Really? You endorsed the candidate who was staunchly supporting DOMA and DADT when Bernie was the real lion for LGBT Rights? Not only was Bernie the cosponsor of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crime Bill every time it came up until it passed, Hillary abstained from voting for it every time. Probably because it was in conflict with her anti LGBT positions, until it was the law of the land, and then she "evolved". While Bernie was consistently fighting for workers rights here, and abroad, Hillary as SoS sent the Ambassador to Haiti to get them to reverse their decision to raise garment workers wages to something far less than a living wage. She had helped off shore our garment worker jobs there where they use mostly women and girls as young as 13YO to work 12 hour days for only about $5/day. They wanted to double it to around $10/day. But she stood in front of the world and proclaimed herself the champion of those same girls she helped exploit, and her minions cheered her for it. Hillary was on the board of Walmart and successfully fought off their workers attempts to unionize for a living wage and healthcare. She helped promote fracking and refused to support any clear deregulation of the banks and stock market. Bernie was consistently on the side of anything you might consider "Progressive". Yet you threw your support behind someone who even SNL and all the political pundits, rightly mocked for her transparent "evolution" to adopt all of Bernie's positions? If you truly liked all those Progressive positions, why not endorse the person who has been championing them for decades and not just months short of election day?
Nice job handing the country over to Donald Trump, idiots.
One month later... what have we learned? Well maybe, if you're a "progressive" newspaper, maybe endorse the progressive candidate next time? Especially when it's someone who has much better chances to win. I'm just throwing ideas out there.
I wonder how many weeks this campaign will continue. In the meantime, if the allegations have merit, I'm sure the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission would like to hear of them.
Otherwise I'm not sure what the poster is attempting to achieve here.
Judge Christine Walczyk of the Wake County Courts is CORRUPT. I am not the Plaintiff or Defendant in the case but I was a witness in a case where Judge Walczyk showed no respect at all to one of the litigants in the case. Walczyk violated the rules of the Court and the Rules of Civil Procedure. Walczyk feels she does not need to follow any rules. She mocked and ridiculed a litigant whom was a pro se litigant and told the litigant it was "exhausting" for her to listen to the litigant present her case. She also laughed at the litigant and told the litigant that she thinks "it is funny" that the litigant would think that she would be shown any respect. Apparently Judge Christine Walczyk lost her copy of the Judicial Code of Conduct because Walczyk's behavior completely violates it. Judge Walczyk already committed perjury in this same case as she already lied about what one of the witnesses said in the case even though she heard the testimony herself and then Judge Walczyk completely lied about what the person stated. There is an audio recording of the court hearing as there is of all the court hearings. It shows on the public NC Board of Election Campaign Finance site that Judge Christine Walczyk spent campaign money buying something from a company that is owned by the husband of a lawyer that frequently presents cases in her court. It gets worse and even more corrupt as not only did Walczyk spend money and do business with the lawyer's husband, Walczyk also reimbursed the lawyer as shown on the campaign finance site. C-O-R-R-U-P-T Judge Walczyk hears case frequently from this lawyer. Oh and wait it gets even more corrupt, the Chief District Court Judge named Judge Robert Rader has a wife named Megg Potter Rader and Megg Potter Rader donated a large amount of money to Judge Christine's Walczyk's campaign for fundraising yet Judge Rader is responsible for approving or rejecting Requests for Reassignments. Surprise, Surprise why Judge Walczyk is out of control and thinks the rules just don't apply to her.
Corruption in the Wake County Courts by Judge Christine Walczyk. Judge Christine Walczyk of the Wake County Courts thinks she is above the law. I am not the Plaintiff or Defendant in the case but I witnessed Judge Walczyk state at a court hearing that she was angry at one of the litigants for putting in Requests for Reassignments against her and that Judge Robert Rader did not approve the Requests for Reassignments. Judge Walczyk laughed about it. Judge Walczyk is laughing because Judge Rader's wife, Megg Potter Rader, contributed money to Judge Walczyk's campaign, so this is the Wake County Family Court, where Judge Robert Rader's wife maintains a friendship with Judge Christine Walczyk and Judge Walczyk makes fun of a litigant in the court for filing Requests for Reassignments against her. Judge Christine Walczyk is a corrupt Judge whom thinks that Judge Robert Rader will just go ahead and cover up her corruption. Also, in the Wake County Family Court is Judge Michael Denning whom stated the discriminatory comment of "China wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for all the Chinese." Horrible, pathetic job you are doing Judge Robert Rader allowing the Family Court Judges of Judge Michael Denning and Judge Christine Walczyk to violate Rules of Civil Procedure and constitutional rights of the litigants. But apparently all that matters is whom Judge Rader's wife supports in a campaign. Judge Robert Rader should have recused himself from hearing Requests for Reassignments concerning Judge Christine Walczyk as his wife contributed a large sum of money for a fundraiser for Judge Walczyk, but instead of doing that Judge Walczyk just makes fun of the litigant whom put in Reassignments against her and laughs and states that Judge Rader denies the Reassignments. This is complete corruption. Walczyk is so corrupt and apparently stupid as all of the court hearings are recorded from the Court and Walczyk can be heard on the audio recordings making completely inappropriate statements, laughing at and making fun of a litigant where Walczyk even states that she (Walczyk) finds it funny that the litigant filed for reassignments against her and gave them to Rader. Walczyk follows the letter of the law in the meaning of capital C for Corruption, that is all Walczyk follows.
Wayne Goodwin lost his reelection to many different factors, but one I am sure he never thought to look at was from with in his own agency. the last four years from an Insiders prospective, the main and most damaging factor was he did not have his hands on the wheel he let his senior Deputies drive the machine and they drove it off the cliff Louis Belo and mark Edwards are good at what they did in the production of running a division but horrible at driving an agency of very good and very skilled staff of seasoned employees however what they were good at was driving them out the door when they did not agree with the establishment, resulting is good people leaving and willing puppets taking there place it all started when Belo gave Carla Obiol the loaded gun and set her lose in the consumer service group and her putting the gun to Bob Lisson head, a man of true integrity intelligence and years of knowledge and replacing him with Kathy short a relatively combatants angry woman that has no issues screaming "do you know who I am" at the first sign of not getting what she wants and the list goes on and on placing a riff employee in the controllers office as controller and passing up a woman "Laresia Everett" that in one of the most accomplished CPA's in state government only to have to bring in another person to help him because of his inability to understand the vastness of the agency's fiscal responsibility and the result of that maneuver the department lost 4 employees with a combined 60 years of experience resulting in only filling one of the vacancy's only do to not understanding the duty's and having applicants decline the offers because of insultingly low salary's and then creating positions that were never required and filling them with co workers from there last agency's lets talk purchasing and contracts policy and general statuses hogwash we don't need no stinking policy's spend, spend, spend, have a state vehicle stay at 5 star hotels BTA for 17 thousand dollars for a symposium why not make it 20 thousand just for the fun of it .. my point is within the agency there were two wars waging those of us trying to do what is correct and just, and the king and his companions living as if the Gods had granted them eternal life he lost the battle partly from within as 95 percent of us have had enough of there disrespectful degrading demeaning treatment as they received increase and promotions and we are getting rifted and reprimanded
we all have friends family and the ability to vote and that is precisely what we did.
Judge Christine Walczyk's spouse recently wrote a post on a Court of Appeals Judge's Facebook that she is such a huge supporter and friend of hers. Problem with this is that the Judge on the Court of Appeals is whom cases could be heard if litigants have issues with Judge Christine Walczyk. How much favortism goes on in the Wake County Courts? Judge Christine Walczyk has already lied during a court case about what one of of the witnesses stated because she favors so much one litigant over the other litigant, Judge Walczyk knows things about the case that only the Defendant and Plaintiff would know before the court case begins. Judges are not supposed to have ex parte communication with any of the litigants. I have witnessed Judge Walczyk being rude, abusive and hostile to a litigant in a case where she laughed at the litigant and referred to her as a joke. Judge Walczyk of the Wake County Courts should be impeached as a Judge.
Unforgivable primary endorsements
As was painfully clear to many of us when you endorsed HRC & Trump for their respective primaries, either endorsement was clueless & morally bankrupt by itself but the two together represented a perfect storm of credibility lost & maximal damage inflicted. Do you see that now?
I had to be talked down then from diverting scarce time & energy to organizing a demonstration outside your office. Friends were right that you weren't worth it. But how dared you?
It was demonstrable at the time that Sanders was the better candidate & stronger for the General Election - what was it about Clinton's 50-55% disapproval ratings that filled you with confidence?
As for endorsing Trump: whoever was responsible for that sickening, reckless choice will carry the shame always.
Can you explain yourselves?
You can thank yourselves, INDY, for endorsing Clinton.
Democrats have been afraid to own their actual positions for 40 years on a national stage. You had a rare opportunity this year. It's a rare occasion that an articulate, well-spoken, competent, and competitive progressive candidate emerges and you swatted him down for a big fat check. Maybe you should've stopped and thought for a moment before endorsing the single most disliked democratic nominee in the history of the party for the past 100 years? When the ties between the war machine and the financial machine and the democratic candidate are too obvious, the base doesn't turn out. Young people don't turn out. And many people who voted for Trump to stop Clinton would've abstained from voting, or would've voted for Sanders, had a populist alternative that wasn't a race-baiting narcissist been available on the democratic ticket.
Good job Indy, now we're all screwed.
Shame on Judge Christine Walczyk of the Wake County Courts!! She is the worst!! I have been present in a courtroom with Judge Walczyk as the Judge. I was not the Plaintiff or Defendant. Judge Walczyk stated to one of the litigants that it was exhausting for her to listen to her present her case (she was a pro se litigant). Judge Walczyk then laughed at the litigant present her case and laughed with opposing counsel. Walczyk frequently brought up Judge Michael Denning whom was already removed off of the case from the Chief District Judge for good cause shown. This is the Judge Michael Denning whom stated "China wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for all of the Chinese." He should be impeached as a Judge for his discriminatory comment that he made during a court case as heard on the audio recording produced from the Court. Walczyk also expressed anger at one of the litigants for filing Requests for Reassignments against her. Judge Walczyk stated in her questionnaire that "The cost of litigation is also a growing concern. With the economic crisis looming, litigants are often choosing to represent themselves rather than hire attorneys. As judges, we have to ensure that the court system works for everyone, and that we minimize the disadvantages to individuals choosing to handle their own legal matters." I witnessed Judge Walczyk laughing at a pro se litigant, allowed the opposing counsel to violate so many different Rules of Civil Procedure and local rules. The litigant whom represented herself pro se proved to Walczyk how the opposing counsel violated many different Rules of Civil Procedure and Walczyk's reply to that was it's "water under the bridge." Obviously, Walczyk is not capable of being a fair or impartial Judge. She had the audacity to state to a pro se litigant that it was exhausting for her (Walczyk) to even listen to the litigant present her case. Walczyk referred to the litigant as a joke and laughed frequently at her. Rude and abusive treatment by a Judge to one party in a case is against the Judicial Code of Conduct. It is all on the audio recording that is produced by the Wake County Courts. That is not the way a pro se litigant should be treated by a Judge. The other litigant in the Court testified to choosing to violate the order, yet Walczyk ignored that. Judge Walczyk is truly the worst Judge. Her campaign manager is a lawyer in the Wake County Courts. I heard a witness testify in front of Walczyk to definitely not stating something about a litigant, yet Walczyk for her bias in favor of the other party, lied and stated that the witness stated something he did not. Yet, there is an audio recording from the court proving the witness testified before Walczyk stating he did not make the statement. Walczyk has stopped following the rules of the Court. Walczyk has had rude and abusive treatment for one of the litigants in the case and complete favortism for the other litigant where even when the litigant admits while testifying in front of her that he chose to violate the order, STILL Walczyk will not find him in Contempt of Court. The litigant's attorney has violated many rules of Civil Procedure yet Walczyk's response to the attorney violating the rules is it's "water under the bridge." Walczyk needs to follow the law, yet she refuse to as she does not follow the Judicial Code of Conduct. Walczyk stated judges are supposed to be "temperate", yet Walczyk is out of control on the court produced audio recording making fun of a pro se litigant trying to present her case.
Indy Week - do you still feel as smug now about your Hillary endorsement? I blame you and the legions like you for this. You not only condoned corruption in the Democratic Party, but you laughed it off. It had real consequences.
here's my take: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8UZw1sd…
Respectfully, I don't see what the point of this article is. It neatly summarizes this year while putting five dollar words behind everything everyone already knows without providing any deeper insight. You ponder potential change and solutions to our problems, but the ideas are once again obvious, brief, and weak at best. You even conclude that none of them will happen. I'm just left thinking, "Yes, and...?"
What are you trying to do for the reader that they can't already conclude for themselves from a few Google searches? I honestly would like to know because clearly I'm missing something, but want to remain an interested reader.
Otherwise, keep up the good work.
A reasonable person would find much to agree in what you wrote but one passage stood out for me
"A major political party, overtaken by uncompromising zealots, has made unbridled, unprecedented obstructionism its central organizing principle and fealty to the gun lobby and unfettered corporate greed its number one focus. "
One could honestly say that you provide no differentiation between the Democrats and the Republicans based on the one small part alone. I do not mean to cherry pick here but merely to point out that you can't really point out the Perils of Trumpism without also indicting the naked ambition of the Clinton Crime family and their retinue of enablers and conspirators.
It was no secret that the Republican National Committee did not want Donald Trump and was actively colluding against him. The Democrats, however , made a sham of the process of pretending to countenance the challenge of Senator Sanders while secretly colluding with the Clinton campaign the entire time. That broke a trust that I think many Sanders supporters could not abide.
But, in the interest of moving forward, I would like to make a gesture of concession to you. If we can agree that we think that both candidates are a$$holes then I think we can build on that. :)
so does this mean he didn't take the time to fill out the questionnaire like all the other candidates? he just sent his campaign flyer?
I'm going to respectfully disagree that "Howard was correct to support the zoning measure." This particular measure defies any kind of common sense and was pushed through with very little opportunity for public input until it was already essentially a done deal. I agree that some kind of county wide zoning is a good thing, but changing all unzoned areas to 1 acre residential is just plain lazy and irresponsible. Several times I asked why it was done this way. The best answer I could get is that it is for "consistency". I'm not sure why we need this kind of consistency in such a diverse county. At a minimum, shouldn't the watershed around Jordan Lake be zoned as something that prevents development? The Army Corps already forbids building much of anything on their land, so this newfound "consistency" is awfully confusing. Zoning farm land for residential use and then grandfathering the agricultural use is, in my view, a sneaky way of setting the stage for future development.
I may vote for Howard anyway, but I'm sure going to disagree with her position on this issue.
Vox: The real Clinton email scandal is that a bull---- story has dominated the campaign
(If you agree with her on policy, vote with a clear conscience about the server)
I will not vote for Worely based on the info I have found on this site an others AND from her own words that she "represent asylees fleeing oppression and seeking refuge on our shores"
I'm NOT against LEGAL IMMIGRATION, I'm NOT against assisting GENUINE "refugees" in THEIR OWN shores. But I AM AGAINST opening our arms and our country to unvetted refugees from HOSTILE countries especially to those who have NO interest in becoming Americans and embracing our way of life.
I look to what's happening to those areas of the country who are already having a problem with rising rape and murder statistics and to Europe where the landscape has drastically changed, where there is fear on the streets and the police do next to nothing to help and most can't because any action is considered "racial profiling" Those who commit these types of crimes are given a pass because that's their "culture". Frankly speaking let them keep their culture in countries who accept that way of life and let us keep our way of life safe and protected.
I have no intention to support or vote for anyone who feels she has time to devote to "asylees". I have a feeling she should have enough to do representing our own people who are struggling with oppression here in our own shores.
"....[The State legislators] do not permit the creation of categories of purchase. A "luxury tax" (whether statewide or local) would have to be created & approved by the General Assembly, which seems unlikely (to say the least)."
And this is another good reason to vote for a change to our State Legislators, so our cities and Counties can have more flexibility to create solutions that fit the needs of their constituents, to make government more responsive. HB2 had the added suck of barring local cities from making their own legislation regarding discrimination- and maybe more.
Time to get them out of there.
I am not an expert & this is difficult to research--I'm not certain whether the additional half-cent would apply to grocery items. I am fairly sure, however, that the General Assembly does not allow local governments to levy taxes on luxury items.
My understanding is that the restrictions created by the current majority allow a raise in the local sales tax across the board (which, again, might or might not apply to grocery items) within very strict parameters, & do not permit the creation of categories of purchase. A "luxury tax" (whether statewide or local) would have to be created & approved by the General Assembly, which seems unlikely (to say the least).
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation