June 29, 2007

(South Carolina) - Now that the air has cleared a little, and the 24 hour news cycle has moved on, there is the career of a very important South Carolinian which must be considered: Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Let's consider the possibility that Lindsey is not the big bugaboo that some people think he is.

• As an Upstate congressman, he was instrumental in bringing sensibility and exactitude to the Clinton impeachment fiasco.
• He is a veteran of the 1^st Gulf War.
• His intellect is legend among jurists in both civilian and military courts.
• He has been a strong voice in the termination of the viciously stupid practice of late term abortion.
• The concept of Federal Grants is odious, but as long as they exist, we should get some of our money back, and he, along with Jim DeMint, has been in the forefront of our reimbursement.
• He believes that education IS infrastructure, along with roads, ports, and a strong standing army.
• He has been a leader in promulgating all forms of energy to diminish dependency on foreign sources.
• He is a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment, even to the point of helping to pass a law shielding gun manufacturers from civil liability in gun misuse.
• He is a leader in the support for homeland security and its legal basis.
• While supporting any technology that helps the state, he has also balanced that with sensible conservation legislation (few people remember that South Carolina was the first state ever to practice replanting of pine trees and promulgating hardwood tree planting through private industry and garden clubs, and then other conservation efforts through Clemson College)
• He has always been a big supporter of Welfare reform - recognizing the necessity to help the least among us, but not to the detriment of the public coffers.

It may, in fact, be the reason so many people are disheartened by his recent actions. Did he really think the Progressives would keep their word and enforce the punitive portions of the bill? Did he not see the impossibility of the sheer weight and complexity of the proposed changes?

I believe that he did not recognize the Machiavellian trap that was being placed for him. First, the Progs used the prize-on-a-string trick - saying this would be a great way to get W's immigration goals achieved. The the "prize" is jerked a little - not so much as you'd notice the string, but enough to put it just a little out of reach. Each concession is tiny, almost unnoticeable, but it moves the prize a little further.

Remember, it was HIS amendment, at the end, that caused the Progs to bolt from the final procedural vote, killing the bill. It seems that this was his way of saying to the Dem tricksters that he had trusted them and they had left him out to dry. He was forcing the Progs to either commit to his ideal of enforcement first - which he had always maintained - or lose their gambit.

As this publication had maintained since the beginning, we agree with Sen.Graham on almost everything else. We know he is a man of principle. What worries us at this juncture is that, to begin with, he trusted the Progs to do what they said. Did he not see that in any case they win? By supporting their bill, which really was not what W wanted, but was close - he thought (it wasn't) - he infuriated his constituents, he would be voted out, and they gain power. If the bill passed, they would get even more power by having 20 million new voters, almost all voting for Dems, and they would gain power. If it failed, well, they can still count on Republican disgruntlement. And they gain power. Machiavellian.

And when they won, he lost. Even when they lost, they won, and he lost. And he could not see that. Or if he did see it, he ignored it.

So do we turn him out for trusting Dems? He DOES believe in enforcement first. He does want to legally help our farmers by making migrant field hands available for picking. He DOESN'T believe in giving away our money in Dumb Dem socialist giveaway vote-buying schemes. He DOES want to protect our borders.

I say this: If Sen. Lindsey Graham comes out publicly and admits his error and promises NEVER, EVER to trust Progs again for ANY reason, that we should give him a second chance.

I admit that I do not know him as well as I know Jim DeMint. Jim is our very best hope for smaller, less intrusive government. But Lindsey can be a good friend to the Palmetto State, too. He has been in the past and can be again.

(2008 - He did renounce his trust of the Progs and has learned the important lesson. I still don't know him any better, and, if the truth be known, his PR people haven't done anything to improve that situation. But I'm just vain enough to think I know good when I see it, and the Senator seems to me more than good on many, many levels. South Carolina does not NEED any person. But we, as a state, can surely use a man like Lindsey Graham.)

- Dick Anderson