Recent reader comments

  • Reply to: Thanks Steve   19 hours 39 min ago

    The "easy" part is how quickly really important stories are disseminated amongst news outlets these days. I keep like 3-4 tabs open on major state media pages, so spotting the top 2-3 issues of the day is not hard at all.

    The difficult part is determining the "hierarchy" of daily news. That's where my personal "fingerprint" could easily leave a smudge if I'm not careful. I have to balance what I believe is the most important issue(s) with what a majority (plurality?) of Progressive readers and thinkers believe, especially when it comes to the top story (the only one visible if you don't open the whole page). Some days it's glaringly obvious, and some days it's almost a toss-up.

    Now, that would be difficult enough without factoring in social media like Facebook and Twitter, where (more often than not) sensational stories with little real-world consequences take the lead. It's one (big) reason I don't open those pages until after the daily news brief is finished. Except Tuesday :).

    There's a couple of things I would like our readers to understand: The first is that we decided long ago to focus (heavily, if not exclusively) on North Carolina-related political news. The sheer amount of damage, of pain and suffering, that has resulted from voters not paying attention to what's happening in our state demands that focus. So, if you see a story about some Republican lawmaker diddling his campaign reports at the top of the page, but down below, there's a story about ICE locking up toddlers in a detention camp, it's not because we care less about those children than somebody who spent campaign donations on Brooks Brothers suits. It's about focusing energy.

    The second thing I would (really) like readers to understand is, BlueNC has always been a member-driven website. While I may contribute much of the content, I'm still just a member, like everybody else. And I miss important stories on probably a daily basis. If there's something you feel needs covering, please do so. Either in the comments, or as a full diary. If you've been wanting to write something but need a little guidance, send me a message. There's both a private message option (I think it's still operating), or an e-mail re-direct. I'll be glad to help in any way I can.

    And lastly, thanks for this comment, and thanks to everybody reading this for being involved in our political process. The stress is great and the rewards are few, but the stakes are way too high to just walk away from it.

  • Reply to: Sunday News: From the Editorial pages   20 hours 41 min ago

    This week's loser is the conservative dinosaur Cal Thomas trying to rewrite history about Brett Kavanaugh:

    In a speech announcing her vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, reminded me of some of the great orators of the past. Her speech was measured in tone, substantive in content and delivered with conviction.

    Collins is no conservative. She has voted in favor of abortion and same-sex marriage while towing a more moderate line on economics. Her speech supporting Kavanaugh and denouncing the smears against him and the distortion of his judicial record was as good as any delivered by her more conservative colleagues.

    Bolding mine, because this dude has been writing for a half-century, and he should know by now that you don't "tow" the line unless you're fishing, you toe the line. It may seem petty for me to point that out, but when a national syndicated columnist blunders like this, the misuse of that term spreads like wildfire.

    Back to the propaganda:

    She correctly labeled the process that has become corrupt, nasty and divisive: “We have come to the conclusion of a confirmation process that has become so dysfunctional it looks more like a caricature of a gutter-level political campaign than a solemn occasion.”

    Collins chastised activists who sent out fundraising letters opposing President Trump’s nominee even before Kavanaugh was announced: “…we have seen special-interest groups whip their followers into a frenzy by spreading misrepresentations and outright falsehoods…”

    Oh, it was dysfunctional alright, but that's because the Senate Republicans didn't even allow their chosen female questioner to ask her questions, much less get the answers the entire nation was waiting to hear. And the vast majority of the "misrepresentations and falsehoods" associated with that hearing came out of Brett Kavanaugh's mouth itself, not from "special-interest groups." Which pretty much undermines this naive bullshit:

    After saying she has been assured by Kavanaugh of his respect for precedent — by which she meant fealty to Roe v. Wade and the Affordable Care Act — she said that Kavanaugh was not a sure vote for policies of the Trump administration. She pointed out that other justices nominated by Republican presidents have voted in ways that went against their wishes, United States vs. Nixon being one of the more significant ones.

    There was a glimmer of hope in Collins’ speech for those who believe Roe was wrongly decided. She said, “There are, of course, rare and extraordinary times where the Supreme Court would rightly overturn a precedent.”

    And that, in a nutshell, is all you need to know about Susan Collins. She knew Kavanaugh would lie to her, and she wanted Kavanaugh to lie to her, especially about Roe v. Wade. So that she wouldn't have to spend the rest of her life hiding from furious women.

    In what might be one of those “carved in stone” quotes, Collins delivered her most profound line: “We must always remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in jeopardy.”

    Both Collins and Cal Thomas are oblivious to the irony of that statement.

    When Brett Kavanaugh's passions were inflamed, any hope Christine had of being treated fairly went out the window. Overpowered physically and restrained, hand over her mouth to stifle her screams, while the other hand groped and tried to undress her. Not only fairness was casually dismissed, but both her freedom and her very life were in jeopardy.

    To posit that Brett Kavanaugh is the one who was "treated unfairly" is easily the most absurd assessment that came out of this process, and we need to make sure Republicans pay dearly for that outrageous hypocrisy come November.

  • Reply to: Thanks Steve   21 hours 1 min ago

    I do a weekly newsletter for the county party and I can not imagine how much work this daily stuff requires. I can imagine how much work the Tuesday round-up is - and I thank you for that too!

  • Reply to: Thanks Steve   1 day 12 hours ago

    Thanks, brother. It's more fun than frustrating, which is really the best you can hope for these days.

  • Reply to: Go high or go low? Democrats face a rhetorical crossroads   1 day 14 hours ago

    It was good to see so many candidates and the party at Winston-Salem Pride today!