Walker - gag a maggot
She should not be on the bench, she is a nasty unfair person. How she gets away with things in court is beyond me. What is wrong with your family court. She is a hated person and a terribly judge, and also corroupt.
You should read reviews about her. What is the problem. I only hope what she does to people she gets it back twice as bad to herself and her family. She is a midget and a nasty person, get her off the bench. I hear she's out on medical leave for awhile. Well the old saying is what goes around comes around! Hope I live to see it with that b....
Thank you for listening , but she needs to gooooo and get a job where she is mistreated and does not have the power that midget!!
Why Was a Wake County Woman’s Lawsuit Settled Against Her Will?
By Jane Porter
Denise Fitzpatrick is in a struggle with Wake County to secure housing for her and her son, Julian Coatley.
Photo by Alex Boerner
Denise Fitzpatrick is in a struggle with Wake County to secure housing for her and her son, Julian Coatley. If anyone has interest in donating to this struggling and loving family, please go to gofundme.com/v3wn9584. It will be greatly appreciated.
It started with an argument. No punches thrown, just words exchanged.
Denise Fitzpatrick, a petite, primly dressed African-American woman, now sixty-one, went to use the restroom at the Cornerstone Day Center, a publicly funded, Wake County-owned facility in downtown Raleigh that provides services such as mental-health and substance-abuse treatment to the homeless.
It was August 2014, and Fitzpatrick had swung by Cornerstone to pick up her mail with her son, Julian, now thirty-four, who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia. They were homeless—and had been, on and off, for the previous two years. At the time, they were living out of a storage unit.
When she returned from the restroom, Julian was in the Cornerstone lobby, arguing with another homeless man. The man was cursing at Julian, Fitzpatrick says.
"It was M F this and F you, you stepped on my bag, M F this, that, and the other," Fitzpatrick recalls. "He was saying, 'Let's take this outside.'"
Staff members and security guards later told Fitzpatrick that Julian had stepped on the man's bag. Julian apologized, they said, but the man wouldn't accept his apology. As Fitzpatrick was leading her son out of the building to cool down, the man continued to yell at him. Julian picked up a metal trashcan and slammed it to the ground. It was an uncharacteristic outburst, Fitzpatrick says.
For this infraction, Julian was barred from the Cornerstone premises for twenty-eight days, in accordance with the center's policy. Fitzpatrick sent Julian to a crisis center and had his medications adjusted.
From the county's perspective, this should have been the end of it.
Fitzpatrick thought it was.
She continued to utilize Cornerstone's services. A month later, she signed into Shelter Plus Care, a program funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that provides rental subsidies and support services to homeless people with disabilities, including mental illnesses. Fitzpatrick has been diagnosed with depression, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
She was approved for the program, which currently has about two hundred participants in Wake County. On October 14, 2014, she attended an orientation and signed a document outlining expectations for voucher participants. According to the form, Fitzpatrick could request that her son be allowed to live with her, and she agreed to monthly visits with her caseworker. In exchange, Wake County would cover 100 percent of her rent—which turned out to be $655 a month—plus her utilities.
But after Fitzpatrick made it clear that she wanted her son to come live with her, things started to unravel.
A social worker told Fitzpatrick that Julian couldn't live with her because his behavior was threatening to himself or others. Another Cornerstone employee told Fitzpatrick she would have to apply for a different program if she wanted her son to live with her. Yet another told her she would have to live by herself for a year before she could have her son move in.
To Fitzpatrick, these responses contradicted the rules she'd agreed to follow. Neither the form she signed nor any of the paperwork she received said anything about behavior beyond prohibitions on alcohol and drug use. Instead, she thought county officials were discriminating against Julian because of his mental-health problems—and that, to her mind, constituted a violation of the Fair Housing Act.
The law makes it illegal for otherwise qualified individuals with a disability— including a mental impairment—to be excluded from federally funded programs because of their disability or the disability of anyone associated with them. Fitzpatrick maintained that Julian was not a threat to anyone, yet the county refused to let him live with her.
In November, Fitzpatrick filed a complaint with HUD, the North Carolina Human Relations Commission, and Legal Aid of North Carolina's Fair Housing Project. That kicked off what Fitzpatrick describes as months of harassment and discrimination against her by Wake County employees, culminating in a lawsuit brought against her by her landlord after the county revoked her voucher and a countersuit she filed against Wake County. That, in turn, led to a settlement she didn't want but was forced into by her court-appointed guardian, a former Wake County judge, after she was declared unable to manage her own affairs—a decision, it seems, prompted in part by her insistence on taking her case to trial.
Fitzpatrick's story sheds light on just how challenging it is for people like her to find normal, stable housing where they can live independent lives. It also raises questions about the kinds of decisions social workers and bureaucrats should be allowed to make on behalf of people with disabilities, and about under what circumstances individuals should lose their legal autonomy.
"I am crying out for justice," Fitzpatrick says. "I am crying out for fair treatment to whoever listens. It isn't fair for my son to be in adult care, begging to come home. Justice to me means fair treatment—that we should be compensated for our damages."
Four years ago, Fitzpatrick and Julian lived together in a rent-to-own home in Atlanta. Julian's schizophrenia, with which he'd been diagnosed at eighteen, had escalated, and Fitzpatrick often came home from her job as a receptionist to find that he'd been pacing the streets of their neighborhood. She quit work to care for him.
Fitzpatrick became Julian's guardian in 2013, shortly after they moved to the Triangle. Fitzpatrick wanted to be able to sign off on his medical decisions. She struggled to find housing, and they ended up staying with a niece in Knightdale. The situation soon became untenable. Julian stayed up all night and ate and slept at odd times; that irked the niece's husband, who wanted them gone, Fitzpatrick says.
So, for the rest of 2013 and most of 2014, they lived together in hotel rooms when they had money and out of storage units when they didn't. Julian was hospitalized a few times and lived intermittently at crisis centers and group homes. Fitzpatrick would stay in shelters when he was away.
After enrolling in Shelter Plus Care, Fitzpatrick signed a lease for a one-bedroom unit at the Montecito Apartments, a complex of brick buildings on Colby Drive in North Raleigh, in December 2014. Based on the assurances she says county officials gave her, she assumed she'd be allowed to have her son move in with her.
click to enlarge Julian Coatley, Fitzpatrick's son. - PHOTO BY ALEX BOERNER
Photo by Alex Boerner
Julian Coatley, Fitzpatrick's son.
County officials had other ideas.
"The program is designed to assist the eligible applicant to establish and become stable before we entertain adding anyone else to the household," program assistant Wanda Teel wrote in an email, included in court documents, to caseworker Joanna Fullmer.
In January 2015, Fitzpatrick received a handwritten note from Fullmer, stating that Wake County would terminate her voucher if she didn't show up to a meeting at Teel's office. Teel followed up with several emails explaining that Fitzpatrick had signed the wrong paperwork in December. The correct paperwork, she said, required weekly instead of monthly caseworker visits. The new forms also would have required Fitzpatrick to wait two years before she could add a family member to her voucher.
But when Fitzpatrick met with Teel in March, Fitzpatrick says, Teel refused to let her see the new rules she was supposed to agree to. So Fitzpatrick refused to sign anything new. (Teel did not respond to the INDY's request for comment. As outlandish as Fitzpatrick's claim may seem, in a later ruling, Wake County District Court Judge Ned Mangum found it to be true.)
Because Julian wasn't allowed to live with her, Fitzpatrick lost guardianship; in March, Julian was discharged from a county crisis center, where he'd gone a few months earlier after having suicidal thoughts, and sent to an adult-care home in Durham. And because Fitzpatrick had refused to sign Teel's paperwork, she received a notice that, effective May 31, 2015, Wake County would be terminating her housing voucher.
Federal regulations state that, under Shelter Plus Care, assistance can only be revoked in severe cases. The county cited Fitzpatrick's failure to complete required paperwork, noncompliance with weekly visits (which Fitzpatrick never agreed to), and her absence from a required housing committee review.
May 31 came and went, but Fitzpatrick refused to leave her apartment. In June, Duke Energy cut off her utilities. She stayed anyway.
"I had already filed a complaint [with HUD and Legal Aid], and when they cut everything off, I didn't really have anywhere else to go," Fitzpatrick says. "I could have gone to a shelter ... but I just thought, this is wrong. My voucher was terminated wrongfully, and this needed to be in front of a judge. So I contacted Legal Aid again."
On June 18, Fitzpatrick received an eviction notice. She stayed put.
At Legal Aid, an attorney named Suzanne Chester picked up Fitzpatrick's case. Fitzpatrick told Chester that she wanted to sue the county because her mental illness had been exacerbated by stress.
"I was having chest pains, and I had to go to the ER," Fitzpatrick says. "They gave me more tests than you can think of—EKG, blood tests, a chest X-ray. They said it is stress related, because they couldn't find anything else that was wrong."
In a July 19 email, Chester advised Fitzpatrick to be evaluated by a psychologist. An affidavit from a mental-health provider, she said, would be crucial for the case to be successful. So therapist Lauren Bridges assessed her. According to an affidavit, Bridges determined that Fitzpatrick "is at risk for recurrent episodes of heightened anxiety, paranoia and underlying mood symptoms" as a result of homelessness and "stressors related to the loss of her housing voucher."
In July, Chester and Fitzpatrick appealed Montecito's eviction order and sued Wake County for wrongful termination of Fitzpatrick's voucher. Chester wrote in Fitzpatrick's complaint that "deprivation of her right to enjoy housing with or without her son had caused her apprehension, embarrassment, humiliation and emotional distress."
Wake County countered with a motion to dismiss. But it also proposed a settlement that would retroactively reinstate Fitzpatrick's voucher, not require her to wait two years to add Julian, and dismiss Montecito's claims against her. In return, Fitzpatrick would agree to drop her complaints against the county and attend weekly meetings with a caseworker.
Fitzpatrick refused. In emails to Chester, she insisted that she wouldn't settle because she was sure the county had discriminated against her and she wanted compensation. In the emails, which Fitzpatrick provided to the INDY, Chester repeatedly advised her to settle, becoming evermore frustrated with her client. Finally, in August, Chester withdrew as Fitzpatrick's counsel, citing Fitzpatrick's refusal to accept a "reasonable" settlement.
Denise Fitzpatrick - PHOTO BY ALEX BOERNER
Photo by Alex Boerner
But before Chester exited the case, another district court judge, Debra Sasser, appointed Fitzpatrick a guardian ad litem, someone to act on Fitzpatrick's behalf. It's not clear from court records why this happened, but, under state law, guardians can be appointed to act on behalf of "insane or incompetent" people.
Fitzpatrick believes Chester used the therapist's affidavit—which states that she is "unable to trust information presented to her" and feels anxious and paranoid—to convince Sasser that Fitzpatrick was not capable of acting in her own best interest. Fitzpatrick points out that no records indicate that she is "insane or incompetent."
However, judges are allowed to use their discretion to decide whether someone is incapable of assisting herself in court.
"[Chester and another Legal Aid attorney] took me into a room and said, 'Look, they are going to appoint you a GAL," Fitzpatrick recalls. "'The judge is going to give you a GAL, and we want to choose who it is.' She said, 'I know a man that used to be a judge. We have been friends for twenty years.'"
(In an email, Chester defended her representation of Fitzpatrick. "In this case, what is in the public record is not indicative of all that transpired," she wrote. She said she could not elaborate because she is bound by state rules governing attorneys' professional conduct.)
The GAL they chose was Abraham Jones, a former Wake County Superior Court judge. Like Chester, Jones advised Fitzpatrick to accept the settlement. Again she refused. In October, Judge Mangum refused Wake County's motion to dismiss Fitzpatrick's case and scheduled a jury trial for December 2.
But that trial never happened.
"[Jones] came into the picture in August to settle this thing for Wake County," Fitzpatrick says. "He harassed me from August to December to settle, and then in December, the day before the trial, he motions the judge to dismiss the case."
Jones declined to comment for this story.
As Fitzpatrick's guardian, Jones could approve the settlement whether Fitzpatrick liked it or not—and that's what he did. As part of the agreement, Fitzpatrick's complaints to the Human Relations Commission and HUD were also dismissed.
Fitzpatrick's was one of 105 Wake County housing-discrimination complaints filed with the state Human Relations Commission between 2007 and 2015, according to county records. In a presentation prepared ahead of a county commission work session on Monday, staffers said the county lacks the resources to investigate these complaints. The county is now considering whether to establish its own human relations committee to take on that task.
Fitzpatrick's story may be unique, in that she lost her autonomy for reasons that aren't immediately clear, but housing mentally ill people is a widespread problem, both in Wake County and throughout North Carolina.
In 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice sued North Carolina and a handful of other states for violating the Olmstead Act, which requires states to place people with mental disabilities in community settings where they can live independent lives. Per the terms of a settlement, the state has to ensure that at least three thousand people with mental illnesses living in adult-care homes are placed into "community-based supportive housing"—meaning homes and apartments—by 2020.
Ann Oshel, the community relations director at Alliance Behavioral Healthcare, a health network that provides services for the mentally ill, says that since the state settled the DOJ's lawsuit in August 2012, thirty-seven people with mental disabilities "have been waiting for months and months [for Wake County] to locate housing for them."
Put simply, landlords don't want them, even if they have housing assistance.
"The problem we have run into in Wake is that there is a competitive housing market anyway, so landlords have a choice of who to rent to. So the people we serve are less likely to be granted accommodation," Oshel says.
But for Fitzpatrick, finding a landlord wasn't the problem; it's more the vicious cycle of homelessness and unemployment that she's once again fallen into.
In January, Fitzpatrick relinquished the housing voucher her settlement afforded her. She says she no longer trusted the county and was too stressed to deal with its caseworkers. She landed a job at Waffle House, she says, but lost it because she couldn't arrange transportation to and from the women's shelter. She's still looking for work.
Julian remains in an adult-care home in Raleigh.
"He begs to come home, he wants to stay with me on the weekends," Fitzpatrick says, her voice breaking. "Whenever I start thinking about it, I get sentimental. I think about the fact that Wake County is authorized by the federal government to provide housing for mentally ill people with disabilities. We go in, we're homeless, living in storage units, hotels, and shelters. Then we're excluded because my son has a disability. It doesn't make sense. And it's illegal."
This article appeared in print with the headline "Autonomy Lost"
FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE THIS DEVASTATING CASE, WHICH IS AND HAS LEAD JULIAN COATLEY, BEGGING TO COME HOME, AND OUR CRY FOR JUSTICE. PLEASE CONTINUE TO READ:
He is a thirty four year old male who has suffered with mental illness in the form of schizophrenia since the age of eighteen. We have had gone through many severe and very difficult and challenging times. We still experience such due to the illegalities of Wake County, Human Services in Raleigh, North Carolina. This County has a pattern of discrimination and state that they are a government agency, authorized by the federal Government to provide housing for the mentally ill who have been homeless, yet they excluded my son from housing because he has mental illness. WCHS Assistant Housing Director also denied me and my son, two reasonable accommodation requests, required by the Fair Housing Act of 1988.
This illegal action by the Wake County Human Services prompted me to file a lawsuit for violations of the Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988, in November of 2014. A complaint that I amended in March of 2015 because of further violations of the Fair Housing Amendment Act(“FHAA”), 42 U.S.C 1985 (Interference with Civil Rights) 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1988 (Color of Law and vindication of Civil Rights) also section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Olmstead Act of 1999.
This case is also criminal interference with fair housing and Civil Rights under 18 U.S.C. 241, 242. Many U.S.C. codes have been violated by the Wake County Human Services in this case.
This extreme and devastating case of discrimination was in a court room in Raleigh, North Carolina for nearly six months and has consisted of six Attorneys who battled vigorously in the Court room, regards this case. After a cross examination of Wake County’s Assistant Housing Director , Wanda Teel, the presiding judge, Ned Mangum denied Wake County’s motion to dismiss such lawsuit.
I was then granted my motion for Preliminary Injunction, pending trial. This action resulted in the scheduling of a trial by Judge Ned Mangum of Wake County. The trial never came to be due to the illegal actions of an African American Attorney, a former Wake County Judge of 19 years, Attorney Abraham Penn Jones.
This Attorney and a Legal Aid so called, Fair Housing Project Attorney, Suzanne Chester harassed for nearly six months to settle the case on the terms of Wake County and without compensatory damages/Punitive damages, even though Suzanne Chester filed the lawsuit on my behalf for monetary damages.
Finally after their many attempts to force me to settle the case against my will, Attorney Abe Jones(Now, again, running for Supreme Court Justice, after being defeated in 2012) was appointed as a Guardian Ad litem, by Judge Debra Sasser (Prior to Judge, Ned Mangum), just for the settling of the lawsuit without compensatory damages. I am not and have never been adjudicated as being incompetent nor incapacitated. The Court stated after a cross examination of WCHS, that I clearly established a Prima Facie right to the relief sought.
Along with attempts for me to settle the case, Attorney Suzanne Chester promised to fight the case of discrimination stating to me in various means of contact that she would fight this case to the end, looking forward to the hearing. After Suzanne Chester performed the cross examination on WCHS’ Wanda Teel, called it good news when judge Mangum denied Wake County’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit and granted my motion for Preliminary Injunction, pending trial.
Shortly after the cross examination which proved further the discrimination, Suzanne Chester motioned to withdraw from the case. And was allowed to do so by Judge Debra Sasser. Attorney Jones who came into the case in August of 2015 to have it settled, and being appointed as a Guardian Ad Litem to do so, settled the case against my will without any form of compensatory damages. This very untruthful Attorney falsified and had falsified legal documents in doing so. His Notary Public and Paralegal wrote untrue statements in an e-mail, then admitted the falsehoods made by her in a later e-mail.
This very untruthful employee of Attorney Abraham Jones stated in an e-mail on February 2, 2015 that Abe Jones was still the Guardian Ad Litem when I relinquished the housing assistance to avoid continuing discrimination in the settlement, written by Attorney Jones, a man who is now running for a position in the appellate court here in Raleigh, North Carolina.
A race of which was lost by Abraham Jones in the year, 2012. Even though, Jones’ Paralegal stated on February 2, 2016 that he was still the GAL, on February 25, 2016, she sent me an e-mail stating the Attorney Jones ceased being the GAL on December 8, 2016, a date that has not yet come. Apparently she meant to write the date as being December 8, 2015.
On March 16, 2016, a popular media outlet, the Indy Week Newspaper printed the story, with my picture on the main and whole front cover of the paper and consisted of five pages of the story inside which also includes a large photograph of my son. This story can also be read online and is included in the Black Archives in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. In one of the court rooms for nearly six months, Attorney Suzanne Chester asked the presiding Judge to seal the documents in the case, but this was refused by myself and Judge Ned Mangum.
During the cross examination, Wanda Teel admitted the illegal discrimination in her answers, causing the faces of Wake County Attorneys to drop, as they turned away in embarrassment from their stares at me and began facing only one another. These Attorneys prior to this starred at me in the Court room as if to say, “Who is this woman who has challenged us, we have had 105 complaints of housing discrimination between 2007 and 2015 and this has never happened before this case of Denise Fitzpatrick. The court rooms for nearly six months were quite strange, awe filled the air, embarrassment, quietness, disgust and confusion by Wake County Human Services in Raleigh, North Carolina.
County Attorney Roger Askew stated in Court during one session, these words to the Judge “This case is very complex and difficult”. The case was not difficult, Wake County Human Services violated the Federal laws and that’s all there is to it. Attorney Askew also stated to the Judge, these words, “We don’t want this case in the media, we don’t want it in Public Records”.
For nearly six months, all Attorneys involved, went back and forth into different rooms in the Court, leaving me setting at the large table in front of the Court room. This case is in the County’s Public Records and for this reason, I have been informed that all names can be used in writing and having published my book which has caused extreme damages now and then. Wake County Human Services excluded the son from housing because he has a mental disability, then Wake County stripped me of my Legal Guardianship because I had no housing for the son.
My loved one was left in a crisis center for nearly three months, then placed in dangerous damaging and illegal conditions of a Family Care Home, miles away from me in Durham , North Carolina. At this time, I was issued a one bedroom apartment by Wake County Human Services. This action deprived me of enjoyment in housing which is also a violation of the “FHAA”.
I MEANT THAT THE SO CALLED LEGAL AID FAIR HOUSING ATTORNEY MOTIONED TO WITHDRAW AFTER THE CROSS EXAMINATION, NOT ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2016, BUT IN THE YEAR OF 2015! LORD HAVE MERCY ON THESE PEOPLE!!!!
Abe Jones has no right talking about Donald Stephens, perhaps he paid in advance in the way he settled my case against my will and he had his Paralegal and Notary Public to send me an e-mail on February 2, 2016 that he was my Guardian Ad Litem, but then sent me an email on Feb. 25, 2016 that he ceased being my Guardian Ad Litem on December 8, 2015! I have a document that it is stated that on December 2, 2015 that I under oath was in the presence with Jones and agreed with rules of a settlement! I have NEVER been in the presence of Abe Jones and a Notary Public. I was later sent an e-mail from his Paralegal that I was not in the presence of Jones on December 2, 2015! Further in reading my article on the website of INDY WEEK Newspaper(MARCH 16, 2016), you will find the story titled, "WHY WAS A WOMAN'S LAWSUIT SETTLED AGAINST HER WILL" You will read that the Legal Aid so called Attorney withdrew from the case of proven discrimination, in August of 2015, but this is incorrect. This dishonest Attorney did not withdraw until AFTER THE CROSS EXAMINATION ON SEPTEMEBR 29, 2016! WHICH SHOWED MORE PROOFS OF THE ILLEGAL ACTIONS OF WAKE COUNTY. WCHS' MOTION FOR DISMISSAL OF THE LAWSUIT WAS DENIED AND I WAS GRANTED MY MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INNUNCTION PENDING TRIAL AND A DATE FOR HEARING WAS SCHEDULED. PLEASE READ THE ARTICLE TO FIND OUT WHY THE HEARING NEVER CAME TO BE! IT IS BECAUSE OF ABE JONES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is sad to realize that Hilary Clinton who is the initiator of ISIS creation starting from Arab springs in Egypt by contributed to islamic party coming to power and after using army dictator to down them from power,
After Egypt follow Tunisia and Lybia where Islamistes where trained to down the legal president and if not created a war where the ISIS she created is now uncontrollable; Obama also recognize that Lybia is a mess
That is Hhylary Clinton experience,how ridiculus is to believe thata some politians still acredited her like having experience and if it is right why did she left the secretary of state office pretending benn seek; or is she afraid of more Skandal coming out?
No, I do not like Abe Jones at all. Please read my article on the website of INDY WEEK newspaper as to why. The online article is titled, "WHY WAS A WOMAN'S LAWSUIT SETTLED AGAINST HER WILL?" You can also do a Google search, Who is Denise Fitzpatrick in Raleigh, NC? This will also lead you to the online story of FHAA of 1988 violations by WCHS. The newspaper article in the March, 16, 2016 publication of the INDY WEEK Newspaper is entitled, "WHEN DENISE FITZPATRICK REFUSED TO SETTLE HER LAWSUIT AGAINST WAKE COUNTY, A COURT APPOINTED WAKE COUNTY GUARDIAN SETTLED IT FOR HER. THAT PERSON CAME TO BE ABRAHAM JONES. I have never been adjudicated as incompetent or incapacitated. I am neither. I am
a Christian woman who is totally and fully sound in mine. But who is really incompetent?
Well I could sat so much on this subject, but since Judge Stephens reported me to the State bar for allegedly unauthorized practice of law without a complete investigation only on hearsay of a few attorney's who were against my program, which this is not the first time he suspended the program. The first time he did this I approached him and tried to explain what my position was and he talked to me like I was a piece of trash. I filed a motion against his motion and after he agreeing to set down and talk to me he reenstated the program. Now here we are again only on hearsay he's done this again, but took it a lil further with reporting to the State Bar.
Karma, maybe here and all things will work for its good. There are so many bullies within the judicial system. It's painful to see such behavior and unprofessional behavior. I been yelled at, lied on, eyes rolled at me, hang ups in my face. Only because of trying to be a voice for those who are not allowed to speak or request a visit or a phone call from their attorney. Oh I can go on and on I just got a call from a mother who says her son has been locked up for 2yrs. And his attorney still have not come to see him. He heard about the Justice Served NC, Inc. program from another Inmate and asked his mother to call me. I had to explain to her that the program has been suspended. She was very upset and yes she was a white woman.
That's democracy? My bad. I thought we were a republic. That's what I pledged to my flag. Hillary is paid advertising. I'm a far right winger. Bernie actually makes more sense than Hillary and he's a straight up socialist. Hillary... seriously?
We all know that it's a done deal that HRC will be the democratic candidate, all the more reason to vote for Sanders. We need to send a message to HRC that we don't agree with a lot of her bullsh@&. She is funded by some of the same folks funding the Republican, she has voted to send our sons and daughters to die in wars we had business being in and she represents just about everything wrong with the Democratic Party. Voting for Sanders will let her know that she has to do better, that she needs to make some changes in her attitudes and policies.
Like many I am greatly disappointed with the Indy endorsement of HRC and will think twice now before trusting or believing what I see from them.
Interesting, I just learned a lot about how the Commissioner of Labor can work for the good of the people of NC. Thank you Maxine for your responses and all your justice work through the years
@Anderson Orr: I find your lukewarm reasoning rather upsetting considering the danger that HRC will not be chosen by many democratic voters in the general election because of her abysmal favorability ratings. Donald Trump is comparable with his likability. The difference? He is able to recruit many new voters! "...the candidate with the best practical and tactical skill sets for managing the demands of the US Presidency?" Voting for the Iraq war? Being a war-hawk? Opportunistically swaying with the wind like Frank Underwood? Being involved with superfluous scandals? How about the practical and tactical skill set of Bernie Sanders who is not involved with any scandals, is not a millionaire and has been on the right side of history throughout his political career?
"... we will be better served by a doer rather than a dreamer." Recently, Bernie Sanders was compared with Martin Luther King by the Black Press, MLK - like Bernie Sanders - being a doer AND a dreamer! The absolute last candidate we need to stand up against the dangerous views of an unpredictable and radical candidate like Donald Trump is a scandal-ridden conformist like HRC who wants to defend the establishment by cautioning everybody with her mantra "No, we can't!" This is neither an attractive nor a successful campaign mantra. So, Mr. Orr, please become bolder and think again before you cast your vote! Thank you.
The divide among your editorial board sounds like a mirror image of my own conflicted inner debate.
I'm quite surprised with myself as I keep coming to the same conclusion as did y'all. It seems like this is the first time I've ever consciously decided to choose pragmatism over my own idealism in an important election and, at times, it almost feels like an out of body experience.
Simply put, in this election, I believe we need the candidate with the best practical and tactical skill sets for managing the demands of the US Presidency and for serving as the national leader of the Democratic Party. No matter how often I question my decision I cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that our strongest candidate for fulfilling those responsibilities is HRC.
So, with due respect to John Lennon, Bernie, and my progressive friends and allies supporting him, and to those endorsing/supporting Hillary I want to say, "To my surprise and with some regrets, I am convinced that in this defining point in history we will be better served by a doer rather than a dreamer. That is why I'm supporting HRC and I'm relieved I'm not the only one."
-- Anderson Orr (Raleigh)
The vote totals for Hillary vs Bernie speak and will speak volumes about electability. Head-to-head polls at this point disregard the fact that Bernie has yet to take a single Republican punch. There is a reason that the Repugs haven't thrown those punches: they think they can trounce Bernie handily, and don't want to hurt his chances. When the right-wing machine cranks up, they will eviscerate Bernie. Look at what they did to John Kerry! HRC has stood up to the worst they have to offer for more than 20 years, and she's still standing, looking them in the eye, bloodying their noses.
As for courage, I don't think that giving gun manufacturers immunity from prosecution is a mark of courage. You can call it pragmatism; I call it shameless pandering. And I don't think that "billionaires" or "Wall Street" is the answer to every challenge we face. A Bernie drinking game during the next Dem debate, quaffing on those two words alone, would put you in the Emergency Room.
@Steve - Incremental progress requires progress though. Meekly avoiding regressions is the most we can expect from this type of democrat (Hillary), and even then that might be optimistic.
Sanders has shown in Congress and as mayor of Burlington he's actually very pragmatic--far moreso than Clinton. I suspect if you looked at a list of bipartisan legislation they've both voted on, you'd quickly reconsider Clinton's electability. General election polls and favorability ratings tell the same story: Clinton's not a strong candidate. She has a huge independent problem, and a huge trustworthiness problem. There are many conservatives who would actually be swayed by Sanders' damn near opulent record of uncorrupted public service (and the fact that he's more pragmatic on some issues like guns).
What I've seen from Obama's '08 election, compared to Gore's and Kerry's failures, is that democrats win not by being moderate, but by having courage. Playing the center and avoiding concrete proposals is a cowardly strategy that has not gone well for democrats for the past 40 years. Democrats also need the youth vote. The difference between getting that vote and not getting it is the difference between 2008 and 2014.
With this single endorsement you have undone everything you have purported to build on up to this moment. INDY you have abandoned your values and good sense, and I would not be surprised if you shut down soon. Before this moment I would have felt your absence, now all I can say is goodbye.
It's a sad day indeed when people ignore reality in favor of entrenched assumptions. Here is my thesis: Hillary Clinton represents (just about) everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party. Here is my defense, by way of The Atlantic (first) and CounterPunch (second):
"Most Democrats regard the Iraq War as a historic disaster. Clinton voted for that conflict. That hawkishness wasn’t a fluke. She pushed for U.S. intervention in Libya without Congressional approval and without anticipating all that has gone wrong in that country. She favored U.S. intervention in the Syrian civil war as well. Why haven’t Democrats concluded that she has dangerously bad judgment on foreign policy? She certainly hasn’t done anything to distinguish herself in that realm."
-- From "‘Hillary 2016’ Has Never Made Sense for Democrats"
"Wall Street’s and the Democratic Party’s old guard preference, Hillary Clinton has high negative ratings both nationally as well as within the party itself. She rates 51% “unfavorable” nationally as of February 7, 2016, worse than the 32% negative opinion registered in September 2011 and the 45% registered a year ago. CBS News found last October that 14% of Democratic voters declared they wouldn’t vote for her, with another 27% expressing strong “reservations” about her, and those numbers are likely to increase with her nasty attacks on Sanders."
-- From "Why Hillary Clinton Spells Democratic Party Defeat"
I am also surprised that INDY has endorsed HRC. The point made above that Bernie's long-term, principled, Progressive position will be more bullet-proof against Trump (or any other GOP nominee) is accurate. Imagine a Trump-HRC debate.....he'll just repeat "she lied" over and over again and, unfortunately, people will believe it. Sanders is also the best candidate to sweep Congressional Democrats into the House and Senate on this election cycle.
Your endorsement of Clinton makes all of your other endorsements suspect in my mind. The political revolution that Bernie is talking about means that we need to start nominating and electing true Progressives (How can you tell a liberal? They think they're a progressive because the progressive label isn't as tainted as liberal. Real Progressives want radical change.) Oh, and as far as electability, the Real Politics polling average has Bernie beating Trump by 3 more points than Hillary and Bernie beating Cruz by 9 more points.
IndyWeekly, what an utter disappointment. Regarding your Hillary Clinton endorsement, "they brush past her mostly impressive tenure as secretary of state, including her push for the sanctions that led to the Iran nuclear deal. (Libya, where Clinton pushed for an intervention that did not go especially well, is probably the biggest blemish.)" Are you kidding me?!?!? HRC is a drone warrior who shows no remorse for the thousands of civilian noncombatants killed by drone strikes. She hailed the collective punishment of the Iranian people with sanctions, their only crime being Iranian and thusly viewed by Democrats as less than pawns in a global rhetorical game in which they posed no real threat to Americans. She pushed for the surge in Afghanistan. She pushed for American war against Libya. She supported Israel's crimes in Gaza.
I have served in combat: It's a total bust. Hillary is a hawk, and you can bet your bottom Yankee dollar she'll try to out-hawk any Republican. For God's sake, I hope ANYONE who backs her has the misfortune of worrying for the physical or psychic loss of a son or daughter sacrificed on her pyre of American military interventionism.
And Roy Cooper. Are you out of your minds? Why not enable Kafkaesque pols who drip the blood of the accused onto state-run crime "laboratory" microscope slides for political gain? Identify one instance in which Cooper showed the moral conviction to stand up for the rights of either the criminally accused or those convicted of crimes (who, despite their convictions, are entitled to the state's protection while in custody). No, Roy Cooper, much like Florida's Bob Graham, is a tough-on-crime gangster who supports the death penalty, and who allowed the crime lab to make it up as they went along so they could get convictions no matter what.
I'D stay home before I went to the polls and pulled the lever for these candidates. Makes me think Rupert Murdock went and purchased the Indy for God's sake.
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation