Anyone? My sense is that that City of Raleigh would easily win the inevitable court case, which would be a ridiculous waste of resources by the state.
A compliment to this article is needed in another article that shows Goose Creek's state as of the present. This site is a point of pride, I believe for the city of Durham. By establishing a conservation easement and re-invigorating the restoration effort to more ecological standards of success, the site is testimony to the perserverance of Durham as a community. Or maybe they are just trying to get mitigation credits to build up downtown. Regardless, it was a great way to bridge restoration with the redevelopment of a low-income housing neighborhood.
I am all in favor of not participating in Obamacare if our legislators would let go of their usually free medical insurance and generous pensions.
To just talk about statistics for a moment...
Oy. If you're going to talk about "marriage rates," you should be clear what you're talking about. Looking at the high rates there, without any notes, the implication is that those crazy folks in Dare County are, what EIGHT TIMES as likely as Triangle residents to get married! Holy matrimony, Batman, what's going on there?
So, I don't know where Lisa Sorg got the numbers, but I'm gonna take a wild guess that this is number of marriages registered at the local courthouse divided by county population, which is an easy but problematic way to do things. Anyone notice what those five counties have in common? Like, perhaps, ocean views?
Yeah. So all those people who live in Wake County but decide to get married at the beach get counted towards these beach county "rates." Which means those aren't rates at all -- a true rate would be how many people who live in Dare County decided to get married, wherever they got married, not how many marriages got registered at the Dare County courthouse divided by the number of permanent residences.
Come on, if you're going to post statistics, do it right!!!
Can anyone explain how the GA can legally do this? A contract is a contract, isn't it?
I've always been pleased that North Carolina was more progressive than most of the rest of the south and other right-wing nut-job-dominated red states, but thanks to the results of last year's election, we are joining those ranks at an alarming clip and becoming a national laughing stock. With attempts to establish an official state religion and now these attempts at voter suppression, we have been mocked and reviled in the national media for a solid week. And that's not counting the bill earlier this year to make nipple exposure (women's only) a felony. I am not amused.
Rachel promised another segment about NC for tonight, BTW.
Our right wing legislature can out stupid any other legislature. Where did these mongoloids come from? I know racist a**hole rednecks who look enlightened next to these cretins.
Nice article Neil. I think the Railhawks are poised to flourish with the new players and new stadium ammenities.
Republicans long for the days when only white male property holders could vote.
I've always been pleased that North Carolina was more progressive than most of the rest of the south and other right-wing nut-job-dominated red states, but thanks to the results of last year's election, we are joining those ranks at an alarming clip and becoming a national laughing stock. With attempts to establish an official state religion and these attempts at voter suppression, we have been mocked and reviled in the national media for a solid week. And that's not counting the bill earlier this year to make nipple exposure (women's only) a felony. I am not amused.
For more background on
A WILL FOR THE WOODS
here is the N&O's story on Clark Wang's funeral two years ago:
I will encourage everyone I know and actively work for her ouster in 2014 over her willingness to sell-out on the second amendment. I suspect she doesn't care about anything in the constitution ... from freedom of speech to freedom of assembly to religious freedom or the rights of states OVER the feds
The opposition to RPS--those supporting this corporate bill--is coordinated. Hager, who was a Duke Energy employee, is a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council. ALEC produced the "Electricity Freedom Act" model bill that Rep. Hager introduced. The text was written by climate change deniers out of Chicago's Heartland Institute. Heartland (and Duke and many others) are private sector members of ALEC.
ALEC & Heartland, as well as John Locke Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, Civitas Institute, and others from inside and outside NC are all coordinated under the umbrella of the State Policy Network. A report on State Policy Network came out today:
I've written about these State Policy Network groups attacking RPS laws in NC, KS and other states:
Thanks for writing.
Wonder if deluded voters who put McCrory and the Republicans in office will get to feel the pain of their decision? Turning back the clock will not bring jobs or great minds to North Carolina. Intelligent people will not live in the dark ages.
Proudly: Good question. I'll give you a one-word answer: Easley.
That said, I supported a nonpartisan reapportionment process (an independent commission) when the Democrats were in and the Republicans were pitching it. I still support it.
As to faux outrage, though, I think there's a big difference between making it easier to vote and making it more difficult. Yes, Democrats did the former, out of self-interest no doubt. Now the Republicans are in the process of doing the latter, also for self-advantage. But how are they equivalent. One strengthens the democratic (small-) process, the other weakens it.
I think you may also be talking about gerrymandering.
Again, though both parties have gerrymandered, there's an important difference in how they've gone about it. Democrats created districts in which African-American voters were in the majority or near-majority even though it was detrimental to the party as a whole to do so. These districts "wasted" Democratic votes (to the point that Republicans rarely ran in them), but they enabled black constituents to elect like representatives. Republicans, when they got the chance, created districts with even greater African-American super-majorities for the purpose of wasting even more Democratic votes and wasting African-American votes as well. By doing so, they could make the surround districts whiter and, of course, Republican.
In other words, the Democrats' gerrymandering was out of a self-interest that was balanced against a competing interest which came at a cost to the party. The Republicans' gerrymandering was totally out of self-interest and maximized the party's advantage while also disempowering African-American voters -- which IMO is a violating of the federal Voting Rights Act.
dudek, completely agree. And thank you, I just noticed the credits were missing. All photos by Jessie Gladin-Kramer.
Like it or not, The United States of America was founded as "One Nation Under God". Furthermore, Wikopedia states, "...According to the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) (2008) 76% of the American adult population identified themselves as Christians..."
If you don't want to live in a Christian Nation, MOVE ELSEWHERE!!''
How about....no. The 1st Amendment and the Constitution of the United States of America ensures by right that I, nor any other non Christian American, has to stand for such a blatant dictatorial attempt to impose government sponsorship of religion. Furthermore, the Treaty of Tripoli quite clearly states that this was NOT founded as Christian nation and our Constitution's tact of denying the application of a national religion cements it in place. We are a REPUBLIC, a nation of laws. We are not a Christian nation. Get over it.
Indy Week • 302 E. Pettigrew St., Suite 300, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation