A very inconvenient truth

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Imagine that: John Hood, Stagemanager at the John Locke Puppetshow, writes a whole column today about the Starling-LaRoque debacle in NC House District 10 - and not once mentions his boss's role in influencing the outcome of the election. Nary a peep.

I didn’t hear the attorneys for LaRoque and Starling make the case before the elections board, so perhaps I have missed a critical argument or piece of information that would change my mind. But at first glance it appears that a do-over is the right choice. To allow Starling to claim victory by a margin of only seven votes, with more than that many voters complaining about how elections officials ran the balloting, would not have been in the public interest.

For those of us who held out a sliver of hope that Mr. Hood might one day actually practice the intellectual honesty he's so fondly advocates, this is proof positive that money talks and bullshit walks when it comes to Pope Puppets.

Back at the UNC School of Journalism in Chapel Hill, which John Hood and I both attended, the omission of such a salient fact in an assignment would have qualified for an automatic "F."

Mr. Hood, of course, will argue that the State Board of Elections did not look at the issue of electioneering (yet) in the LaRoque-Starling race and that the "do over" has nothing to do with Art Pope. That's like saying that George Bush doesn't have anything to do with the latest deaths in Iraq because he's vacationing in Texas this week.

Say goodbye to your integrity, John. You just flushed it.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Comments

If I ever

give a Puppet the benefit of the doubt again, will somebody please shoot me?

What was that noise? Put a EU dollar in it!

Say goodbye to your integrity, John. You just flushed it.* A

You do understand that John lastest attack on Ed Cone site was
that he was for Unisex restrooms? The country is going to
hell and he is concern that Eurpore might be ahead of us
in State supported restrooms?

Oh, brother

Jim:

OK, I'll take the bait. I would usually not waste my time with you, whose nonsense here is more comical than threatening (I recommend that my staff occasionally scan it as an example of the kind of uninformed, unfair, illogical, and profane personal invective -- also practiced by the likes of Ann Coulter and Michael Moore -- they should never seek to emulate). But this last spleen-venting is so absurd that I can't overlook it.

Yes, I wrote a piece today about the state board of elections proceeding on the LaRoque-Starling primary. I took LaRoque's side. Art Pope supported Starling. No, the piece did not discuss the complaint before the board of elections about the 527 organization funded by Variety Wholesalers, since that has nothing to do with what the state board did in ordering a special election in District 10. Nothing whatsoever. The dispute here had to do with poll workers, policies, and voting machines in those counties. Again, I agreed with LaRoque's position here.

You seem to suggest that unless I disclosed the fact in this piece that Art Pope is a JLF board member and the Pope Foundation is a JLF donor, I cannot disagree with Art on the LaRoque-Starling special election matter without compromising my integrity. Huh? This information is hardly a secret, and is disclosed clearly on our website. It needs to be disclosed daily, again and again? That, and you, are absurd.

My integrity is not a risk in this matter. Your integrity isn't, either, because it does not exist.

As for the 527 issue, my reading of the law and what Republicans for a Legislative Majority did suggest that there was no violation. The language used in the RLM mailer is virtually identical to language previously used by other non-campaign organizations and upheld by the board of elections as compliant with the law. Perhaps the state board will find differently now. If I thought the 527 funded by Art's family business had transgressed the law, I would say so. All of my donors know that we will say what we think is right, and virtually all of them (including Art, including this morning) have experienced such disagreements. We are grown-ups. You are a child.

In a free society, we all enjoy the right to express our political views and inform our fellow citizens of those views, whether on Christmas Day or Election Day. This right is not limited to those who work for media companies, for example. You have that right. I have that right. Art has that right. Art and his family members, as owners of the privately held Variety Wholesalers, have that right. The executives of the publicly held corporations that pay your bills at CapStrat have that right. Corporations, properly speaking, do not have any rights. They are bundles of contracts among shareholders, employees, customers, vendors, and other individuals. Those individuals still retain their rights as they engage in corporate business, however. Separate from the law, your "argument" -- more like a shriek -- that "corporations" are engaged in wrongdoing when they support 527s, trade associations, referendum campaigns, or other groups and causes that express political views would make a little more sense if applied to publicly held corporations in which thousands or millions of shareholders are not asked explicitly to approve such use of their company's resources. In other words, it might make a little more sense if applied to the expenditures of CapStrat clients, though I still wouldn't be persuaded. But it makes no sense when applied to a family owned business in which all the owners are easily consulted as to their wishes.

I continue to read other threads on BlueNC, because they are informative about Democratic Party politics and discussions, but I usually skip your rantings, which are of an entirely different tone. Perhaps I should have skipped this one, too, but enough is enough. If you can't express your political opinions without character assassination, conspiracy theories, vulgarity, dishonesty, and assassination fantasies, then you are the one deserving of the F from the J-School. I paid better attention.

Connie, please get some help.

Pot meet kettle

whose nonsense here is more comical than threatening (I recommend that my staff occasionally scan it as an example of the kind of uninformed, unfair, illogical, and profane personal invective -- also practiced by the likes of Ann Coulter and Michael Moore -- they should never seek to emulate).

That, and you, are absurd.

My integrity is not a risk in this matter. Your integrity isn't, either, because it does not exist.

Aside from the above, I would like to take issue with actual "views" expressed here:

Separate from the law, your "argument" -- more like a shriek -- that "corporations" are engaged in wrongdoing when they support 527s, trade associations, referendum campaigns, or other groups and causes that express political views would make a little more sense if applied to publicly held corporations in which thousands or millions of shareholders are not asked explicitly to approve such use of their company's resources. In other words, it might make a little more sense if applied to the expenditures of CapStrat clients, though I still wouldn't be persuaded. But it makes no sense when applied to a family owned business in which all the owners are easily consulted as to their wishes.

Where in the law is there any seperation between types of corporations? Where does it say that a family owned business can participate in politics but a publicly owned business cannot? I will tell you. Nowhere. A corporation is a corporation is a corporation. There is ONE exception made for corporations, and that is when a SINGLE person owns a business and has no personal accounts.

Lyndon Helton for NC Senate

"Keep the Faith"

name calling

oh yes, you are such an "Adult"!

I appreciate your response.

As you know, I read your column every day, always on the lookout for a better understanding of how your organization operates, for insights into what would possess a bright person like you to cling so strongly to the free-market nonsense you're so fond of. I read the JLF LockerRoom as well. (I used to wonder why you don't allow open debate there, but after a few months of monitoring it regularly, I now understand why.)

But let's cut to the chase. Here's what I predicted you would say:

Mr. Hood, of course, will argue that the State Board of Elections did not look at the issue of electioneering (yet) in the LaRoque-Starling race and that the "do over" has nothing to do with Art Pope. That's like saying that George Bush doesn't have anything to do with the latest deaths in Iraq because he's vacationing in Texas this week.

And I was right. More important than being right, however, is one of core issues that divides us. You and I have a fundamental difference of opinion about the influence of corporate money in politics. But for me, it's not about the interpretation of current laws. I want to see those laws changed. You're happy to have a world in which corporations can pour money into elections whenever they want. It's a natural extension of your free-market philosophy. In your view, if something can be bought and sold, it should be.

I, on the other hand, believe that the crush of corporate money in politics (including money proferred by businesses that hire me and my company) is not in keeping with the ideals of democracy. And I'm working to change that. My approach and methods may offend your sensibilities, and I'm sorry for that. I'd much prefer we lived in a world where genteel discussion could carry the day. But the extremes of the Republican party (I know, you're an Independent) have dragged the middle so far to the right that the only workable response I can see is an equal and opposite extremism, shrill though it may be.

You and the John Locke Foundation have done an extraordinary job positioning yourselves as the authoritative voice on all things conservative in North Carolina. You have done so with the backing of a man whose quest for rightwing partisan purity rivals that of Karl Rove. I'm not asking you to disclose that fact in everything you write, but to report on a story about a primary election that will be held again because your boss interevened with his 527 money seems more than a little wrong.

Anglico, how eloquent

and Adult! I like YOUR debating style....nothing like a clear-headed answer Without calling the other nasty names.

Addendum

It was an oversight on my part not to give you credit for acknowledging the need for a new election. You called that right.

My, My, My, John Hood thinks your not worth

reading....however, he came out of his ivory tower and answered this.....
Yea, we all understand how hard it is for you to digest the truth, kinda goes down hard doesn't it!

Feeling threatened Mr. Hood? BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!

See if we didn't allow comments like the CJ

we wouldn't have to put up with this.

Our blog, Locker Room ( http://www.johnlocke.org/lockerroom/), does not allow comments so there is now way nor need to join it. Many blogs, including some of the more famous ones like instapundit.com and michellemalkin.com, don’t allow comments. However, our blogs in Charlotte ( http://charlotte.johnlocke.org/blog/) and Wilmington ( http://wilmington.johnlocke.org/blog/) are set up for comments from registered users. Neither, however, allow blog posting by readers.

Hope this helps.

Of course, that is the fear of every right-leaning organization, openness. Because the largest blogs in the blogosphere are Democratic and democratic and DO allow comments. Only those that carry the water of their corporate sponsors fear the truth that lowly readers might bring to the table. Or, that their readers will show their true colors and scare the bejebus out of Eisenhower Republicans

Folks, there is NO simply solution. The ONLY way to have "lasting peace" is to either surrender to the Muslims or kill them all. Period.

....

Sorry, faggots, in this country, at least so far, we've got freedom of speech.

- prominent right-wing blogger "Ogre"

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Oh Hell, It's On Now

Anglico,

John Hood showed up to call you out. Looks like it's time for another ill-informed, absurd rant from your psychotic self.

Mr. Hood has decided that his ethical peccadilloes don't merit scrutiny or repetition. But you've clearly touched a nerve (that was one long comment he left!), and your efforts may linger in the back of his mind whenever he sits before his keyboard.

You're a watchdog, Anglico. And guys like Hood need guys like you.

Thanks for keeping the pressure on.

And Mr. Hood, Are you familiar with the term "whiny-ass titty baby"? It was popularized by uberblogger Duncan Black, and it refers to dishonest people who get upset when anyone reminds folks that they're dishonest people. The abbreviation for this term is WATB. Keep an eye out for it, because it will likely appear often with your name.

Scrutiny Hooligans - http://www.scrutinyhooligans.us

Anglico, please 'splain something...

Mr. Hood,(the adult) used CapStrat a couple of times, I have no idea what that is, but it sorta sounded like a threat. Was it? What is CapStrat?

Anglico, before you answer that

Can you give the rest of us a few hours to make up funny fake answers? Like "Captain Strategery?"

Lance....

Am i suppose to know this? Sorry, guess i'm just one of the uneducated that the JLF and John Hood just hates! (Ha, but I'm a voter....)

No, no

I just like jokes that involve alternative meanings behind acronyms and abbreviations. Dunno why. And I just hated to the the moment go by, but I didn't have anything good ("captain strategery?" sheesh; c'mon).

It's the company

I work for when I'm not blogging and writing novels. I'm not sure why Hood likes to throw that into his rants. Maybe he's just jealous because I have a real job.

No worries.

I think he is obviously trying to out you.

But, anyone with ten minutes can find out who you are (you've written in it all over the blog) and a quick google search will out who you are. If you will remember, that is how we initially met on OP - I googled you and wondered why your companies were no longer located in Chapel Hill.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me