I was visiting our widening project on U.S. Route 521 and the view was just too good to pass up.
Enjoy the pictures.
Oh yeah, don't forget to vote in today's Republican Run-Off elections (if you're a Republican).
All good things must come to an end, including the chance to post lascivious photographs and diary entries on the Internet without repercussions. A generation that has come of age with blogging, Webcams and social networking sites is waking up to the fact that would-be employers are looking over their shoulders — and adjusting their job offers.If you're concerned about being "found out", you should be. If you're not concerned, think again.
Alan Finder reported in The Times last week that companies have moved from putting applicants' names through Google to checking sites like Facebook and MySpace. There are ethical concerns about corporate officers snooping through registration-only sites designed for students. But the first order of business is for the indiscreet to think twice.
Every generation has its shrinking violets, and plenty of high school and college students still comport themselves with dignity and decorum, but the standards of decency in public behavior have surely changed. Between reality television shows like "The Real World," and "Girls Gone Wild" videos, our culture has sent the message that acting stupid in front of a camera is a way to get attention or even start a career in show business. Many young people think nothing of posting intimate material on the Web, whether it's daily minutiae, personal poems or snapshots of a fraternity beer pong tournament.
What they are getting now is an education in the virtues of privacy.
The Internet feels private in certain ways that it isn't. Sharing posts with friends, fellow hobbyists or potential dates, a user could be forgiven for overlooking the possibility that a human resources executive might be zeroing in as well. So much attention has been focused on sexual predators and swindlers that it's easy to forget that businesses and the government want to retain the right to peruse our correspondence as well.
A recent survey found that more than a third of large American companies read their employees' outbound e-mail, and just under a third fired someone as a result. We are only just beginning to wake up to the wider ramifications of the Internet on the personal and the confidential. In the meantime, don't leave a digital trail. That photograph from your friend's party could be more than just embarrassing. It might cost you your dream job.
Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel rose with an impassioned defense that seemed even to surprise the president.
"I think it's grotesque to say that America is a threat to the peace in the world compared with North Korea, Iran, a lot of countries," Schuessel said. Europe would not enjoy peace and prosperity if not for U.S. help after World War II, he said.
"We should be fair from the other side of the Atlantic," Schuessel said. "We should understand what September 11th meant to the American people."
Got this news today about one of my co-workers at my company:
May he rest in peace.
Dear fellow employees:
U.S. Group, Inc. suddenly lost one of its own this weekend. John Roof, our lead mechanic at the shop, had a heart attack, and passed away on Sunday, June 18, 2006. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his co-workers, his family, and his friends. He will be greatly missed.
Visitation and Viewing will be held on Wednesday evening, June 21, 2006 from 7:00 PM until 8:00 PM, at Barron Funeral Home in Chester, South Carolina.
Graveside services will be held on Thursday, June 22, 2006 at 11:00 AM, at Evergreen Cemetery in Chester, South Carolina.
"O God of spirits and of all flesh, Who has trampled down Death and overthrown the Devil, and given life unto Your world, give, we beseech You, eternal rest to the soul of Your departed servant, in a place of brightness, in a place of verdure, in a place of repose, from whence all pain, sorrow, and sighing, have fled away.
Pardon, we beseech You, every transgression which may have been committed, whether by word or deed or thought. For there is no man who lives and does not commit a sin. You only are without sin, Your righteousness is everlasting, and Your word is the Truth.
For You are the Resurrection, and the Life, and the repose of Your departed servant, O Christ our God, and unto You we ascribe glory, together with eternal the Father, and Your Most Holy, and Good, and Life-giving Spirit, now and forever, and for ages to come." Amen
"May our gracious and merciful Lord, who rose from the dead, Christ, our True God, through the intercessions of His Holy Mother and of all the Saints, establish the soul of His departed servant in the mansions of the righteous; give rest in the bosom of Abraham, and number his soul among the just, and have mercy upon us and save us".
Eternal be Your memory.
This album was recorded in the Bahamas and was self-produced by AC/DC band members, which probably has much to do with the album's raw-edged sound. The hard guitar sound and raw and powerful vocals that are much of the classic AC/DC sound stand out prominently throughout the album.
My favorite tracks on this album are Flick of the Switch, Guns for Hire, and Rising Power. But there's not a single bad song on this album, so it's an album you don't want to miss. I promise you'll not be able to listen to this album on anything less than full blast!
I'm sorry he felt that way, but I have to admit that he had a point.
A number of these blogs, such as ones run by Mike Reese, Mike Reino, Lauren Manning, and Sunny Phillips and myself clearly identify who owns/publishes them. The ones who are most vicious in what they have to say, both blog publishers and comment posters, tend to be anonymous (is anyone surprised?). These attacks have included:
One reason I've hesitated to get into discussion of SC politics on my blog is because I didn't want to get drug through the mud, or have my blog used as an attack vehicle. Since I decided to test the waters, personal attacks, threats, and other childishness that had never been part of the discussion on my blog now pop up in the comments regularly. Some of them I approve, some I don't.
There is nothing wrong with speaking clearly on the issues, but if one is willing to make claims, they need to be able to stand behind them. People have more respect for those who make harsh claims and criticisms when they have the cojones to put their names to them. While some may have legitimate reasons for concealing their identity, others use anonymity as a weapon, not a shield, both as bloggers and posters on blogs.
Let's try to clean up our act.
Based on how media figures are tuning in and getting story leads and inputs from SC blogs that deal with politics, in part or whole, we have the potential to have some real influence out there, broaden the dialogue, and bring some valuable perspectives to the table that wouldn't have been included in the political process before. Those are good things - let's not let the rogues ruin them.
I'm really curious as to what you were referring to with this comment - "This has included the bizarre vetoing of a number of budget items that his office had requested."
Copyright 2005 The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC)
The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC)
May 22, 2005 Sunday FINAL
SECTION: SECTION A; Pg. 1ALENGTH: 768 words
HEADLINE: Statehouse veto dispute approaching critical mass
AH: Sanford cut $95.9M from budget passed by state Legislature
BYLINE: JOHN FRANK Of The Post and Courier
COLUMBIA--When Gov. Mark Sanford's veto pen met the proposed state budget last week, it slashed some of the governor's own spending recommendations, speared proposals to improve the state's top moneymaking industry and skewered a Senate leader.
Sanford might have used up his last credit with the GOP-dominated Legislature, and he left Charleston's Bobby Harrell bewildered.
"These vetoes make absolutely no sense," said Harrell, the House's lead budget writer.
GOP lawmakers have been reluctant to attack their party leader, but that could change this week. The House Republican Caucus is considering a public denunciation of some vetoes.
"The mistake last year is we went and did our job," said Harrell, referring to the quick override by the House of most of Sanford's vetoes. "This year, we realized we were dealing with a public relations machine, and the people needed to hear both sides."
Caught in the crossfire are dozens of projects and initiatives in the $5.8 billion budget aimed at helping South Carolinians.
Legislative budget writers say quality of life will suffer if the vetoes are sustained, while Sanford believes improving the state's fiscal footing by replenishing trust and reserve funds comes first.
He asked the Legislature to put the $95.9 million in vetoed appropriations toward those accounts.
Lawmakers responded that the governor can veto, but he can't appropriate funds.
In explaining his 163 vetoes, Sanford noted how he struck a number of pet projects in various lawmakers' home districts. But many vetoes would cut deeply into state agencies' operating money, lawmakers said.
More than 40 vetoes strike money for agencies' base budgets, and nearly 60 more would eliminate money for state colleges, Harrell said.
"In order to get to $95 million (Sanford) couldn't find enough pork in the budget to do it, so he had to make deep cuts into agency budgets," Harrell said. "He is striking at the heart of ... a host of agencies that are the core functions of government."
Sanford spokesman Will Folks, in turn, criticized budget writers for giving the Department of Social Services nonrecurring money for operating expenses. "They are not in a position to make that kind of comment," he said.
One veto would redirect $1.8 million from the Clemson extension offices that assist the state's agricultural industry. Officials told lawmakers most offices would have to close if the veto stands.
Another would cut nearly a half million dollars for family health centers that serve small communities. It would force those families and the state to pay more for health care, Harrell said.
By striking deferred maintenance items for state colleges, "it will end up costing the state more money" in the long run, he added. "As a fiscal conservative he should understand that."
Harrell and others are perplexed by Sanford's vetoes of at least 15 items he included in his own executive budget.
"What's up with that?" said Democratic Party Chairman Joe Erwin. "You are for something or you're not."
Sanford had various explanations in his veto message for cutting the money for these projects. Folks said it largely boiled down to the Legislature giving those agencies too much money in other areas."This has a lot to do with how the budget gets rolled up," Folks said. "You have to find something that represents that level of spending (to veto)."
Brian Hicks of The Post and Courier staff contributed to this report.John Frank covers state politics and the Legislature from Columbia. Contact him at email@example.com or (803) 799-9051.LOAD-DATE: May 31, 2005