Guarino

Signs of Extremism in Raleigh

While the media has been careful to label our state Democratic establishment in Raleigh as moderate, there are telltale signs of the political extremism that has lingered beneath the surface and had an impact.

The state legislature passes, and the governor signs into law, two bills that cut sentences for murderers, rapists and other felons.  We already have a revolving door criminal justice system in our state, and this will make it worse.

There is also news that state revenues once again are falling below projections.  It will once again be very difficult to craft a balanced budget.  The main culprit, however, is unrestrained spending at the state level.

Meanwhile, the state community college system continues to advance its proposal to admit illegal aliens.  The Democratic state legislature and Governor Perdue have not intervened to prevent the system from pursuing this policy.

While the existence of political moderation among the Democrats in Raleigh has been rumored, it is sometimes difficult to find evidence to substantiate it.

The Work of Downtown Greensboro Partisans

It is an open question as to whether it is justifiable to shunt additional public resources, or take special public measures, to bolster your downtown.  There are currently at least a couple of proposed measures that would seem to work toward that end:

1. Sam Hieb raises questions about the unanimous council vote to seek federal stimulus money for the proposed downtown hotel.  Even without considering the ethics of accepting misbegotten stimulus money, I would also question the wisdom of using governmental mechanisms to add more hotel capacity to our city when, only a couple of hours prior, a representative of the local hotel industry was whining before our city council.  He urged approval of the aquatic center to bolster the local hospitality industry because of decreased business,  and because of the addition of ten new hotels in the city within the past year.  Apparently increased competition and a contracted economy are taking their toll on the local hotel/motel business.

Are supporting the downtown, and accepting stimulus money, of such compelling urgency that we should make decisions that defy plain economic sense?

2. A proposal to add new parking deck capacity downtown, I believe, has previously been talked up by Robbie Perkins.  The fact that he may be in favor does not make the proposal inherently wrongheaded.  If the deck will pay for itself in the long run, then it might be worth pursuing. 

3. We learn that T. Diane Bellamy-Small is consulting with Perkins about the possibility of a new youth center downtown in the old YWCA building.  I think this is a very bad idea that would undermine the desire to hold the line on increased municipal spending.  And I doubt it will add anything positive to the downtown community.  We need to be wary of any horse-trading that may occur within the Melderec con Simkins faction to make this happen. 

A Tea Party Party?

A couple of recent polls have indicated the strength of the Tea Party movement.

First, Rasmussen found if the Tea Party was a party of its own, it would best the GOP.  And then, an NBC/WSJ poll found the Tea Party is viewed more favorably than the Republicans or the Democrats.

Perhaps this is a signal that the Republican Party needs to return even more to our constitutional roots, and to adopt an even more conservative stance on domestic issues.

Otherwise, this other party can position itself as the Tea Party party.  In fact, it is already attempting to do so.

More Tony Rand News

Tony Rand, who served with Greensboro's own Kay Hagan as part of the leadership of the North Carolina Senate, is facing more difficulties, as related by Conservative NC.

It appears that Rand's situation may need to be examined by U.S. Attorney George Holding before the incumbent federal prosecutor is ultimately replaced by the nominee Hagan had recommended to Barack Obama.

T. Diane Bellamy-Small: Candidate for Award?

When I went to medical school at the Medical College of Virginia in Richmond,the graduating class every year had a tradition.  It was to hold a comedy show for the entire school community; and during the show, the "Anus Equinus" award was granted to the faculty member who had most poorly treated students, interns and residents.

John Hammer writes in the Rhino about why T. Diane Bellamy-Small appears to be the Greensboro City Council's most uncivil member ever.  It appears Ms. Bellamy-Small, if we had an Anus Equinus award locally, would be a high-ranking candidate.

I was present when she pulled her stunt.  It was interesting that she was playing overtly to the swim center crowd, which was a bit unhappy with the council member-- Danny Thompson-- she was trying to humiliate.  In fact, some members of the swim center crowd were cheering on her game-playing.  They were behaving like children.

But Hammer explains that Thompson's vote was entirely justified had proper procedure been followed. 

This was the second time within a period of several days that the Melderec con Simkins gang had behaved poorly.  John Hammer confirms in part what I had reported earlier this week:

Knight learned at the retreat ... that the rules are different for a mayor who is registered Republican.

For instance, the mayor has in the past been able to appoint councilmembers to boards and commissions at will. However, Knight was told at the retreat by Councilmembers Robbie Perkins and Zack Matheny that if they didn't get the appointments they wanted, they had five votes to overrule Knight's appointments.

Knight had not even announced what his appointments were, but Perkins and Matheny had heard that they didn't get what they wanted.

Health Care Developments

The contours of the "health care reform" debate in the United States Senate seem to change almost daily.  From the beginning, it has always seemed to me that Obama and the national Democratic congressional leadership would be willing to make whatever compromise is necessary to pass a bill.  The big question has always been whether Harry Reid can formulate a compromise that will not drive away certain Democratic senators. 

In addition, with the waning popularity of health care reform, certain Democratic senators will be putting themselves at political risk if they vote in favor.  The question is whether all 60 Democratic senators will be willing to fall on their sword for Barack Obama; or whether any Republican senators will be persuaded to vote in favor.

The recent announcement that there will not be a public option, and that the Medicare expansion will not take place, does not remedy all of the problems with the bill in evolution.  It is doubtful that any bill passed will fulfill Barack Obama's various pledges regarding "health care reform". 

We must also remember that the health care exchange/cooperative concept is a trojan horse for the public option, and will ultimately lead to single payer.  The Democratic approach will vastly increase the degree of socialism in the health care sector of our economy.  The Heritage Foundation has published an excellent summary of the problems with that approach, which I am reproducing below:

Obamacare Is The Public Option

According to recent reports, the Medicare buy-in compromise that Majority leader Reid (D-NV) and President Barack Obama heralded as the grand health care compromise just last week, is now dead. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) is being credited with killing Reid’s deal, and some are even suggesting that the entire idea of a public option is dead. But do not be fooled.

Through incremental expansions of government programs like the State Children’s Health Insurance (SCHIP) program the left has been slowly moving us closer to single payer government run health care system for decades. Obamacare will only accelerate that trend; the only question is how fast. You can’t take the public option out of Obamacare. Obamacare is a public plan. Here are five reasons why:

1. Obamacare Raises, Not Lowers, Health Care Costs. According to President’s own Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the agency in charge of running Medicare and Medicaid, both the House and Senate health bills raise overall health care spending in the United States. The House bill would raise national health expenditures by $289 billion and the Senate bill would raise them by $234 billion.

2. Federal Regulation of Health Insurance. Both the House and Senate bills would result in sweeping and complex federal regulation of health insurance that will create a one-size-fits-all federal health plan that will drive up (not down, as promised by the President) the cost of health insurance.

3. A Ticking Entitlement Time-Bomb. Both the House and Senate would dramatically expand eligibility for Medicaid and extend generous taxpayer-funded subsidies to the middle class. Combined, such commitments are the biggest cost items in the bills would result in scores of Americans dependent on the government to finance their health care. Both bills hide their true costs by claiming cuts and program restrictions that are unlikely to stick. In this regard, the Senate bill is far worse, creating staggering discrepancies between what families with the same incomes would pay for health insurance based on who they bought their insurance through. When future Congress’ “fix” these inequalities, the true cost of Obamacare will skyrocket. According to a recent analysis by the Lewin Group (for the Peterson Foundation) just by adding in the doctor fix (which they should), the Senate and House bills will add to the deficit — $196 Billion in the first 10 years and $765 increase in the second decade under the Senate bill.

4. Employer Mandates. Both the House and Senate bills would impose penalties on many employers. An employer mandate would hurt low-income workers and would stifle much-needed economic growth. Our country does not need a job killing employment tax at a time of 10.2% unemployment.

5. Individual Mandates. Both the House and Senate bills would require virtually all people to obtain health care coverage or pay a penalty, an unprecedented an unconstitutional first for the federal government. Those individuals who do not purchase government qualified health care coverage would be subject to new tax penalties and in some cases jail time.

Heritage Foundation Director, Center for Health Policy Studies Bob Moffit comments: “If the public option goes, it will have only a marginal influence on the substance of the bill. The whole bill is a public option: a massive transfer of power and control over health benefits and financing to Washington.”

Manhattan Declaration: Conclusion

This is the final passage I am excerpting from the Manhattan Declaration.  It includes a call for us to be willing to engage in civil disobedience:

Through the centuries, Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required...

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family.

Cops in Black and White, Part XC

I am posting belatedly about the latest segment in the Bledsoe series.  It is found here. 

This segment mostly covers material regarding the News and Record's role that has been previously discussed throughout the series.  I will therefore not provide a summary except the following recent information.

Taft Wireback reported on the news conference last month attended by the Special Intelligence officers and their attorney.  Wireback failed to point out the meaning of the results of the internal investigations which had cleared these officers. 

John Robinson has recently denied on his blog that the paper had gotten the GPD story wrong.

Perdue Soft on Crime, Despite Facade Created

Conservative NC:

In light of today's order that two of these inmates be freed and Governor Perdue's promise that she will do "everything she can" to keep them in prison, it bears repeating that this Governor has done everything she could to ensure that repeat offenders convicted of dangerous crimes are back on the streets earlier by signing S488 and S489.  In addition, there are inmates convicted of the same offenses as those in question being released in North Carolina every week without any comment or action from this administration.

Manhattan Declaration: Religious Liberty

The Manhattan Declaration continues with a discussion of religious liberty and freedom of conscience:

It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law—such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.

We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel pro-life institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and pro-life physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti- discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business.

Aquatic Center Approved by Council

On a series of 5-4 votes, the Greensboro City Council voted tonight to approve the creative financing arrangement for the aquatic center.  The council also refused to allow voters the opportunity to vote in another referendum for the shortfall.

I spoke at the hearing, and explained that any council member who votes in favor of this project becomes a party to all the deception that took place when advancing it.  I also explained that council members voting in favor also become a party to the practice of taking income from those who have less-- for the benefit of those who have more.

The members voting in favor included Nancy Vaughan, Zack Matheny, Robbie Perkins, Jim Kee and T. Diane Bellamy-Small.  Of course, this was classical vote-buying behavior-- currying favor with interest groups. 

Particularly disappointing were the votes by Vaughan and Matheny.  Jim Kee flip-flopped from the position he expressed during the campaign.  The Melderec con Simkins faction prevailed.  And while the vote was not a surprise, it was, after all, typical Greensboro politics.

Pulpit Forum to Help Select New Greensboro Police Chief?

Yes!Weekly:

Young said the search for a new police chief is already underway. (Chief Tim Bellamy has announced that he will retire next year.) Young said the human resources department has already talked to one recruitment firm last week, and plans to talk to others this week. He plans to conduct a national search rather than recruiting from inside the department. Once the list is narrowed to a handful of contenders, Young said he would like the candidates to appear publicly before different panels, one comprised of sheriffs, judges and prosecutors, one comprised of citizens, one comprised of business leaders, one comprised of citywide staff, and one comprised of members of pastors from both the minority and majority communities.

I wonder what particular expertise pastors might have with respect to controlling crime or running a police department.  I suppose one could argue they are legitimate stakeholders in the selection of a police chief, but on what basis?

We need to be concerned that this is a back-door mechanism to somehow give Cardes Brown, Nelson Johnson and/or other Pulpit Forum members input into the selection of the new chief.  That would be a terrible mistake.

Disturbing Developments at City Council Retreat: Zack Matheny Reported to Have Threatened New Mayor

The new Greensboro City Council held a special retreat over the last couple of days.  I have heard through the grapevine about some things that occurred at this retreat.  It warrants grave concern for all Greensboro citizens who want us to have good government in our city.

Apparently three or four media outlets were present at the meeting.

I am told that a coalition has formed that was apparently rounded up by Robbie Perkins.  It apparently includes T. Diane Bellamy-Small, Jim Kee, Zack Matheny and Nancy Vaughan.  It appears these five are forming a united group that is seeking to undermine the authority of the newly elected mayor, Bill Knight.  I am told they are opposing Knight on the Aquatic Center, on commission assignments for council members, and even on the matter of seating arrangements at council meetings.  Some of it seems incredibly petty.

If the information provided to me is true, these members do not give a flip about what is best for Greensboro or its citizens.  Instead, they are seeking to perpetuate the old Melderec con Simkins ruling establishment.

What makes it even more egregious is that they have pulled these maneuvers when Knight has been mayor for less than two weeks.  They have not even given him an opportunity to become acclimated to the position, and are already waging power plays against him.  This group maintains the facade that they seek unity, respect among members and an appropriate tone for conducting business.  In reality, however, they engage in the most reprehensible gutter politics.

One or more members apparently were unhappy over what they learned might be their commission assignments and their placement on the council dais.  At least, that is what was discussed at the retreat.  But the reality goes much deeper than that.  This is about the old guard reasserting control.  

I am told at the end of the meeting, Matheny approached Knight and threatened him.  Apparently he told Knight that if he did not get reassigned to the coliseum commission, then he had five votes to reverse whatever Knight tried to do regarding assignments.

I know that it all sounds very petty, because it is.

Some people might disagree with Bill Knight's position on the issues.  But no one can make the assertion that he has anything other than the city's best interests at heart.  He was treated in an indefensible manner by the newly formed opposing bloc, and this is a bad prognostic sign for what will follow.  He did not even remotely deserve that.

Local citizens concerned about this series of events need to do two things.  First, they need to show up at the council meeting on Tuesday night when the discussion of the aquatic center takes place.  Anyone who wishes to be seated in the council chambers should be sure to arrive early-- by 5:00 P.M.

And second, they need to register their disapproval in whatever way they see fit.

There is a lesson to be learned.  When selecting council members, voters need to consider a candidate's character.  District 3 voters unfortunately neglected to do this when they elected Matheny two consecutive election cycles.

Update 12/13: Amanda Lehmert reports in the News and Record.  It is ironic that, in view of the above detailed circumstances, Matheny was making a call to "end the political jockeying"-- when it is very clear that is precisely what took place when the Melderec con Simkins bunch were assembling their five votes against Knight over a couple of picayune issues.

North Carolina Taking a Sharp Turn Further Left?

Recent news revealed that Tony Rand resigned abruptly from the North Carolina Senate (it turns out, under a cloud).  And now we learn that another influential legislator, David Hoyle, is leaving as well.  Doug Clark posted earlier this week that these two departures add up to a shift to the left in the North Carolina Senate. 

The concern is that these two individuals were part of North Carolina's "business progressives" establishment which is represented to be more moderate on economic matters than the national Democrats.  The North Carolina Senate has overall been less liberal than the House, and this has probably had some impact on policy.

North Carolina overall has not done well from the standpoint of public education or criminal justice, so our "business progressive" orientation has not helped in those spheres.  But arguably from an economic standpoint, we could have been worse off than we have been.  Although North Carolina acts as if it wants to be like New Jersey, we are not quite there yet.

One of the unspoken dynamics is the effect the departure of these two senators will have on pro-life, pro-family policy in the state of North Carolina.  Our state overall has not been strong in these areas.  Efforts to pass good bills have been repeatedly stymied by the Democratic legislature.  The North Carolina Family Policy Council has recently published an analysis that details how our laws in North Carolina are much worse than those in surrounding states like Virginia and North Carolina.

I had the opportunity to speak last weekend with a high-ranking pro-family advocate in the state of North Carolina.  This person told me he was concerned regarding the departure of Tony Rand from the Senate.  If we have done so poorly with regard to family policy in our state, I asked, why would he be concerned?  This person explained to me that Rand was one of those legislators who applied the brakes when some of the most irresponsible legislation reached the Senate.

The year 2010 might represent an enormous opportunity for North Carolina Republicans to increase their numbers in the state legislature.  Some of the seats are gerrymandered to the point that they are non-competitive.  But clearly there is much at stake, because if Republicans do not gain a fair number of seats, our state is turning further to the left.  That would be very bad for North Carolina's future.

Republicans at the state level need to have a sound strategy for approaching the 2010 election cycle.  They need to recruit good candidates, raise much money, develop a strong message to communicate with the state's residents, and work relentlessly.  Many Carolinians otherwise might not like the outcome, given what appears to be happening in the Senate.

Manhattan Declaration: The implications of accepting gay marriage

The Manhattan Declaration concludes its discussion of gay marriage:

On inspection, ... the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships. Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships? No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential.

No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as a marriage. Marriage is an objective reality—a covenantal union of husband and wife—that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice and the common good. If it fails to do so, genuine social harms follow. First, the religious liberty of those for whom this is a matter of conscience is jeopardized. Second, the rights of parents are abused as family life and sex education programs in schools are used to teach children that an enlightened understanding recognizes as “marriages” sexual partnerships that many parents believe are intrinsically non-marital and immoral. Third, the common good of civil society is damaged when the law itself, in its critical pedagogical function, becomes a tool for eroding a sound understanding of marriage on which the flourishing of the marriage culture in any society vitally depends. Sadly, we are today far from having a thriving marriage culture. But if we are to begin the critically important process of reforming our laws and mores to rebuild such a culture, the last thing we can afford to do is to re-define marriage in such a way as to embody in our laws a false proclamation about what marriage is.

And so it is out of love (not “animus”) and prudent concern for the common good (not “prejudice”), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture.

Mike Baron's Rebuttal of Ed Cone's Post on Water

Ed Cone said this.

Here is Mike's rebuttal.

The Black Officers' Latest Suit

Says local attorney Sam Spagnola:

Discovery should be fun considering all other investigations found nothing.

I sure hope that the new city council resists any pressure to settle.

The Aquatic Center: How the Income Transfers Will Flow

The News and Record has a prominently placed story this morning trumpeting the possible benefits of the proposed aquatic center.  It talks about all the various meets and competitions it might attract that would cause out-of-towners to stay in Greensboro hotels.  It suggests, however, the facility itself will likely operate at a deficit.  The article also points out several other complexes in the state of North Carolina with which the Greensboro facility would be competing.

The story does not attempt to describe the elaborate web of deception and the breach of ethics associated with the manner in which the previous city council advanced this proposal.  John Hammer spoke about that yesterday in the Rhino.

But let us look at the manner in which this proposal redistributes income.  Remember that it would ultimately be supported by local property taxes.

It takes money not only from those who own property, but also from those who rent-- because renters indirectly pay property taxes.  These people include folks in the working class and the lower middle class.  Among these groups are lots of black people.

It takes money from these groups and redistributes it to those who will benefit from the aquatic center.

Who are those people?  The owners of local hotels, and people who participate in competitive swimming.

But let us look further at the demographics of competitive swimming.  I do not see anyone alleging that this is a sport that attracts representative numbers of people from the lower middle class or the working class.  I do not see anyone alleging that it attracts representative numbers of African Americans.  In fact, it is a sport that is predominantly upper-middle class, upper class and white.

So let's sum it up.

We would be transferring wealth and income from the lower middle class and the working class to the upper middle class and the wealthy. 

We would be transferring wealth and income from blacks to whites.

We would be transferring wealth and income from those who pay taxes, directly or indirectly, to two narrow groups-- those in the swim community, and the owners of hotels.

Manhattan Declaration: The Push for Gay Marriage

The Manhattan Declaration discusses the meaning of the push for gay marriage, and why it must be resisted:

The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex and multiple partner relationships is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil and religious law and in the philosophical tradition that contributed to shaping the law. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture. It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. In spousal communion and the rearing of children (who, as gifts of God, are the fruit of their parents’ marital love), we discover the profound reasons for and benefits of the marriage covenant...

Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being—the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual— on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation. That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.

Burr Relents

As reported by Jeff Sykes at Conservative NC, Senator Richard Burr now plans to block the nomination of Thomas Walker.

Thank goodness Burr made this decision.  We would not have wanted to hold our collective breath waiting for Kay Hagan to do it.