E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The South Carolina Democratic Party announced its executive committee will hold a public hearing tomorrow afternoon on the Senate primary that propelled political unknown Alvin Greene into the national spotlight.
The losing primary candidate, Vic Rawl, a former judge and Charleston County council member, filed a protest. The committee can call for a taxpayer-funded do-over primary, overturn the result if there is sufficient evidence of error, or simply declare Greene the legitimate winner. Rawl and Greene are given the opportunity to present their case to the party.
Leave a Comment:
A good start at finding the 'error' would be to nail down exactly where an unemployed ex-vet who's up on felony porn charges managed to 'scrape together' $10,400.00? After he told the judge earlier that he was indigent and needed a court appointed attorney.
No?
Wait what AM I thinking this is SC after all...
But can/will the committee do an investigation to determine what happened with regard to Greene's decision to run and where he obtained the necessary fees?
Why are people questioning this Greene guy's creds? Because he's inarticulate? Slow acting? 'Not all there' acting? Hell, Bush made President, didn't he??
Smile - you have a point there drive-by. But remember, GW had the Bush name behind him. I don't think we can say that the name Greene has been associated with a well-known family political dynasty.
Until now. ;)
How true Anna Molly. Frankly, I respect the guy a bit. It would seem that there would be a heck of a lot more info on this guy by now the way the media digs deep into people's lives, past and history. If he can keep the media at bay in this regard he may be just the type of representative folks in SC need. Someone who says very little, only speaks when he has something to say, gives short and often uninformative responses to questions, and the rest of the time keeps his mouth shut.
A vote for Greene is a vote for privacy and silence.
LoLoL I've known you a while, but I confess to being mystified as to which way you want that comment to be read. So I think silence may well be my best defense. Now THERE'S a surprise, I'll bet.
Let's just say my comment about Greene most likely escaped from that passive-agressive part of me who would agree to give Sarah Palin a shot at President just to see how ridiulous it would all turn out. And to be able to tell those Palin supporters, we told you so. ;)
They need to overturn the result. There is sufficient evidence of error. How could Greene have more votes than there are people in not only once precinct but in 25 precincts?!
Delaware resident
Same way Al Franken did in Minnesota...it's a group formerly known as ACORN.
Hey! Greene won! This says more about the SC Democrats than anything.
True, that. And begs the question why none of these questions came up BEFORE the election.
Having touch screen voting machines with no paper trail is suspect. I hope that the machines are checked prior to any "major" voting by the electorate.
Mr Greene sure looked like he was not quite with it on Keith O's interview. But it could be that his lawyer was signaling him what to say since the lawyer was just off camera.
Anyone who can watch an hour of Keith Olbermann's show is "not quite with it" either. A wasted hour out of your life that you'll never get back....
Greene states he paid for the filing fee out of his own pocket, and has raised no funds, so he did not have to file a campaign statement.
If no proof can be presented to show otherwise then there is no legitimate reason to remove Mr. Green from the ballot.
They can not use his arrest to remove Mr. Greene from the ballot, he has not been convicted of anything, and even if he were such a conviction can not be used to remove Green from the ballot. If he is convicted then the senate could refuse to set him, but looking at porn on a computer is far less of a offense than say drownding someone in your car like ted kennedy or being the grand cyclopes of the kkk like robert byrd, and they served decades in the senate after their transgressions.
because the SC Dems. do not like the result of their primary is not an excuse to remove Mr. Greene from the ballot. Sour grapes is all this is. The election has been certified and Mr. Greene won. To deny him the ballot would give Mr. Greene a very good civil rights case vs the SC dems, and he could probably go to federal court to enjoin any such action.
Mr Greene has not been convicted of anything...on the other hand, Rep Alcee Hastings (D-FL) has been...as was former Washington DC mayor Marion Berry (DC is supervised by the House)....A reasonable guess would be that the Democrats are behind this foolishness just to stir things up politically in a race where they don't have a chance in hell....Republicans don't really care who the Dems pick to run against Demint because they cannot win...so why go to the trouble of nominating Al Greene ? Rawl would lose just as badly as Greene surely will...
Kieth O. and Robert R., you win..you are now both moved up into "THE WHO CAN BE THE DUMBEST PUNDIT CATEGORY ". You are R.R. THE DUMBEST HUMAN BEING ON THE PLANET award winner. Just think about it...330 mil Americans all with an idea..how do you deal with it.. ignor 99.5% of the STFU idiots ..fire .3..slap .1 and listen to .1...duh. Bendy straws for all...luff