Dear John Hood.

As the Grand Duke of All Things Conservative here in North Carolina, and the Crown Prince in the Kingdom of the Puppetmaster, you are, we assume, responsible for the gleeful frenzy on the Carolina Journal website over the fall of Speaker Jim Black. Indeed, you seem to have covered almost every angle of the story, except for the small fact that the progressive community here at BlueNC and elsewhere in North Carolina have led the way in calling for the Speaker to step down.

Keep reading . . .

Puppets, on the other hand, appear to have no interest whatsoever in cleaning the filthy house in which you play. You have not called for Chuck "Delay" Taylor to explain his shady business dealings in any way. The best you've done is this pathetic column by a junior puppet, complaining that the N&O had a double standard for covering corruption. Double standard? That's rich, especially coming from the Puppet show, where double standard appears to be the only guiding principle.

And what about your silence on the erosion of civil liberties and privacy rights in America under the reign of Dear Leader? And on the criminal war of choice in Iraq? You're happy to cover national topics when it suits you, but when it might focus criticism on Friends of the Puppetmaster, mum's the word. I thought you guys were Libertarians. The truth is, you're Republican hacks through and through.

Let us know when you decide to shine the light of truth on Republican crooks and sleaze. Let us know when you're willing to look honestly in the mirror. Just stop by with a link to a credible column about Charles Taylor, for example. Or maybe about the fiscal insanity running rampant in your government. When that happens, I'll stop back by the Carolina Journal and continue to link to your stories.

In the meantime though, you're off the list of sites I check each day. Which is sad. I lose one of my reliable sources for tracking wingnut talking points. And you lose your only regular reader.


PS I would have said this on one of the Puppet blogs, but, of course, you don't allow public comments.


I know.

Don't hold my breath.

I made this sticky with the

I made this sticky with the plan of leaving it front and center into the afternoon. This is key. Jim Black's problems are Jim Black's. To the extent that they are NC progressives', we are taking visible steps to deal with them. That's responsibility. That's integrity.

Grow Up


Yes, I google and technorati every now and then, guaranteeing that I'll run across posts such as yours that are so personal. I read BlueNC on occasion, sometimes chuckling, sometimes gaining some useful insights, and rarely have felt the need to respond. But you frame specific questions to me personally, so let me provide some answers.

On Black, congratulations for being ahead of the curve among Democrats. You weren't, strictly speaking, ahead of the liberal Democrats that JLF andd Carolina Journal have mentioned prominently, interviewed for radio and our web site, and worked with on ethics and lobbying reform issues during the past two years, but you are to be commended. Sorry if you have felt left out, so to speak.

On Charles Taylor, we did put some reporting resources into the story several years ago, when the trial of his political allies was raging. We tried to improve on the public record regarding whether Taylor had personally approved the loans in question. We didn't get anything. CJ folks follow a lot of leads that don’t pan out as stories for publication. In this case, the story appeared to be a "he said, he said." I commented on the case at the time in other ways, TV and radio, but did not write a column on it. Perhaps I will soon, once I re-familiarize myself with the details of the case. As for the allegations on his Russia dealings and the like, please provide me with some links to non-hyperventiliating investigators or commentators with useful information. Given the prevalence of the 11th district in NC politics this year (I fear that the 8th is no longer competitive, with Dunn bowing out), I'd like to get up to speed.

As to your use of terms such as "puppets" and "wingnuts," with respect, please grow up. I feel odd speaking to you in those terms, given our relative ages, but your rhetoric is sophomoric. I feel like I'm back in high school. If you have an argument to make, make it. Absurdly suggesting that everyone who disagrees with you is a "puppet" of Art Pope or Bush is a waste of everyone's time. Are suggesting that I'd be a liberal Democrat but Art is paying me to pretend otherwise? In addition to misunderstanding our finances and the way public-policy organizations of all political stripes work, this is a silly proposition. If that's not what you mean, why use the term "puppet"? For its alliterative qualities?

If you've been reading and watching my work and that of my colleagues, you know well that we've been intensely critical of Bush's fiscal record, for years. Most recently, he was excoriated at our election-preview panel last week for his spending record. I wrote a column and a radio commentary about it. During the past 18 months, we've had speakers attack the Patriot Act and other aspects of the war on terror. Within our staff, there are supporters of the Iraq invasion (I'm still one) and strong opponents of it, both groups vocal in public and on our blogs.

As for your other assertions, we have created two local blogs (Charlotte and Wilmington) and will soon have three more (Asheville, Triad, Triangle) that allow comments. The Locker Room does not because, like NRO's the Corner and similar venues at the national level, it is intended as a give-and-take among staff and affiliated writers. Not all web features have the same design and audience. As for you being the only regular reader, why make such a risible claim? It conflicts with your apparently frequent complaints about JLF and the Pope Puppets having excessive influence. I hate to break it to you, but we have many thousands of visitors to our sites each week, most returning visitors.

Finally, please tell your wife hello from a former and admiring student.

You Two Appear to Know Each Other

So, I will leave that aspect aside. I think a main issue in this is that the conservative side of things tends to engage in a combination of moral equivalency when they are caught in corruption, such as trying to bring Democrats into the Delay mess, and moral exclusion when they are taking the high ground, such as trying to make this seem like only conservatives calling for Black's ouster (also from Carter Wrenn's constant diatribes). I think to be a more productive debate, it needs to be a more honest debate. One side is not good and another is not evil (sorry W.). We need to work together to bring our state more competence, integrity, and common good. Any broad slap at the other side of "they are doing nothing" only makes the debate more political and lessens the opportunity to get real progress.

Other than that. I appreciate your willingness to engage in debate in our territory. Keep coming back, just remember to give us credit next time.

It's worth noting that, unlike BlueNC,

The Pope machine is a for-hire spin machine. Funding by arch-conservative Art Pope (and his family's foundation) aside, Pope outlets the John Lock Foundation, the Pope Center for Higher Ed, and the NC Institute for Constitutional Law have taken just short of $200,000 from Koch family foundations.

Who's the Koch family? Charles and David Koch own Koch Industries, and they've been listed as two of America's 50 wealthiest individuals. Koch Ind is the single largest privately energy company in the US. Daddy Koch was a member of the John Birch Society, and David and Charles have been funding right-wing spin operations to the tune of more than $100,000,000 since the mid-eighties. [Source:]

The Pope crew is hired to do a job. The authors who ignore the left's efforts to clean its own house aren't the first people to put a paycheck above personal integrity.



Thanks for the reply. Perhaps it is worth repeating that power corrupts. In Washington, most of the corruption currently evident is among Republicans, because they've been in power for a while and wield the instruments of federal authority. Republican attempts to plead "Abramoff supported Democrats, too!" are rather silly -- factually correct but irrelevant. In Raleigh, the evident corruption is mostly among Democrats, who have been in power for a long while. If the GOP ever gains significant power in state government, I am certain that similar temptations and incumbencies will kick in, as was true when Dems ran Capitol Hill. Certainly the recent behavior of some of the state House Republicans would lend credence to that.

Since the mid-1990s, I have helped to create a number of Left-Right coalitions on a variety of state issues, such as the lottery, lobbying reform, ethics reforms, the Blue Cross conversion, and tax reform. I work with liberals on a daily basis on issues of mutual interest, so I entirely agree with your point.

I have credited liberal Dems for their early critical statements of Black back last fall. Not sure what you mean by giving you credit, unless you specifically mean BlueNC's comments on Black. If so, ok, but respectfully I'm not sure it would be fair to characterize BlueNC as among the early movers here, as were Sinsheimer and some of my Raleigh activist friends many months ago.

Lance, I repeat the previous point to Jim. What do you mean by a for-hire spin machine? JLF is staffed by conservative and libertarians. We say what we find and believe, and often debate each other on issues local and international. Are we paid to disagree with each other? Is that all part of the grand conspiracy? Basically, what are you talking about? Are North Carolina's liberal groups -- virtually all dependent on the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation for a substantial part of their operating budgets -- all puppets of Tom Ross or Tom Lambeth? Again, a little maturity and coherence would be welcome.


The credit comment was forward looking. Not an accusation that you did not give proper credit in this instance.

Also, even if we were not a first mover (BlueNC was not even founded when Black's activity began), we have been keeping attention on the issue. I believe it deserves some mention that left-leaning groups outside of the party are putting pressure on the establishment Democrats.

As far as being paid, I am sure that there is some self selection going on. Conservative people want to work for a conservative publication. There is always an appearance of conflict of interest though when one person is financially supporting another in the manner that the Carolina Journal is. One could reasonably ask whether the Carolina Journal would publish something that Pope disagreed with.
There is also another issue of resources. You obviously have a lot more time, energy, and money to devote to pursue your causes. Where as we rely on being a community supported group. Obviously, this is just a quick gloss of our groups, but I think that it creates a real difference in how they both work.

By "for-hire spin machine" I

By "for-hire spin machine" I mean that the JLF (for one) takes its funding from sources that expect a particular viewpoint to be espoused. I took A's point to be that you ignored "the small fact that the progressive community . . . in North Carolina have led the way in calling for the Speaker to step down." An author who ignores salient facts to further his employer's agenda would have the integrity problem I described. What's incoherent about that?

I appreciate that you stopped by, and I'll take you at your word that you "have credited liberal Dems for their early critical statements of Black back last fall." Given that, I'll let my statements about integrity stand as a general proposition and apologize for applying them to you. <sarcasm>Let me also thank you for the free maturity assessment.</sarcasm>

Regarding comments: this thread is a good example of the value of comments on a blog or news site—they help to keep us honest and on topic. The National Review's "Corner" is a blog that functions well without comments because the various authors there frequently disagree with one another, and not just over the small stuff. I don't see this kind of self-regulating internal tension at the Locker Room, just as I don't see it here at BlueNC. (To be fair, I've only been reading LR for a couple of months.)

Didn't they?

*sly look*

Two quick points

I'm at work, so two quick points.

1. Democrats were not supported by Abramoff, factually incorrect on your part, they were supported by his clients.

2. Democrats were not corrupt during the Clinton years, it was Republicans responsible for the appearance of corruption. Republicans held 150 hours of hearings on their Christmas card list, and 5 on the Valerie Plame scandal. Republicans have been responsible for the American people believing that D.C. is totally corrupt. Perhaps if they focused on real crime, instead of pretend crime for political gain, Americans would have a higher opinion of them.

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

Very true

One fear is that the Republicans nationally taint people even more against government. Thus, making it more difficult for government to act for the common good. In effect, acheiving the Norquist goal of people hating all government.



CJ as a publication and I personally have said many things that Art disagrees with (perhaps more than I know, as we really don't talk much and about such things, contrary to the conspiracy mongering). For example, he and I have disagreed recently about UNC tuition policy and state tax reform, both fairly big issues in the state context.

Absolutely this web site and JLF are in entirely different categories of operation, both financially and professionally. For y'all, this is a labor of love, not a day job. I understand. JLF is properly compared the many groups on the left in NC that do similar work (and have a significantly larger collective budget than JLF and other right-of-center policy groups do, by the way). I do indeed appreciate BlueNC's comments on the Black scandal, and didn't mean to suggest otherwise.

Lance, you are giving Jim's "argument" more credibility that it deserved. He claimed to be reading our site carefully, then seemed to intimate that we have never recognized progressives speaking out about Black, which is demonstrably false and, if you think about it, quite improbable. Just for example:

By the way, it might give folks a chuckle to know that after I wrote about him in December, Sinsheimer said that some of Black's people began to spread the rumor that I was "behind" his web site and funding it. Public approbation is not always helpful, and it can just encourage the conspiracy-minded to renew their fulminations.

Also, Lance, fair point about the Corner being more internally argumentative, at least of late. Back a few months, we had some spirited debates in the Locker Room on education, Iraq, and some other issues. Not so much recently. Perhaps I'll instigate some soon. We have debated the comments issue off and on within the office, but have generally concluded that the best mix is to create a series of other blogs, moderated locally, that allow comments. I happen to believe that an institutional blog allowing comments will have to put a lot of resources into monitoring them, so as to police obscenity and the like, and I have not seen the value of that investment regarding the Locker Room. Say what you will about Internet protocol: the first time some kook got into the Locker Room and spouted something objectionable, we'd been written up in the media. Not good.



You don't really mean to suggest that Abramoff's clients made their political contributions with no advice and counsel from their lobbyist? Not the way the system works. GOP lobbyists spread money around to Dems on occasion, just as Dems spread some around to Republicans, such as here in NC. These are not decisions independently arrived at. On the larger point, I agree that Republican attempts to pretend Abramoff is not a GOP scandal are wrongheaded.

Democrats were not corrupt during the Clinton years? Come on, that's preposterous. Republicans oversold some of the "scandals" they harped on, sure, but every administration, D & R, ends up with some bad apples who do bad things. If what you mean is that the Democratic Party as a whole was not corrupt during the 1990s, ok. No one suggested otherwise. It would be equally questionable to argue that the Republican Party as a whole is corrupt today.

Rule 1! John spins at the wrong site again?

Hi John! It appears that the gang at ncblue has got your
attention finally! Do you really believe by reponsing 4 times
on this thread that you have carry the day for your neo-con cause
in North Carolian with your superior knowledge on how to give
one a lesson in effective media policy and control in politics.


It wasn't illegal for Jack Abramoff to direct his clients to give money to anyone. He was a lobbyist and that was HIS JOB. That's a stupid assertion and I'm tired of Republicans trying to elude the stench of corruption trailing them around Washington by hiding behind an absolutely idiotic statement like that.

I have spent the past 5 months researching the Abramoff scandal. I'm happy to discuss it with anyone who hasn't hidden their heads up their behinds and traded in their intelligence for Karl Rove talking points. If you actually know something OTHER than talking points about the Abramoff/Reed/DeLay/Ney/Safavian/Scanlon/Burns scandal I would be happy to discuss it with you. If you are just another GOP mouthpiece with no brain cells outside the control of Karl Rove, then you're wasting my time.

So, which Indian tribe would you like to discuss and which politician. I'll go get my data and reach you back here. We can go point for point. I'll bury you in undeniable facts. What are the odds you'll try to bury horse shit. Somebody call Vegas, I want to place a bet.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

The larger point is

that we have no idea how corrupt congress is or was since 1994. The reason being that the various committees responsible for checking corruption were busy looking for blue dresses to embarass the Clintons. Since 2002, those committees have been neutered.

No one, including yourself, could have ever expected that the Republican party would do so much to hide the "Inside Baseball" stuff that is happening in Washington. You were supposed to bring light to the party, instead you brought a blanket.

The Whitewater fiasco should go down in history as the Republican equivalent of Nero fiddling while Rome burned. There was no crime, just a wish to have "Clinton scandal" on the news every night. And, in the meantime, real criminals in Congress were allowed to pass unchecked. Now, we are lead to believe that there is no crime in Washington, just this one crazy indy lobbyist that no one knows.

As for Abramoff and Democrats. Rick Santorum supports autism research. I support autism research. Do I therefore support Rick Santorum - No. Harry Reid received funds from Indian Tribes that at different points had given money to Abramoff, does that mean Abramoff supported these payments? No, and in fact I seem to remember reading that he threatened not to help some group that had given money to Democrats. But, like you said, this isn't my day job and I have to get back to it.

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


I'm tired...pulled an all-nighter researching Plame...I meant I'd meet you back here...not reach you back here. But you can reach me here.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Uh, what?

Southern D, please re-read the post. I am agreeing with you. The Abramoff scandal is a Republican scandal, overwhelmingly so. The fact that he may have dealt with some Dems on an issue or two, and his clients given some dough to Dems for whatever reason, is just beside the point. That IS a GOP talking point, nothing more. As for the rhetorical flourishes, congratulations on the originality. Karl Rove reference? Wow. You and Jim should start a high-school paper sometime.

Rule 1

Connie, this site is named BlueNC, not NCBlue. Otherwise, by all means continue to embarrass yourself and your wife with semi-literate ravings.


Re-read your first sentence. There's your talking point. It doesn't really matter what you follow with because you got your little Abramoff-directed-his-clients jab in with the first sentence.

It's what you lead with that is remembered and you know that. If you really believe that the Republicans are wrong to try to include Democrats in the Abramoff corruption I want to see it in a headline, not burried in the comments on our little site.

Oh and before you tell someone their writing belongs in a high school paper you might want to stop ending your sentences with prepositions.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Sorry to have missed all the fun!

It was good to have Mr. Hood stop by, though I can't say I like his tone. But perhaps we can agree on this: I'm sophmoric. He's a Pope Puppet. Let's just leave it at that. And in the meantime, we'll keep our eyes open for a hard-hitting JLF expose on Republican corruption. That should take a good long while.


PS By the way, Pope Puppets is indeed for alliterative purposes. Kinda catchy, heh?

A, You are trouble...hehehe

I watched the Senate Judiciary committee meeting on C-Span 3. I've got to find something more fun to do as a hobby! Bye for a few.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Thanks for covering the wrasslin' match.

I'd hate like hell to be the person who call you out on the Abramoff scandal. Those pesky facts of yours are hard medicine.

I don't get to stay and play...

I have to go do the Mom/school thing and I won't be back for a couple of hours. Ya'll play nice.

John, show me the headline, fill the article with undeniable facts that back you up, don't end your sentences with prepositions and please use better punctuation than you find in my sentences. (It's an admitted weakness.)

I would be delighted to read your article about the corruption of the men I listed earlier and how the Abramoff scandal is a Republican scandal. You might want to add Grover Norquist to the list.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.


Jim, I suppose that the appropriate rejoinder at this point is some kind of hand gesture from the playground. Sorry I don’t know the appropriate emote.

One example of the type of expose of Republican misbehavior you reference was published in Carolina Journal over the course of several issues in 1997 and 1998. We reported on an arrangement by the then-Republican Speaker of the House, together with the Democratic leader in the Senate, to dole out pork-barrel money to favored causes and institutions outside the proper budget process, out of the sight of the public, and in probably contravention of state law and constitutional provisions. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers excoriated us, both in print and whenever they saw me in the halls of the General Assembly. Sorry you missed it.

Southern D, you referenced the first line of a later post, not the first line on the topic, which is higher up and was making your point. Again, the Abramoff scandal is a Republican scandal. If you would like to argue otherwise, I'll be happy to debate you.

As to ending sentences with prepositions, I'm with Churchill (or so the legend goes), who described that rule as "the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.”

John..I've read Churchill's quote as well..

The rule is that you don't end a sentence in a preposition if it doesn't sound right, or doesn't make sense. Your sentence falls into the first category.(I actually don't usually pick on spelling, punctuation or grammar. It was just a natural retort to the "high school newspaper" comment)

Congratulations on your brave expedition into the truth 9 years ago. I wouldn't mind seeing something a little more current. I don't read CJ. I'm not saying that to be rude. I just don't have time to add one more thing to my reading list. I know you aren't a true news reporting source(more of a selective reporting source) and you aren't expected to be objective. You have an audience that you have to appease. I understand that. Just think about it though, if you printed that true headline with an article to match you would be doing better than most of the media sources that are supposed to be objective.

I was responding to your response to Robert. Now, I really do have to run.

Ya'll get ready for some wind. It may have already made it up and over your way. Spring is in like a lion.

Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.


How many J-school grads does it take to create a grammatical dust-up? I don't know what the answer is, but I can honestly report that three is sufficient, if not necessary.

John, I do appreciate your willingness to engage and I'm sorry you feel like a playground gesture is the only appropriate rejoinder to my comment. I don't know you at all (though my wife reports that you were one of her smartest students) and I have no ill will toward you personally.

The truth is, we share a number of common interests. We both opposed the so-called "Education Lottery," for example. We both take a dim view of the practice of economic incentives. We both see the need for dramatic education reform.

But our proposed solutions are different. You see government as inherently part of the problem and want to restrict its role by starving the beast. I see government as an important resource for the common good - a resource that has been hijacked by special interests. And while I agree that power corrupts, I don't believe that all corruption is created equal. Lying about a blowjob is not the same as lying about a war.

There are other places where we flat out disagree. For example, commentary on your website suggests that your organization does not believe gays should have the same rights as heterosexuals. That seems strangely at odds with your libertarian rhetoric. On another front, you believe that commercial speech should be protected by the First Amendment - and that advertisers have a fundamental right to say whatever they want to children. I support stringent restrictions on the rights of companies that profit from products that put children's health at risk. You think global warming is a liberal conspiracy. I think global warming is an epic disaster in the making. And while the free markets might eventually find a way to address that disaster, "eventually" could very well be too late.

I could go on, but I won't. Because despite our few agreements, I have an overaraching problem with the broad agenda that your organization is pursuing. You are allied with business interests to a fault, and those interests appear to drive many of the policies JLF advocates. You seem to conflate the ability of individuals to make money with outcomes that reflect the common good. I consider that view both misguided and destructive. It is the view that dragged our nation into war in Iraq.

And just to be clear, I am sure you would hold the same beliefs without your benefactor's largesse. I've never said otherwise. But I won't ignore the fact that he provides a large and powerful soapbox from which you can share your opinions and influence public policy. I consider many of those opinions destructive and unhealthy for North Carolina and for our country. So if I have to resort to sophomoric satire to interrupt the show and redirect the agenda, so be it. It is the least I can do.


Questionable Maturity Level Comment

The current Republican party has reached new depths and breadths of radicalism and corruption - from encouraging violence against the judiciary to propagating unnecessary war to deliberately sidestepping the Constitution, the 21st century Republican party is a gumbo of American Taliban, Big Corporate interests, Warseekers, Torture apologists, Bigots, Obfuscators, and the inevitable whiners who don't like to see their party looked upon with disgust...and that's just the elected officials.

There are plenty of rank-and-file Republicans (as evidenced by the dismal approval ratings given the President and the Congress) who are dissatisfied and alarmed with where their party has led them.

Jim Black, Sayonara. Now what, Mr. Hood? Will you, as many other Republicans are doing, now furiously work to distance yourself from the President you carried water for for five years? Will the party continue to point its tainted fingers at Bill Clinton or will the conservatives among you throw off the leadership that has led the GOP into a morass of terrible policy making?

It's nice having you come around to this very Blue site. Now run along and do something about the mess your party is making of my country.

Charles Taylor for Congress

Scrutiny Hooligans -

Well said.

Plus, you have enough maturity for both of us! Thanks!

I'll have you know

that link is going to count towards my pizza party.

Personal and up close with the Pope Puppet john boy?

Rule 1
#12935 On 28 March, 2006 1:47pm John Hood (not verified) said,

Connie, this site is named BlueNC, not NCBlue. Otherwise, by all means continue to embarrass yourself and your wife with semi-literate ravings.* John boy showing off elite Nanny Grammer think tank repub internet Ass again!

John boy! Get with the program son!

[a portion of this comment has been removed by an admin; it will be on the "too hot for BlueNC" video]

Why are you here John? Are you fearful that something is wrong with your think tank and it being expose as another half ass red state fascist repub operation in drag for the neo-cons? After all John boy! Your claim to fame is that neo-cons don't exist and are nothing but a myth in the progressive community.

Why does the term neo-con bother you John Boy and why do you make it personal with me and my sign other.


Don't you just hate personal attacks John Boy on the internet that makes your Pope puppet string jerk into many directions to the public?

Angilico I laugh at how much

Angilico I laugh at how much of a boring life you must have. Why don't you grow up (oops you are), and stop bashing other people. It's called a life...have one. You may bash me as much as you want I won't hold my breath.

John Boy reports battle action to Art about BlueNC

Angilico I laugh at how much of a boring life you must have. Why don't you grow up (oops you are), and stop bashing other people. It's called a life...have one. You may bash me as much as you want I won't hold my breath.* A secret Pope Puppet trying to point Anglilico to be a success
in life like Art

John Boy! Shame on you for using another persona to make a Pope
Pointed tin foiled myth neo-con hat here.

John boy: Boss! I really clean their clock at BlueNC today!

Art: You idiot! I told you to stay away from those communist blog

John boy: But! But! I thought you want me to take them on
and put them in their place!

Art: Now they think you are some kind or red state addicted internet
freak now.

John boy: Boss! Have you read where I ripped them apart on Grammer,
when I was confronted by issues?

Art: Yes! I did and some soccer mom caught you with your stupid High school grammer debating skills. John boy! I hired you to write brilliant stuff exposing the communist take over on campus at Carolina and teach people what a Tax is! Do you realize what you done? Now you got to write a letter to the Judge who is going sentence Jack Abramsoff this wed for a lighter sentence in order to save our neo-con game plan to save North Carolina from the lottery tickers sales Thursday. Now get to cracking and stoping hanging on those progressive communist sites and telling people we are going to win big time
in Robbin Hayes congressional district against that school teacher.

John boy: Yes Boss!