal abuse is more important, then you don't care about poor little baby chicks. If neither is important, that's bad. And only one bill got out. And your critics are being listened to by the media.

            Now, let's be up front about this. John Graham Altman of Charleston was not tactful with the young and attractive reporter. He could have patiently taken her through a maze of "feelgoodspeak" and left her with the impression that she was the wisest and wittiest reporter in town. He could have tactfully explained, at length, the tortuous stupidity of passing a spousal abuse law that will most certainly be whacked down by our sensible state supreme court, since it was filled with civil rights violations. He could have even told her that another, better bill was about to be profered in place of the very bad spousal abuse law. He could have. But that's not what John Graham Altman of Charleston does.

            Instead, John Graham sighed, drew a breath, and blasted away.

            It was rude. It certainly was not what she was expecting (although I must assert that the lady representative from O'burg probably knew it would happen). It might have not been a lot of things, but it was not thoughtless.

            At some point, everyone gets tired of dumb questions. The question in question was insulting and very poorly researched. Altman could have struck a better blow for civil rights and still shot down the offending question.

            What is most evident is that the young and attractive reporter simply did not do her homework. Had she done so, she would have known that John Graham Altman was unpopular, at one time in the Lowcountry, because he pushed hard for the civil rights of everyday citizens of color. She would have found out that at one time, Altman was in that group of progressive Charleston Progressives, Armand Durfner, James Clyburn, Ray McClain, Bill Runyon, and Joe Riley. She would have also known not to ask such a leading question. No matter what you personally think of Altman, he is no dope.

            She could have said, "Look, Mr. Altman, you must admit that this looks bad - this juxtaposition of passing a cockfighting bill out of Judiciary and not moving on the Spousal Abuse bill sponsored by the Orangeburg Lady. What is it about the bill you folks in Judiciary didn't like?" Having asked similar questions of JGA, I can guarantee you that he would have answered her at length - if not politely, at least at length - and he definitely would not have insulted her in earnest - maybe as a joke - but not in earnest.

            So now, the nice Lady from Orangeburg has her hullabaloo (as opposed to her Laugh-In) and her face time on camera. We will still get that spousal abuse felony law, but it will be fair and civilly right. And Gamecocks will be protected. And after all the huffing and puffing settles down, sensible people will begin to ask important questions about the reporter's report about her "to-do" with John Graham Altman.

            And all will be well in the garden.