Blog Articles
17
A TAPster who doesn’t like the legislature posed a good question, and it is reinforced by a story on the excellent EducationNC (EdNC) website.
 
The TAPster asked: Who exactly are the members of the legislature? Where are they from? Where did they go to school? What are their backgrounds and life experiences? Why do they do what they do?
 
The TAPster wonders how many of the elected representatives shaping North Carolina’s future have a first-hand knowledge of North Carolina’s past or present. The TAPster hopes that someone will research the answers.
 
Which brings us to an EdNC profile written by Alex Granados of Rep. Craig Horn (R-Union), who co-chairs both the House K-12 Education Committee and the House Education Appropriations Committee.
 
The profile begins:
 
“(Horne) is the education legislator. It’s an odd moniker considering he only moved to the state in 2005, has no education background and didn’t even start out focused on the subject.
 
“An almost 8-year veteran of the Air Force, Horn made his living as a food broker, retiring in 2002 from his business which he says was the largest food broker in the country at the time. When he retired, he worked with big names such as General Mills, Butterball and ConAgra.”
 
It reminds me of an education professor’s warning to his prospective-teacher students: “Everything you do in the classroom will be dictated by old white men who haven’t been in a classroom since college.”
 
So consider this an invitation, or a challenge, to some researcher to answer the TAPster’s questions. 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Posted in: General
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

16
To my readers: Because you often come here through Facebook or Twitter, you may not see Carter’s blogs. But you should. Because even when you don’t see eye-to-eye with him, you get to see where he’s coming from.
 
And sometimes, shockingly enough, you may find yourself agreeing with Carter. So I wanted to be sure you read his blog about the Republican redistricting of Wake County.
 
Especially this:
 
“There aren’t many lines left in politics. But redrawing districts because you lost an election goes too far.”
 
Read his post here.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

16
Supporters of gay marriage figure it’s time to change two things: First, to change the legal definition of marriage to allow a man to marry another man.
 
The other change is even knottier: Discriminating against a man (or woman) because of race is illegal; gay rights supporters want to make it equally illegal to discriminate against a man because of his sexual orientation. Which, in a way, sounds reasonable. But, in another way, is the legal equivalent of giving government a knife to hold to the throats of people who disagree with gay marriage.
 
Under the current law, even if the state of Indiana changes the definition of marriage, Ms. Crystal O’Connor of Memories Pizza can say no to catering a gay wedding. It’s her choice. It’s not discrimination.
 
But if gays become a protected minority that changes. And not catering a gay wedding becomes illegal. And Ms. O’Connor lands in the soup.
 
Twenty-five years ago two Native American drug rehabilitation counselors who worked for the government got fired for smoking peyote. That sounded logical. But the Indians argued peyote smoking was part of their religion so firing them violated their freedom of religion. That sounded a bit odd. But Congress agreed. And New York Senator Charlie Schumer passed a law saying firing the Indians was wrong.
 
Liberals also like to say government has no business telling people what they can or can’t do in the privacy of their bedroom – but what about government walking into Ms. O’Connor’s pizzeria and telling her what to do?
 
Shouldn’t she be allowed to practice her religion – just like an Indian smoking peyote?
 


 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

15
The Reverend William Barber stepped back up onto his soapbox and thundered it’s time that Richard Burr and Thom Tillis left the chains of hatred behind and joined the chorus for justice by voting to confirm Loretta Lynch.
 
The Reverend went on to explain how he’s looked into Ms. Lynch’s heart and how he knows her worth and how she will work to cure racism, sexism, classicism (whatever that is) and homophobia.
 
William Barber’s about as fine a demagogue as has come down the pike in years. And there’s no doubt he has an unmatched penchant for draping himself in holiness.
 
But, then, so did Elmer Gantry.


 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

15
Paul Krugman’s column runs twice weekly on the far-right side of The New York Times’ op-ed page, which is ironic given how far left his opinions are. He’s more liberal than me!
 
But he had a good one this week on the vast differences between any Democrat and any Republican in the Presidential race. He gave Democrats who yearn for a Democratic challenger to Hillary Clinton much food for thought.
 
Krugman decried what he called “personality-based political analysis,” a debatable stance, but his real point was:
 
“There has never been a time in American history when the alleged personal traits of candidates mattered less. As we head into 2016, each party is quite unified on major policy issues — and these unified positions are very far from each other. The huge, substantive gulf between the parties will be reflected in the policy positions of whomever they nominate, and will almost surely be reflected in the actual policies adopted by whoever wins.
 
“For example, any Democrat would, if elected, seek to maintain the basic U.S. social insurance programs — Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid — in essentially their current form, while also preserving and extending the Affordable Care Act. Any Republican would seek to destroy Obamacare, make deep cuts in Medicaid, and probably try to convert Medicare into a voucher system.
 
“Any Democrat would retain the tax hikes on high-income Americans that went into effect in 2013, and possibly seek more. Any Republican would try to cut taxes on the wealthy — House Republicans plan to vote next week to repeal the estate tax — while slashing programs that aid low-income families.
 
“Any Democrat would try to preserve the 2010 financial reform, which has recently been looking much more effective than critics suggested. Any Republican would seek to roll it back, eliminating both consumer protection and the extra regulation applied to large, ‘systemically important’ financial institutions.
 
“And any Democrat would try to move forward on climate policy, through executive action if necessary, while any Republican — whether or not he is an outright climate-science denialist — would block efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions.”
 
No matter how-many-angels-dance-on-the-head-of-a-pin internal debates Democrats have, this is the real debate in 2016.
 
Let’s get on with it. As Krugman says, “American voters will be getting a real choice.”

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

14
When the young woman who runs Memories Pizza in a small town in Indiana told a reporter she wouldn’t cater a gay wedding all hell broke loose – a mob formed on the Internet howling she was an ignorant bigot and a Nazi and there were death threats and threats to burn her business.
 
The mob ruled.
 
The pizzeria closed. The woman fled. The politicians in Indiana did an about face.  
 
Then, unexpectedly, a second mob rose up howling back at the first mob. The Internet posts got ugly. And uglier. Then an unusual thing happened: A man in South Bend, Indiana wrote a post asking people to send donations to the young woman.
 
The Religious Freedom Act is dead in Indiana. But thanks to $842,000 in donations Memories Pizza will remain open.


 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Posted in: General, Issues
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

13
Pat’s attacking Phil’s tax cut plan, and the Senate’s Sales Tax Plan, and the Senate’s Religious Freedom Act (about gay marriage) was a mixed bag – after all, voters like tax cuts and are split on gay marriage (with almost all the Republicans agreeing with Phil).
 
But next Pat hit the mother lode, attacking Phil for the Senate’s plan to redraw the County Commissioners’ districts in Wake.
 
There aren’t many lines left in politics. But redrawing districts because you lost an election goes too far. If the Senate’s new districts had been in place last fall, while losing the county by 30,000 votes, Republicans would have won 5 of the 9 seats on the County Commission.
 
Independents, Democrats and all but the most hard-bitten Republicans know that kind of politics crosses the line. And, right now, Pat McCrory’s the only Republican standing up and speaking out for them.


 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (2) RSS comment feed |

13
Hillary Clinton’s announcement was so damn good it ought to end all the hand-wringing and bed-wetting in the Democratic Party. It won’t, of course, Democrats being Democrats. But she puts a stake down right on the ground where Democrats can win big in 2016 – from the White House all the way down the ballot in North Carolina.
 
She puts it more smoothly than this, but her message is blunt: It’s all of us against them, them being the 1 percent at the top and the Republicans who are their handmaidens.
 
Before we descend into the coming 19 months of over-analyzing, over-thinking and under-listening, let’s frame the presidential race the way most American voters will: Who understands ME and who will really be on MY side?
 
That’s what the video hits squarely: the myriad lives and concerns of real people and families – people starting out in life, people (yes, including same-sex couples) starting a marriage, people retiring, people starting a new career, people starting a new business and even people who just want to keep their dog from eating the trash.
 
The political media hates this sort of thing, of course. As The New York Times noted archly, Clinton “finally” appeared at the 1:33 mark of her 2:18-minute video, titled “Getting Started.” The Times failed to note that, in her first screen shot, she’s listening, not talking. Now we’ll have to endure endless media commentary about whether she’s said enough yet about where she stands and whether she’s done enough yet to make the media happy.
 
The video’s contrast with the Republicans who have so far announced for President was striking. Both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul had the traditional Big Speech at a Big Lectern to a Big Crowd. Their events screamed “Politician!” Clinton’s video said “People!” As of 9 am this morning, her video had been viewed 2.2 million times on YouTube alone. How many people saw Cruz’s and Rand’s announcements?
 
(By the way, Cruz staked out his turf as the reddest red-meat Republican there is. His real base is a handful of billionaires who care about one thing only: not paying taxes. Paul’s target constituency appears to be, as one TAPster noted, white males between the ages of 18 and 20. Which is fitting for a candidate who looks like a cross between a hobbit and one of Harry Potter’s classmates.)
 
Let’s do something radical here. Let’s actually pay attention to what Clinton said, and not just what the big feet and big mouths say about it:
 
“I’m getting ready to do something, too. I’m running for President.
 
“Americans have fought their way back from some tough economic times. But the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top.
 
“Everyday Americans need a champion. And I want to be that champion. So you can do know more than just get by. You can get ahead, and stay ahead. Because when families are strong, America is strong.
 
“So I’m hitting the road to earn your vote — because it’s your time. And I hope you’ll join me on this journey.”
 
Here’s how one wise old North Carolina Democrat sized it up: “People in this country are getting pretty damned fed up with struggling to get by while the top 1 percent take everything and tell the rest of us to go to hell.”
 
That’s the ground where 2016 can be won, and won big. That’s why Democrats who yearn for an Elizabeth Warren to get in the race are wrong. As California Governor Jerry Brown said, “the primaries get into all the little nuances and small differences of candidates of the same party. What Hillary needs is a good debate drawing the distinctions between where she stands and where all these Republicans, these wannabes running around, (stand).”
 
Those differences are big. And that debate is on.

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

10
As Hillary Clinton gets ready to announce, Republicans are obsessed with attacking her and the media is obsessed with her emails, her husband and her relations with, yes, the media. But voters are more likely to care about the fundamental strengths she brings to 2016: she’s a Woman, she’s Older and she’s White – the WOW factor.
 
Jill Lawrence in Politico put it this way: “…for all her challenges, self-made and otherwise, Clinton has demographic advantages that could swing decisive battleground states her way. She is not young; she is not black; and she’s not a guy. All of which gives her an edge in her quest to succeed the young, black guy now occupying the Oval Office.
 
Continuing, “For reasons that are not pretty, nominating Clinton could stanch the flow of white seniors and white working-class voters, particularly men, away from the Democratic Party. ‘She’s white,’ one national Democratic strategist says simply. ‘That’s going to make it easier for her in some places. The reality is race is still an issue in our society. We certainly see that in the way people vote.’ Another party operative, a veteran of several presidential campaigns, was even more emphatic: ‘The race thing cannot be overstated. It’s like a shark. It’s so close to the surface in some places that you can see its fin’.”
 
“See its fin,” hell. You can see the whole damn great white shark of Race hurling itself into the boat and grabbing you by the leg, just like in Jaws.
 
Lawrence’s article reminds us that Americans usually want a President whose main qualification is that he (or, now, she) is different from the last guy – often, but not always, including being a member of the other party: Ike was old, JFK was young. Nixon was a crook, Carter was honest. Carter was weak, Reagan was strong. Bush was a Republican like Reagan, but kinder and gentler. Bush was clueless about the economy, Clinton felt your pain. Clinton was a rake, both Bush II and Gore were (then) fine family men. Bush was a doofus, Obama was smart.
 
Ironically, Republicans who worship Ronald Reagan now say Clinton is too old. She’s 67, which is young (see my blog this week, Get Your Kicks at Age 66). She’ll be 68 on Inauguration Day, more than a year younger than Ronald Reagan when he took the oath. But that’s another story.
 
Probably, Republicans won’t be able to resist being ageist, which will alienate us older voters. And they’re proven over and over they can’t help being sexist and patronizing.
 
We’ll see how Hillary’s rollout goes. My guess is that she’ll run a far better campaign than in 2008. You learn a lot when you lose. She has a better team around her and gets better advice. Last time, her pros wanted her to act tough and downplay being a woman.
 
This time, the real Hillary could be exactly what Americans really want

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

08
A young woman wearing a black dress, sitting on a stool legs crossed, speaking with a measured British accent, looked into a camera and told how after Issah Al Qurain’s village was captured soldiers came into his home, took his money, then told him to convert or they’d kill his wife and children. 
 
He converted.
 
A fortnight later the soldiers came back and told him under their law – Sharia Law – his ten year old daughter had to marry.  
 
He fled across the Nineveh Plain, talking his way through three road blocks, following back roads, arriving homeless, penniless and outcast in Kurdistan with his wife and children.  
 
The Monastery St. Michael, sitting on a mountainside above the plain (amid towns and villages where Christians trace their roots back to the time of Paul the Apostle) is, itself, 1600 years old and has survived Mongols, Saracens and Ottomans.
 
After ISIS captured Mosul, six miles away, soldiers painted red letters on the homes of Christians – as Nazis painted Stars of David on the homes of Jews – then gave them three choices: Convert, pay a ransom, or beheading .
 
Mosul emptied. The villages emptied. As Christians fled. Leaving behind seven monks in the monastery.
 
In Erbil, the capital of Kurdistan, the young woman, now dressed in a dark shirt and jeans, interviews the Catholic Archbishop, asking, Where are the Christians of the Nineveh Plain today?
 
Looking like a stoic Italian friar instead of an Archbishop born in Baghdad, Basar Wanda says, “Disappearing. It’s dying.
 
The young woman asks about the American airstrikes on ISIS and he explains, “For me, ISIS is a cancer. It’s a disease. So sometimes you take some hard measures, unfortunate measures to treat this cancer.”
 
So you want a major military offensive to retake Mosul, getting rid of the Islamic State, defeating them militarily?
 
He stares back at her with black eyes. “Please God.”
 
A ticking stopwatch replaces the young woman on the screen and the video ends – it was made by 60 Minutes.
 
Four years ago, the night a hundred thousand men filled Tahrir Square in Cairo, when Hosni Mubarak’s government fell, the young woman was sent to cover the demonstration; when her crew turned out the light on her camera to change a battery, in the darkness, a mob of men surrounded her, tore her away from her guards, tore away her clothes – then raped her repeatedly.
 
Twenty-five minutes later the mob shifted driving the men holding her toward a fence on the side of the square where a line of Egyptian women sat – and the women saved her, closing around her, standing in a line between her and the mob.
 
She fled Egypt, returning home, was hospitalized, recovered, then returned to work, covering wars in Libya and Iraq.
 
After her report for 60 Minutes about the lost Christians of the Nineveh Plain, Lara Logan was hospitalized again due to injuries she received in Cairo.


 

 

[Click to read and post comments...]

Posted in: General, Issues
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (0) RSS comment feed |

Page 1 of 405First   Previous   [1]  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next   Last   
Carter & Gary
 
Carter Wrenn
 
 
Gary Pearce
 
 
The Charlotte Observer says: “Carter Wrenn and Gary Pearce don’t see eye-to-eye on many issues. But they both love North Carolina and know its politics inside and out.”
 
Carter is a Republican. 
Gary is a Democrat.
 
They met in 1984, during the epic U.S. Senate battle between Jesse Helms and Jim Hunt. Carter worked for Helms and Gary, for Hunt.
 
Years later, they became friends. They even worked together on some nonpolitical clients.
 
They enjoy talking about politics. So they started this blog in 2005. 
 
They’re still talking. And they invite you to join the conversation.
 
 
Follow Gary


Follow Carter

 


Order The Book


 

Carter's Book!

Purchase Carter's Book:

Spirits of the Air

Support independent publishing: buy this book on Lulu.

Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement