PDA

View Full Version : Senate Candidate in SC - What Are The Voters Thinking?


Richard
07-23-2010, 05:46
Alvin Greene - running for the US Senate in SC - gets QMP'd from the USAF, then manages to join the ARNG and US Army, and is now a candidate for the US Senate after winning the SC primary against a former judge.

I think it bothers me less that someone like this can run for public office than the idea that they may get elected by the voters - but he does meet the minimum qualifications for a Senator as set forth under Art. 1 Sec. 3 in the Constitution.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

Richard :munchin

Records Show Greene's Military Flops
AP, 22 July 2010

Surprise U.S. Senate nominee Alvin Greene frequently mentions his 13 years of military service, but records obtained Thursday by The Associated Press show that the veteran who has called himself an "American hero" was considered a lackluster service member at best.

The records, which document his superiors' decisions to pass over Greene for promotion, cite mistakes as severe as improperly uploading sensitive intelligence information to a military server, and as basic as an overall inability to clearly express his thoughts and perform basic tasks.

Greene, 32, won a surprise victory in the June 8 Democratic primary. Greene handily defeated Vic Rawl, a former lawmaker and judge who had been considered an easy win by the party establishment.

Up to that point, Greene had done no visible campaigning and had no website, fundraising or staff.

In the weeks since, Greene has given a series of awkward interviews to reporters clamoring for more information on the unemployed man who lives in Manning with his ailing father. In one interview, he suggested that the state's economy could be improved by making and selling action figures depicting him in his uniform. On Sunday, Greene gave his first public speech, a 6 1/2-minute recitation of his previous comments and commitment to jobs and education. He now has a website and says he has raised less than $1,000.

Greene has often mentioned his military service, saying he first came up with the idea to seek political office while serving in Korea. But the veteran has also refused to go into detail about his service, merely saying he won numerous decorations and left the military honorably but involuntarily.

At his home in Manning on Thursday, Greene told an AP reporter who reviewed the documents with him that the evaluations show he was discriminated against by military supervisors but he did not explain what that meant.

"I'm telling you who they promote: the terrorists and the communists," said Greene, wearing a blue U.S. Air Force T-shirt. "This is why we need to overhaul the military and get these people out."

The records obtained by AP only reveal a small slice of Greene's service record, his three years with the U.S. Air Force. After serving in junior ROTC in high school, Greene entered the Air National Guard in 1995, serving there until 2002.

In July of that year, he entered the Air Force, serving first as an intelligence librarian responsible for analyzing reports and briefings at Shaw Air Force Base near Sumter.

In a performance report two years later, Greene received adequate marks for performing tasks assigned to him, complying with standards and training requirements. But Greene's reviewer marked him as an ineffective leader who lacked organization and was "unable to express thoughts clearly."

Greene is "usually capable of handling mundane tasks with supervision" but is "not able to adapt to any changes to daily routine," the reviewer wrote, also noting that Greene had received multiple disciplinary actions for failing to perform his duties.

Greene was also written up for posting sensitive information on a military Internet server, a mistake that resulted in a three-day work stoppage. Records showed Greene was kept at Shaw while the rest of his unit deployed after leadership "recognized his inability to contribute to the wartime mission."

Greene protested the denial, writing that the reviewer "only concentrates on presenting a negative perception of me by making false statements of my character" and saying the reviewer and other airmen "create a hostile work environment."

A year later, Greene was evaluated again, this time in his new job as an analyst working with the weapons of mass destruction section. But Greene's job had little to do with intelligence analysis and more to do with shredding documents and escorting contractors around the base.

Again receiving low marks for ineffective leadership, Greene also was rated as not knowing much about his duties or performing them effectively and not complying with minimum training requirements.

The reviewer also wrote Greene "required a daily to-do list" to perform basic duties and had a "consistent inability to follow instructions or maintain basic job knowledge." Most seriously, the reviewer wrote that Greene would represent "a threat to others" because of his inability to grasp the basics of military training.

In additional comments, the reviewer said she would not recommend Greene for promotion but did note his community service work and fundraising efforts for a holiday party. "While Alvin is a decent person, he lacks the basic skills necessary for promotion," the summary said.

Greene also objected to that appraisal, writing that corruption to his computer "can often make it impossible for me to accomplish tasks in a timely fashion" and said another airman "cursed me out and told me I am wanted out."

Six months after that evaluation, Greene was honorably discharged from the Air Force. A year later, he joined the Army National Guard, in which he served about six months before joining the U.S. Army. :confused:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100723/ap_on_el_se/us_us_senate_sc

Nucleusbrains
07-23-2010, 06:06
Never ceases to amaze me the level of ignorance within political figures.:boohoo

Ret10Echo
07-23-2010, 07:24
Richard,
I would not be surprised by voters who select a candidate NOT for what he/she is or does but because of who he/she is NOT. We will continue to suffer this sort of mindset for the foreseeable future as America continues to grow less intelligent yet more "connected".

R10

Utah Bob
07-23-2010, 09:35
I watched his first speech the other day. He's completely brain dead.
Even after his ridiculous performance people in the audience said they'd vote for him.
Reminded me of the movie "Idiocracy".:confused:

jw74
07-23-2010, 12:51
An unqualified senate candidate :eek:What next...an Incompetent president?! Oh wait..:rolleyes:

Richard
07-23-2010, 13:07
What next...an Incompetent president?!

The general agreemnt among Presidential historians is that began about 173 years ago with the election of Martin Van Buren to the Presidency. ;)

Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be, is it. ;)

Richard :munchin

Peregrino
07-23-2010, 13:56
A people will have the government they deserve.

Defender968
07-23-2010, 16:23
What amazes me is that he got these marks in the AF, which by far and large gives anyone with a pulse a firewall 5 on their EPR unless they are a complete window licker...and you have plenty of documentation to prove it...and then they usually just get a 4 with basic comments....given the comments on his EPRs, and speeches thus far....the words O2 thief come to mind as a more adequate description.

As for getting elected, I understand and agree with for the most part the fervor to not re-elect any incumbent....however it is still SC and a GOOD dim has about as much a chance to get of getting elected in SC as a pig does at walking on the moon....and this guy doesn't strike me as a good anything.

Utah Bob
07-23-2010, 16:26
And then there are those pending felony charges against him........:rolleyes:

Utah Bob
07-23-2010, 16:29
Heeeeeeere's Alvin!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSJ6P1gS4Ys

His words of wisdom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HzQ59rLm6U&feature=related)

Green Light
07-23-2010, 19:24
Here's a couple of possible answers (at least opinions):

http://townhall.com/columnists/HarryRJacksonJr/2010/06/21/a_greene_victory_in_south_carolina

"Al Greene’s victory in South Carolina has puzzled everyone - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. When I first heard of the victory of the unemployed veteran, I immediately remarked to my wife that name recognition of the Rev. Al Greene had been a factor. More specifically, it reminded me of a1992 comedy starring Eddie Murphy entitled, “The Distinguished Gentleman.” The movie featured a black con man named Thomas Jefferson Johnson who decided to shorten his name to Jeff Johnson in order to purposely confuse voters into thinking he was a dead congressman."

http://www.themonkeycage.org/2010/06/did_alvin_greene_win_because_o.html

"And I’m not sure that the potential ballot order effect is implausibly large. Assume for the moment that voters were essentially choosing at random between the candidates. That would imply a 50-50 outcome. The actual outcome was 58-41, which only implies that 8-9% of voters were influenced by ballot margin.

Another question is whether there was any information on the ballot that might have cued voters to choose Greene over Rawl. I wondered whether SC voters might have inferred the candidates’ racial background from the names of the candidates. I looked to see whether there was any relationship between Green’s percent of the vote in each county (data here) and the percent black in that county from the 2000 Census. There is a modest positive relationship, although it is not statistically significant. Ecological inference problems make this analysis suggestive at best, but I don’t see much happening." (Scatter chart below)

Who the heck knows? It's a sorry state of affairs when someone runs for the Senate (essentially) unopposed. Demint is going to return to the Senate, which may or may not be good. There's nothing worse than a one-party state. If there's no political competition, there's no reason for the incumbent to take the people seriously.