Super Size SC.
July 25, 2008
In 2004, documentarian Morgan Spurlock showed America what happens when we survive on 30 days and 30 nights of nothing but McDonald’s fast food in his film Super Size Me.
It’s a caloric binge that sounds great in the beginning, but after a while, after the gorging and adding the extra weight, we say to ourselves, “This isn’t healthy.”
Spurlock’s Super Size Me can also be viewed as an unintended metaphor for South Carolina’s government spending problem. The state’s politicians may have thought that binging on taxpayer dollars was a good idea, but as we watch state government grow faster than we can pay for it, we now say to ourselves, “This isn’t healthy.”
If you don’t know about the movie, you can watch it HERE (completely legally) for your infotainment.
It’s time for South Carolina can go on a fiscal diet.
– Mary Claire Forrester
Entry Filed under: Mary Claire Forrester -- The Lone Girl of the Group. Tags: Government Spending, Morgan Spurlock, Super Size Me.
2 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1. Palmetto Links - 07.25.08 : Wesley Donehue | July 25, 2008 at 8:07 am
[...] Brooks Brothers | Super Size SC. [...]
2.
Nathan | July 25, 2008 at 10:28 pm
MCF – watch the veto votes again next year. We might (might) see improvement.
Several of us were pleasantly surprised this year when the first 3 vetoes (after Capital Reserve) were all sustained. Unfortunately, that brief taxpayer victory got quickly squashed when a “time out” was called so members could go home…only to have a weeekend of arm twisting occur to put things back to “business as usual” when we returned the next week.
Sadly, I think some of those veto votes will, once again, be “held against’ some members. Until the numbers improve – it’ll always an uphill battle to save even a “little bit” (relatively speaking) of the taxpayer’s money. And unfortunately, those that try often are “penalized” for it later on.
Hopefully, the votes to sustain will be larger next year with over 20 new members coming to the House. Who knows? Hopefully, next year we won’t keep revisiting every vote that was sustained only to have them ultimately overturned.
One particular veto of note: the Hunley veto for “security”.
I wish Gov. Sanford would not veto this because (I know, can you believe I’m saying that? But follow me here…) Here’s how it usually shakes out….that veto is usually sustained,the FIRST time…then members know the drill…..if they agree to go back and overturn it, they might can assure some of their favorite vetoes get overturned too.
Seriously, ask anyone. As soon as we sustain “the Hunley”, the House suddenly has “visitors” in our chamber…then…..later in the day, the veto is reconsidered and always gets overturned….of course, after discussions to make sure other vetoes get the “attention they deserve”.
Enjoy the site. Keep on keeping on.
Nathan
http://www.nathansnews.com