Among NC's wealthiest counties, ranked by per capita income, Orange is the richest, Wake is #2, and Durham is #8. Framing this article as "The General Assembly Once Again Takes Aim At Urban Areas," downplays the relative wealth of our area. Even though money will flowing from blue counties to red ones and the motives of the Republican legislators are self-serving, isn't the result something progressives should celebrate?
Shorter Indy Endorsement: "Nice work on the lawsuit that made this all possible, little lady. But now is the time to step aside and let the menfolk get down to the hard work of judging."
I am voting for Faires. If she was smart enough to see this was a winnable suit that would open the primary, she is clearly smarter than any other candidate running, or any current NC SC justices.
ProudlyUnaffiliated, study after study show that immigrants (documented and undocumented) in the US are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born citizens. Higher rates of immigration are associated with lower violent and property crime rates.
No previous Presidential administration comes close to the number of deportations carried out by the Obama team. Even adjusted for population, Obama deported far more people than W. Yet, both conservatives (who generally want to deport more) and liberals (who claim a desire to deport fewer) have a vested interest in pretending that Obama is compassionate on immigration. Make no mistake: Obama is not, and the "Deporter-in-Chief" label he was tagged with is correct. I consider most conservative beyond redemption on this on the tragedy, but if liberals want to be perceived as anything other than partisan hacks, they would do better to attack the actions of Obama over the last seven years than the words of a Trump or Cruz.
I will happily support any candidate (Green, Justice Party, or Libertarian) who will fight against the drug war, work to preserve civil liberties, and most importantly (to me) actively oppose all elective foreign interventions. Even if he can't win, I hope Sean is able to get into future debates and force Tillis (who is awful) and Hagan (slightly less awful) take stances on these issues, ideally pulling Hagan to the left.
There are a number of progressive causes listed in the article, but virtually nothing about what WILPF is doing to oppose our current war state. Given the rest of the agenda, I fear the anti-war cause is deep on the back burner for fear of losing Democratic support for the organization. If this group is truly anti-war, there is no way it supports Obama's agenda of 50,000 steady-state troops in Iraq, a significant ESCALATION of troops in Afghanistan, an INCREASE of drones attacks in Pakistan, ILLEGAL war in Libya, and drone attacks in Yemen. I didn't see anything at all about opposition to these war initiatives in the article. Is there any evidence that this isn't simply a Democratic front group that doesn't care about war or peace as long as war is waged by Democrats and not Republicans? Will this group actually protest Obama's war policies? Will they *not* vote for Obama in 2012 due to his war policies? I would hope not, but I'm not that naive. Thanks, but no thanks. I'd prefer to write in Kucinich or Paul.
I just hope the new GOP doesn't tamper with integrity of the 1st district:
or the 2nd
or the 3rd
or the famous 12th
If North Carolina weren't already the most gerrymandered state (ok, the state that has the highest number of egregiously gerrymandered districts -- four of Slate's top 20), I feel certain that the Republicans would make it so.
Just as the Dems have done for 100 years, the GOP will carve it up into incumbent protecting districts to preserve their new generation of crooks.
All Comments »
Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.
Login to choose your subscriptions!
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation