If there’s one thing we can’t stand it’s two-faced politicians (especially so-called “social conservatives”). Seriously … give us an honest liberal over a deceitful, sanctimonious “conservative” any day of the week.
For example, earlier this week our news site ran an item on state representative Dan Hamilton – one of thirteen “Republican” candidates seeking the Palmetto State’s fourth congressional district (map). During a debate earlier this week, Hamilton was asked whether he supported the ongoing government subsidization of abortion provider Planned Parenthood – and whether he would vote for “any budget that provided funding” to this organization, which was involved in a gruesome fetal body parts scandal three years ago
“Absolutely not on both counts,” Hamilton responded. “I will not support budgets that include Planned Parenthood funding.”
Good. That’s our view, too.
As we noted in our original story, this news site has consistently called for lawmakers at all levels of government to reject public funding for abortion providers. In fact, this is precisely the sort of action we urged former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley to take while she was in office.
She never took it, though …
We also ripped U.S. president Donald Trump back in March for his support of a budget that contained $500 million for Planned Parenthood, betraying a promise he made on the 2016 campaign trail.
Unlike these politicians, we’re consistent …
Hamilton? Not so much …
Just a few weeks ago, the 41-year-old realtor voted “aye” on South Carolina’s $30 billion state budget – a spending plan which contained tens of thousands of dollars in taxpayer funding for (you guessed it) Planned Parenthood. Not only that, Hamilton voted “aye” on the specific section of the spending plan that contained the Planned Parenthood money.
During an appearance on WORD 106.3 FM earlier this week, Hamilton initiated his defense of these votes by attacking the credibility of this news site – claiming (falsely) that one of his opponents in the #SC4 race paid us to publish a “hit piece” against him.
“I’m disappointed first of all that you count FITSNews as news – that is a paid hit piece from one of the other candidates in this race,” Hamilton told WORD host Tara Servatius.
That’s a pretty bold allegation coming from a guy who just last week published a guest column on our news site (we gave him our microphone for free, incidentally).
But whatever … we’re used to that sort of attack.
In fact we’ve been sued before by people who have used our microphone to communicate to the masses.
Anyway, moving on …
“I would never vote knowingly for Planned Parenthood,” Hamilton told Servatius, adding that “none of us were in any way aware” that the budget they voted on included money for the organization.
Hamilton later told Servatius he was “going to Columbia … to work on an amendment” aimed at resolving the issue.
According to Hamilton, his amendment “will strike that out and make sure that no dollars go to Planned Parenthood.”[timed-content-server show=”2018-Jan-17 00:00:00″ hide=”2018-May-18 00:00:00″]
SPONSORED CONTENT – ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW[/timed-content-server]
Sounds good, right? Sure …
Again, though … it turns out Hamilton was “all talk, no walk” on this issue.
The amendment Hamilton was referring to – which was actually sponsored by state representative John McCravy of Greenwood County – cleared the S.C. House of Representatives late Wednesday by an overwhelming 66-26 majority.
The only problem? Hamilton was nowhere to be found when it came time to vote on this measure.
Take a look …
(Click to view)
That’s right … Hamilton was a no-show.
So … where was the congressional candidate?
He bragged about his intention to cast this vote … where was he when it actually came time to cast it?
Good question …
We reached out to Hamilton’s campaign early Thursday in an effort to determine his whereabouts during the vote … but heard nothing back but crickets.
That’s fine with us. The last time we sought out comment from Hamilton his spokesperson – Logan McVey of Kentucky – similarly accused us of publishing stories based on a recent media placement purchased by the congressional campaign of state senator William Timmons, one of Hamilton’s rivals for this seat.
You know, Timmons … a guy we have repeatedly bashed in the past. A guy who also happens to be in our crosshairs on two major stories related to this race (expect one of those stories to hit early next week).
Stay tuned …
Regardless of his comments about this news site, we will continue to afford Hamilton every opportunity to respond to coverage we deem newsworthy – and to use our microphone as a means of communicating with our audience on this or any other issue.
Same for the rest of the #SC4 field …
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our stories? Please feel free to submit your own guest column or letter to the editor via-email HERE. Got a tip for us? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE. Want to support what we’re doing? SUBSCRIBE HERE.