Hmmm. A fact based article that doesn't slant to the left like most Patch articles. What's going on over there???? One criticism, if there was a six member panel with three Republicans and three Democrats, then to say "the vote was a long party lines with Rep. Laurie Funderburk (D-Kershaw) the only dissenter." is a bit misleading. If, however, the panel had 5 Democrats and only 1 Republican, the comment would haven given a better picture.

But overall, this is a better article than I have come to expect from "Tthe Patch"; Keep it up.

Mr Tompkins, thanks for the note and your kind words about this article.

The six-member panel is made up of five Republicans and one Democrat, so to say the vote was split along party lines is absolutely correct (http://www.scstatehouse.gov/committee.php?chamber=H#eth).

If you have any questions or concerns or belief that any of our articles are "slanted," please let me know at chris.winston@patch.com or 803-319-7768.

I have the pleasure of working with our 12 outstanding editors in South Carolina and believe they do a tremendous job of rising above politics to get the news out to our readers.

Thanks for commenting, and please let us know how we can do better.

Chris Winston
Regional Editor for SC
Patch

I can't stand Haley and her Mafia. She is wrecking our state and happy to do so. Before she's through, we'll be a "business-friendly" polluted state with a poorer education system and insufficient state employees to support our state's necessary and often legislatively mandated functions. We'll rank nationally in the bottom of everything good and at the top of everything bad. We'll no longer be able to say "Thank God for Mississippi."

Thanks! Knowing the make-up of the panel makes the comment in question much clearer, at least for me. I am curious how I got to the Easley Patch when I was viewing this article on the West Ashley patch??? I would also like to add that the comment regarding a 5-1 vote was not in the article I read, but certainly clears it up.

As an aside, I am amazed that we would have an "ethics" commitee so tilted to one of the parties but as they both just play politics, in the end it wouldn't matter. It would still be "along party lines". Our current politicians are blind to the truth.

Thanks for your resopnse.

Oh, as for your comment about the "slant" of the Patch, I do not share your opinion. I feel the West Ashley Patch often "slants" things toward the left. And before you consider me a kook, I am usually in violent disagreement with both parties, though I am currently a registered Republican. (But a Libertarian on the inside, LOL). But I'll keep reading and thank you for the information!

Here is the article from the West Ashley Patch, just to demonstrate that I did not imagine the missing text:

http://westashley.patch.com/articles/haley-probe-would-be-public?ncid=newsltuspatc00000003

@Greg - See addendum re: panel composition. Thanks, Shawn

Mr. Tompkins, I'm not certain how you were directed to Easley Patch, but I'm very glad that you came to visit. I wrote the original story this morning, so the link must come back to my site automatically. But regardless of how you got here, I'm glad you have visited. We appreciate your comments. As Chris mentioned in his earlier post, I invite you to reach out to any of us if you feel an article is unfair.

Mr. Tompkins. I know the original posting did not have all of the information about the committee, as we were trying to get something up quick for our readers. We knew it was 5-1 along party lines, but we should have put the background information there immediately. Thanks for pointing that out.

Also, I fully understand if you think there are more stories about Democrats or liberals in the West Ashley Patch, as Charleston County has one of the most-active Democratic parties in the areas we cover (Pickens, Greenville, Lexington, Richland, Dorchester and Berkeley). While our bloggers and commenters and those featured in stories may be liberals or conservatives, we strive to put out as much useful information on all sides as possible (positive and negative).

But as Carolyn said, thanks so much for keeping us on our toes. And let me know any concerns you have.

Chris

We need to get our elected officials in Columbia to understand, the People of SC, elected Nikki Haley as our Governor and she won in a fair election.

Just because she is a woman in a male chauvinist State and a Republican who will not bow to the liberal way of thinking and holds true to her virtue and morals.

This does not give these low down dirty liars like John Rainey who makes up myths and then give him the right to keep spending our money (taxpayer’s money) by keeping our Governor tied up in Lawsuits that have been dismissed.

From the beginning, when she was elected, everyone who was for the other guy has put down Haley and still she is being harassed by, so-called republicans and of course by Mr. Dick the democrat cheerleader.

Either way this is not how SC is suppose to be as a State, it’s our policies that matter not peoples skin color or sex, but it seems even with more republicans in office they are voting as democrats or with them.

We will never get better or even our people out of poverty if we do not crack down on our own State Spending.

Per this story...

Most Stunning (If It Looks Like A Duck and Quacks Like A Duck, It Must Be Sarcasm): That the Republican Ethics Committee of the South Carolina House found Governor Haley "innocent"---which is not something she is often accused of being---of ethics violations committed during her brief tenure in the legislature. This in spite of documentary evidence (in specific, an email exchange between Ms. Haley and officials of the hospital in August, 2008) establishing that, while the House was considering a measure relative to Lexington Medical Center expanding its cardiac surgery services, Ms. Haley, who was being paid $110,000 by LMC to be a nominal fund-raiser---I use the modifier "nominal" because of complaints by LMC that she just wouldn't show up for work, which led to her being fired, which led to her hiring a trial lawyer (despite the fact that she constantly speaks in derogatory terms about trial lawyers) to work out a "separation agreement" that paid her for services not rendered and also excluded any mention that she might have been "fired" or "terminated"---was lobbying legislators for votes and keeping LMC administrators advised as to the votes "we have" and the fact that "we have much work to do." Had she not been a paid employee of the hospital, she would have simply been taking care of a constituent issue. But, given that she was a paid employee, this constitutes a textbook conflict-of-interest.

Per this story...

My Bad: In my first post, I mistakenly insinuated that Ms. Haley was only lobbying legislators per the LMC expansion issue. She was also lobbying SCDHEC board members for their approval of the expansion.

Most Surprising (If It Looks Like A Duck...It Must Be Sarcasm): That the House Ethics Committee is comprised of five Republicans and one Democrat. My goodness, the guys I play cards with---is penny poker still illegal?---would shoot somebody for stacking a deck like that! Could we get a seven-person committee with a 4-3 split? Better, why aren't allegations of ethics violations sent to the South Carolina Ethics Commission? When will we learn that there is an implied conflict-of-interest whenever the chambers engage in peer-review?

Most Disappointing: Reps. Gambrell and Brady. Mike Gambrell, whose integrity is beyond question, is one of the few true citizen/legislators left in South Carolina government---I admit to surprise, though the fact that the governor escaped via legal technicalities (i.e., that she claimed to have been employed by the LMC Foundation and not the hospital itself) may be reason enough for a different take on Mr. Gambrell's vote. Joan Brady has become increasingly partisan over the past couple of years, but I had hoped that remnants of her old independent streak still remained.

Most Wrong: The idea that the governor has been exonerated. The evidence is damning and committee members are not willing to refute it.

Per this story...

Most Hilarious: One reply to this story accuses The Patch of having a "slant to the left." Are you joking? Have you not noticed that Karen Floyd---ubiquitous self-promoter and right-wing political wannabe---and her, uh, Palladian View have a weekly space in every South Carolina edition of The Patch?

Most Ridiculous: One reply to this story seems to imply that, because "the People of SC...elected Nikki Haley as our Governor and she won in a fair election," she is not accountable for past indiscretions, whatever their nature. She is not being held accountable because she is a woman but because she is, as John Rainey says, "the most corrupt" governor in South Carolina history.

Second Most Ridiculous: One reply to this story references John Rainey as a "low down dirty liar(s)...who makes up myths..." John Rainey is a widely-respected Republican official who made his bones in South Carolina government service. Unlike the governor, he is not a liar (cf. the governor's conflicted explanation of the Darla Moore fiasco, et al) "who makes up myths" (cf. the made-up story in the governor's book per her car being parked next to Governor Sanford's at the airport, etc.). Indeed, Ms. Haley's cohorts have yet to respond substantively to his charges.

Best Line: One reply to this story states that "before [Ms. Haley] is through...we'll no longer be able to say 'Thank God for Mississippi.'" Outstanding! My buddies in Oxford hope you're right!