Sombody Isn’t Being Honest.

There’s a truth problem somewhere, and we honestly aren’t sure where it is.

Representative Bill Sandifer of Oconee states at the end of each of his recent news releases that, among other groups, he received the endorsement of the South Carolina Association of Taxpayers or SCAT.

There’s just one problem with that. According to a SCAT executive member, the association’s bylaws prevent the group from making endorsements.

We know that Representative Sandifer signed the association’s “No-New Tax Pledge” about ten years ago, and that’s sufficient for him to continue receiving “Taxpayer Hero” news releases each election without challenge, but is a “Thank you” for signing a ten-year old pledge the same as an endorsement?

If it is, then SCAT is violating its bylaws. If it isn’t, then Representative Sandifer is being dishonest with his constituents.

What’s the truth? We’ll update you when we find out what it is.

Sandifer Claims Endorsement from State Leaders

Representative Bill Sandifer of Oconee County recently sent a news release claiming that “South Carolina leaders” endorsed him.

He’s right. That is true, but just like any statistic, there is more to the story.

SC House District 2 is a demographic mix of local residents in the Seneca area and of relocated northerners around Lake Keowee.

The Seneca side seems to trend toward both fiscal and social conservative leanings, while the lake residents seem to be more concerned with more of a fiscally conservative and socially moderate philosophy.

With that said, knowing that your voters are concerned with financial issues, wouldn’t you want to paint yourself first and foremost with those concerned with fiscal effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability? Of course you would.

Adding the support of constitutional officers, fellow House members, and various private groups would seem to give you some measure of legitimacy and credibility, but is there more than meets the eye? There always is.

The state treasurer endorsed representative Sandifer. OK. The state treasurer was elected from the House by the legislature (really the house since the 124 members of the House will trump the 46 votes in the Senate just by math, alone) in the summer of 2007 when the state treasurer found himself in legal trouble over a personal bout with cocaine. Thomas Ravenel’s legislatively elected successor was seen as the anti-conservative and creating a new majority on the state’s all-powerful Budget and Control Board that would open the state’s wallet with a spending rampage instead of fiscal restraint shown by Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom and Governor Mark Sanford. For his personal failings, Thomas Ravenel was a fiscal conservative.

Representative Sandifer was also endorsed by big business and a number of PACs. The big business endorsement is actually surprising since his support of tax swaps will, for the next several years, place the majority of the property tax burden on South Carolina’s businesses. That will be the case until around 2010 when residential property owners will see their property tax savings disappear because Representative Sandifer and his colleagues did not enact spending limits to fix the holes they left in property tax reform.

Speaking of colleagues, several of his colleagues in the legislature supported him. Of course they did. Why does he feel the need to brag about it. An even bigger story would be if the guy that sits next to you decided to support the challenger instead.

Self-preservation is a given among these folks, and this year they feel it’s extremely important to stick together.

Incumbent legislators know that with state government growing by 41% over three years, $1.5 billion in reserve funds spent in the same period, a more than $200 million deficit for the upcoming year, there is discontent among South Carolina’s voters.

Bill Sandifer is among the incumbents who during the last week continuously voted to override the majority of Governor Sanford’s 69 vetoes amounting to $72 million, and he still tries to wrap himself in a blanket of financial responsibility.

That’s the truth.

More “Truth” from the Be(er) Holder.

Truth seems to be becoming more subjective as we get closer to the June 10 primary.

That other truth group we mentioned continues confusing fact and fiction. Last time they said the mailer came from a campaign instead of an outside group. They were wrong.

Now they claim that the mailer above came from an outside group when, in fact, it came from candidate Ken Roach’s campaign.

Unless a blind person is doing the group’s research, there is no excuse for these types of false accusations. Just look at who paid for the mailer (upper left corner of the piece). It’s not that hard.

That’s the truth.

What Trumps the Race Card? Try the Truth.

South Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice Don Beatty, who had his voting record brought in to question during his election process last year, has now gone on the offensive.

In an article that appeared in yesterday’s Spartanburg Herald-Journal (See: http://goupstate.com/article/20080605/NEWS/806050362/1051/NEWS01), Justice Beatty claims that his skin color is the basis of a mailpiece that a group called Conservatives in Action sent throughout Representative Bob Walker’s district.

According to the article, referring to the groups Conservatives in Action, South Carolinians for Responsible Government, and the South Carolina Club for Growth, Justice Beatty added that, “I’ve heard them referred to on more than one occasion as the new face of the (Ku Klux) Klan. I’m almost about to believe that.”

As with the previous post, our crack research staff looked at the mailpiece in question in an attempt to verify the justice’s claim that the mailpiece was indeed race-based. You can, too. Just click on the images above.

According to a thorough visual analysis, there is no photograph of Justice Beatty and no mention of his skin color. In fact, the only mentions of gender are there to substitute the proper names of Justice Beatty and Representative Walker.

The piece claims that Representative Walker supported a judge with a liberal voting record as a member of the SC House of Representatives and then cites issues such as abortion, gun ownership rights, and taxation/spending where the group disagrees with Justice Beatty’s recorded positions.

Did we mention there is no photo of the justice or mention of his skin color?

The two men served together in the SC House as members of the Spartanburg County Legislative Delegation until Justice Beatty was elected to the Circuit Court of the Seventh Judicial Circuit in August 1995, and Representative Walker is facing a serious challenge by political newcomer Joey Millwood.

That’s the truth.

Truth is in the Eye of the Be(er) Holder.

There is truth. There is perception. There is a lie.

Another “truth” group (that exists because a certain political consultant’s incumbent clients are facing serious challengers) now claims that candidates are responsible for mailpieces and advertisements they clearly are not.

For example, the group claims that the mailpiece above is coming directly from Trey Whitehurst — the challenger in a race we unexpectedly commented on most of our short time on the web.

Take a closer look.

The mailpiece plainly states that it was paid for by South Carolinians for Responsible Government.

So it seems that the other “truth” group either lied or sees truth through beer goggles. Either way it didn’t take much research to discover the hole in the group’s claim. By research, we just looked in the upper left-hand corner.

That’s the truth.