Prayer for judgment. Continued.

Human beings are judgmental to the core. In the blink of an eye we assess and calculate and decide how things stack up. Somebody writes something and "boom" somebody else lines up to agree or disagree before you can say David W. Hoyle. We even do it to ourselves. Just look into your own mind. Right now you might be judging whether you're wasting your time reading this.

The hard truth is, being judgmental feels like a job to me - and sometimes it's not a job I like.


Like any "good" Democrat, I discount Republicans out of hand. Individuals may be fine, but as a collective, I judge them to be paternalistic extremists. Doing anything that enables them in any way is unconscionable.


Back before I knew Bob Orr, I harangued him because of his association with Art Pope. You might say I was brutal. Somewhere along the way, though, Orr responded to something I wrote, which led to us striking up an email conversation. I found him to be smart, sincere and decent, and have said so on several occasions. (I don't think he has a snowball's chance of being the Republican gubernatorial nominee, and I really don't want him to be governor, specifically because of his long-standing relationship with Pope.) My judgments about him changed.

Yesterday person named NC Advocate showed up here brandishing loyalty oaths because I've said nice things about a Republican candidate. Actually, the brandishing started because I said David Hoyle should retire from the North Carolina Senate. The Bob Orr stuff was thrown in for good measure.


To top it all off, NC Advocate argued that BlueNC has some kind of special status among news media, and therefore some special responsibility to faithfully represent the "voice of progressive Democrats." S/he suggest that encouraging a pro-business Democratic Senator to retire is not consistent with that voice because the seat could fall into Republican

NC Advocate has a point. It would be a tragedy for the Senate to flip into Republican control. So I really hope somebody is scrambling to recruit Hoyle's replacement in case he does bail out.

If Hoyle were to retire while Democrats still controlled the Senate, that would be just fine with me. As someone wrote to me today, a strong conservative Democrat in a position of influence like Hoyle's can have more negative effect on state policy than an equally (or even more) conservative Republican on the back bench in the minority.


I don't know if it's possible for people to avoid making judgments, although it's certainly possible to keep them to one's self.

That said, I lean toward transparency at almost every turn. More discussion about something is better than less, and the more public that discussion, the better. It's not always pretty, and there are some boundaries for sure, but it is a reliable path to insight.


David Hoyle could give a rat's ass about what I think. But in the off chance he's reading blogs these days, I'm glad he knows there's at least one voter out here who's not happy with his leadership.


Suggesting that Democrats voicing discontent with any Democrat

opens the door for Republicans is one of the most ludicrous assertions I've ever read. I was raised on the premise that it's my duty as an American voter - and as a Democrat to question everything, and to hold my leaders accountable. David Hoyle should be held accountable for the votes he's made. His leadership has been right of center, in my opinion. That's not where the Democratic Party, even in NC, is.

To not even talk about it - that's down right unamerican.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

And we are just the ones to do it if anyone is.

If we don't call it for what it is, who is going to? I don't think I'm all the way to the left of the spectrum but the center looks way too far right to me.

Have you called to support H. Res 333 Impeach Cheney Today? call 202-224-3121 & ask for your Congress member by name

That is exactly the problem.

The center has slid far too far to the right in recent years. Things that ten years ago would have been considered obscene (torture, for example) are evidence of patriotic zeal today. Truly sick.

To be a Democrat or to Not be a Democrat?

Anglico, I appreciate your concession that it would be a tragedy for the Senate to be taken over by the Republicans. I recognize that this site has substantive debate on policy issues but there is clearly a lack of understanding by some of the bloggers as to how a strong Democratic Party structure gives a voice at the table for progressive Democrats. A majority of both the House and the Senate consist of political conservatives. If both bodies were organized strictly based upon political ideology, progressives would be shut out of the system. However both bodies are organized along party lines with the Senate having far greater party discipline. David Hoyle's conservative views represent the beliefs of a majority of the Senate. They do not represent a majority of the Senate Democrats. He is loyal to that structure and accepts it when he loses out to the progressives on issues. If you want Senator Kinnaird to wield power as a chairperson of Crime and Public Safety Appropriations, then support for Hoyle is part of he package. If you want openly gay Senator Julia Boseman as a co-chair of the Education Committee then support for Hoyle is part of the package. If you want Senator Nesbitt as the chairperson of the J-1 committee, then support for Hoyle is part of the package. Simply saying that Democrats need to find a replacement for him continues to ignore the reality that the seat will go Republican. LCloud lives in Moore County. If she runs as a left of center candidate in Moore County, she can't' win. She can't win even if we donated $250,000 to try to get her elected. Her area is conservative however there are progressive positions that even her conservative area would support that are not supported by Senator Harris Blake. One, a Democrat could get elected there who opposes private school vouchers. A Democrat could get elected there who supports health insurance coverage for children A right of center Democrat elected in Moore County would be a major gain for the people of Moore County. However, until there is a greater appreciation for the importance of building a strong Democratic Party there that includes both conservatives, moderates and liberals, it will never happem,

In 2000, we bestowed the honor of nominating Joe Lieberman as our vice-presidential nominee for the oldest poltical party in the nation. At that time I was proud that our party had the first Jewish American on the national ticket. Today, I am embarrassed that we bestowed such an honor to someone so unworthy. Senator Lieberman chose to continue to support the war. That position is forgivable. What is not forgivable was his unwillingness to accept his loss when he did not win the Democratic nomination for re-election to his seat. Unlike Lieberman. David Hoyle is loyal to sharing power with progressive Democrats and keeping the Democratic Party in control of the Senate. I have been hard on you because you have enjoyed a special role with this website to Democrats. If you remain a Democrat simply because you didnt get the postage correct when you mailed in your change of registration card to become unaffilated, then how can any Democrat take you seriously? If you choose to not learn why the Democrats have retained control in a Red State unlike every other southern state and attempt to build upon that success, then why should any Democrat take you seriously?


From our official propaganda:

BlueNC is a community-driven website that promotes progressive values and policies in North Carolina.

I'm not going to get into this debate with you again, so forgive me for hitting and running. I just want to set the record straight with regard to the mission of BlueNC (which does not mention the Democratic Party). And I want to answer your closing question: I've never asked anyone, Democrat or otherwise, to take me seriously.

It's clear you don't like my approach to politics. That's cool. I don't like yours either.

But you can easily counter whatever evil influence you imagine I have. Just start writing your own posts here (or anywhere for that matter) and see what happens. I'll even put them on the front-page you - unless they're about me, in which case you're on your own.

How do you know

what kind of appreciation there is is Moore County for building the Democratic Party?

LCloud lives in Moore County. If she runs as a left of center candidate in Moore County, she can't' win. She can't win even if we donated $250,000 to try to get her elected. Her area is conservative however there are progressive positions that even her conservative area would support that are not supported by Senator Harris Blake. One, a Democrat could get elected there who opposes private school vouchers. A Democrat could get elected there who supports health insurance coverage for children A right of center Democrat elected in Moore County would be a major gain for the people of Moore County. However, until there is a greater appreciation for the importance of building a strong Democratic Party there that includes both conservatives, moderates and liberals, it will never happen,

Our executive committee includes just that, and though we are indeed in a building phase, no one appreciates better than those of us in leadership positions how important it is to include everyone. Unfortunately - it is often difficult to convince all factions of a party that everyone should be called a Democrat.

You seem to be quite focused on Moore County - are you part of the MCDP? If so, we need some help. Step up.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi


You insult our intelligence and undermine whatever credibility you may claim to have. The site has clearly been supportive of candidates with conservative positions in conservative districts like Larry Kissell and Heath Shuler. We understand Democratic control in a red state and don't need condescension, or personal insults, to bring it to our attention.

You talk like David Hoyle is the only person who can hold that seat and also holds the balance of power on the Senate. From a voting record point of view most Senate bills passed with few or no opposing votes. It's hard to read anything into Senate votes, however it was Senators like Hoyle who reneged on the initial county Medicaid deal struck with the House.

It is not necessary to be poor to talk about poverty. It is not necessary to be registered as a Democrat to vote for a Democrat in the general election where it counts.

Electing conservative Democrats is one issue but giving carte blanche to a conservative legislator to enact conservative legislation for interests other than constituents, or beyond the district's conservative threshold, is another issue worthy of discussion.

As Bob Moser has pointed out the conventional wisdom about red states is undergoing change.

It Only Seems Like Condescension When You Beg The Question

Flynn, you do not know what you are talikng about when you claim that Hoyle reneged on the Medicaid deal. It was the Senate that has consistently advanced a plan to takeover Medicaid. The House would only agree to a Medicaid takeover if the Senate agreed to give counties the power to have a referendum on the transfer tax. The Senate Caucus rejected that proposal but eventually agreed after a month of discussions. It turns out the Senate position was correct given that the transfer tax referendums failed 16-0.

Tell me how a non-incumbent Democrat other than David Hoyle can hold that district given that it went 2-1 for George W. Bush not to mention that Patrick Ballentine defeated Mike Easley there. A swing of 6 seats will .result in a Republican takeover of the Senate which will mean that Progressive Democratic Senators will not have the opportunity to advance progressive legislation..

I write about what I know

Yes I was talking about Hoyle's role in delaying the transfer tax issue relating to allowing counties to vote on a transfer tax option in addition to a regressive sales tax option in the Medicaid swap.

The transfer tax failed because it was introduced by counties prematurely and because realtors and homebuilders spent about $1 per registered voter ($6.50 per vote) to defeat it. It's working very well in 6 counties. I believe it was right to give counties revenue options that they choose. Let the other 78 counties choose how they want to pay for their services. I also believe that authority for impact fees should be given to all counties.

People will think differently as the years go by and the bills pile up. Unemployment insurance, workers comp, social security were not built in one day or with one vote.

Hoyle holds one seat, not 6. Anglico has already stated how the seat could be held if Hoyle is not going to run. He could retire early and have a successor appointed. Perhaps he is the only person on the planet that can hold that seat as a Democrat. So be it. Doesn't mean we sit on our hands and duct tape our mouths.

Some of your rationale is like the justification for keeping quiet about Jim Black because we needed the majority.

For someone who claims the moniker of ncadvocate I don't see much advocacy except for the person of David Hoyle. You use a lot of words to make a point we already understand. What you don't understand is that those words are alienating people left, right and, center and are not advancing any cause.

REd Herrrings and a Red General Assembly

The transfer tax failed because people like you were only interested in advancing the ideological position and not willing to do the work and raise the money to fight for that position. Actually that was too personal a hit. I suspect it would have had a better chance of passage if it was tied specifically to school construction but that position was rejected. Your cite to Under the Dome doesn't prove your point.

Democrat Scott Thomas who held a Republican leaning seat was replaced with former sheriff Pete Bland in last year's election and yet he lost.

It is mighty presumptuous of you to say my positions are alienating the left right and center. So far I have yet to hear anyone respond who thinks that Party affiliation matters to say that they disagree.

There are 5 other seats that are extremely vulnerable in this upcoming election that have existed prior to Hoyle's possible retirement. It is a red herring tto compare Hoyle to Black, but I suspect you are smart enough to know that.

Pete Bland

Did Pete Bland lose because the district was overwhelmingly republican and he was a perfect candidate who was just not good enough?


He lost because he was unknown, and while he had money, very little of it was raised by him in district. He also ran against a very well known Republican legislator who already represented a good chunk of the Senate district, and had more than enough money.

One of the "extremely vulnerable" seats is a candidate who won with almost no help from the Senate caucus. If he could win effectively on his own in an off year election, why would he be any more vulnerable with the added funds and name recognition that comes with being an incumbent?

I dont remember all the people you had listed, and I dont really feel like looking right now. But the assumption that all 5 of them will lose and Hoyle will lose is a little far fetched.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

People like me

I am the only person in the state who paid for Google ads in support of the transfer tax. I produced three videos and maintained a blog critical of the realtors. If there were more "people like me" it might have had a chance.

You make my points for me.

To paraphrase Terry Gross to Gene Simmons: "Are you really that obnoxious or are you just pretending to be obnoxious?"

That was one of the best Fresh Airs ever

BTW, I've been a big supporter of impact fees in Meck. County, but we didn't have fees or the transfer tax on the ballot this year since our hands were full with bonds and transit. When the time comes, I'll be there.

1 Thessalonians 5:21: But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.

I always wanted to be the avenging cowboy hero—that lone voice in the wilderness, fighting corruption and evil wherever I found it, and standing for freedom, truth and justice. - Bill Hicks

Doomed to fail

I agree that the counties may have been a bit premature in putting the transfer tax on the ballot. Here in Moore County, we just went through a revaluation cycle and taxes were already on everyone’s mind. Even so, I was truly shocked at how badly it was beaten here. I thought for sure it would pass as a way to keep property taxes lower. There’s nothing that gets all the retirees in Moore worked up more than their property taxes.

That said, the TT was doomed, if not designed, to fail. What chaps me even more than the loss or the tactics and money spent by the Realtors to defeat it is the completely disingenuous rhetoric from the Realtors and homebuilders after the defeat of the TT. In letters to the editor they gloated over their victory and talked about how they were the only ones out there looking out for homeowners and for affordable housing. They said they stood for fairness. They often said they would have supported increasing the sales tax as it is fairer by spreading the burden to everyone.

Spreading the burden of growth-related capital costs to everyone is the opposite of “fair” and the Realtors and homebuilders know it. What the voting public probably did not know was that there were multiple bills in the Legislature that brought up more options than just a transfer tax or a sales tax increase. In fact, the Realtors and homebuilders made sure that the time-tested and most “fair” option never got to the voters. That option was impact fees. Impact fees are the most targeted way to force growth to help pay for itself. Impact fees are imposed on new construction. New construction is almost completely growth-related. Only a handful of towns and counties in NC are allowed to impose impact fees.

Too bad the big Realtor and homebuilder money in Raleigh got its way and our “protectors” in the Legislature caved to the lobbying and “protected” the voters from being able to choose for themselves from a larger menu of options, including impact fees. Apparently we are smart enough to elect them, but not smart enough to decide for ourselves how to pay for things and tax ourselves.

So when you hear the Realtors and homebuilders gloating over the defeat of the Transfer Tax and telling you they were the only ones looking out for you, remember that they ensured in the first place the type of tax/fee with the best chance of passing-impact fees- never got to local ballots in the first place.

Egg-sucking dogs is what the Realtor and Homebuilders associations are.

Keep fighting the good fight gregflynn!

Nice to see you back, SPLib.

I really wish you'd learn how to express yourself. :)

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Make that two of us.

David Hoyle could give a rat's ass about what I think. But in the off chance he's reading blogs these days, I'm glad he knows there's at least one voter out here who's not happy with his leadership.

Considering the fact he's a real estate man, who's been the primary sponsor for legislation to require a pre-licensing home inspector education program, more stringent regulations for modular homes, and so many various tax breaks I lost count, I'm not so sure his "leadership" will be missed.

I've been on a roll recently

with my posts here and elsewhere, so I'm going to take a chance and jump into this fray.

It reminds me of a comment from the film "The Patriot," where Mel Gibson's (ugh) character asked "why would I trade a tyrrant 3000 miles away for a tyrrant 300 miles away," or something like that.

My point is, as a voter, why must I vote for a Democrat who is not in line with my personal ideals just because he runs as a Democrat?

No, I would not vote for a Republican under any circumstances, But my message to the anti-progressive Democrat would be to get his/her priorities in order, or lose my vote, lose my support as a volunteer/activist, and lose my money as a donor.

If this Democrat then says to me that he would rather lose those things than change his/her positions, then that is not someone I could vote for anyway. That means they are never going to change regardless of voter/constituent sentiments, aka useful only to ideals that I disagree with.

Finally, this whole idea that progressives must tolerate "centrists" for the greater good baffles me. If people go to the store and buy a dozen shrimp, knowing that 2 will be rotten, they will eventually stop buying shrimp until the company can assure you of a dozen fresh almost every time.

As a progressive who is loathe to support a so-called conservative Democrat, my message is forget my vote. I'd rather skip the shrimp altogether than take my chances of food poisoning every week.

Begging the question

Your analogy begs the question. If it takes 26 Senators for the Democrats to maintain control of the Senate, why would you seek to oust a conservative Democrat David Hoyle who represents a conservative area of the state? Progressive ideas can only be implemented if the Democrats control the body. Progressive Democrats can only hold positions of power to advance progressive legislation only if Democrats are in control.

Look, I get your point

and I admit I don't know anything about Hoyle. I was looking at this from a a generic perspective.

But your argument is very silly.

If said Democrat swings the majority, yet votes with the Republicans on major issues, then what is the difference?

Yes, I realize that the committee assignments will change, but does that in itself necessarily doom all progressive legislation? I think not. Legislators will still be held accountable for their votes, and committee members that block votes will be held accountable as well.

I don't vote for Republicans, nor do I vote for Demcorats who further the Republican agenda. It's really that simple. And if your candidate is running on and votes for conservative platforms just to get elected, that only damages his credibility even more.

Maybe I'll run as a moderate Republican next year because my area is Republican. Sure, that may tilt control of the legislature, but at least I will win. I may vote my true values now and then, but in the end, I have to dance with the ones that brung me to get re-elected.

If so-called conservative Democrats brung him, then he must dance to the conservative tune.

At least the Republican is telling me the truth on his positions, not hiding behind them in order to get elected as a Democrat.

Finally, you speak on truly hypothetical grounds. Who is to say that Hoyle is defeated while a progressive wins in another area. Or two. Or three. Progressives who abandon one area would simply switch their time and funds to other areas.

Why in the hell am I debating this? NCAd is wrong, and Anglico is correct. I have work to do.

I believe in truly representative Democracy

Watch NC Advocate keel over with this one.

If a representative is elected from a conservative area, their votes should reflect the views of their constituents. However, they represent all of their constituents, not just the ones who voted for them. Having been represented over the years by Harris Blake (R), Joe Boylan (R), Richard Morgan (R), Howard Coble (R) and every (R) county commissioner for 15 years, I expect to be heard by the elected officials of my area, even if I didn't vote for them. (For what it's worth - Howard Coble is the best at responding in a reasonable fashion to someone who does not share his views and values - although I haven't had much conversation on issues with county commissioners.)

Furthermore, if someone represents himself as a Democrat on a statewide or national level, Democrats on that level have the responsibility to call on that individual to represent the policies and platforms of the Party. Politicians are not free to just vote willy-nilly how they wish when they are elected. They have multiple responsibilities: to the people of their district - all of them, not just the ones that voted for them; to the party to which they belong; and to their own good conscience. Not necessarily in that order.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Strawman Arguments & Begging the Question

LCloud, you repeatedly set up strawman arguments. On a prior comment, you suggested that I don't believe that conservative Democrats should be questioned about their positions. Now you suggest that I don't believe legislators should be responsive to other persons other than those persons who elect them. At some point, I would hope that you would respond to the central point that brought me to respond on this blog. Senator Hoyle holds one of the most conservative districts in the state as a Democrat. However, he votes with the Democratic Party on many progressive pieces of legislation.. A swing of 6 seats means a Republican takeover of the General Assembly. Calling for him to retire is inviting a clear opportunity for Republicans to takeover the Senate. Respond to that argument. You have meted out insult after insult toward me and yet you fail to respoind to the central point. I recognize that labeling you as an Anglicoite has been received as an insult, so to that extent I apologize.

GFylnn, since you have read my commentary as condescension, why don't you step in and explain how Senator Hoyle's potential retirement does not put the Senate at risk of being taken over by the Republicans and removing the elected progressive Democrats from being in a position to shape and advance progressive legislation?.

I'm not suggesting you believe one thing or another, ncadvocate

I'm merely stating what I believe, so that I can clarify where I stand. I don't see my statement as a "strawman argument" - it is a statement of what I believe.

Aside from telling you to "kiss my donkey", which I admit was glib and rather ill-advised, I don't see what I've said that could be perceived as an insult. Please show me what I've said that you've taken that way, and I'll be glad to apologize for it. But I will not issue a blanket apology without knowing for what I'm apologizing. That would be silly.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Let's Have That Real Discussion of Issues

Calling me ignorant twice certainly were insults don't you think?

Here is what you said:

"was responding to your absolutely ignorant assertion "don't call yourselves Democrats"

I said your comment was ignorant.
Submitted by lcloud on Sat, 11/24/2007 - 6:52pm.
And it was.

You called me ignorant because I said you shouildn't call yourself a Democrat if you are advocating that Hoyle retire given that his retirement could imperil Democratic control of the Senate. Keep in mind that the call for him to retire is based on a belief that he allegedly doesn't vote or act like a "Democrat." In the same way that Senator Hoyle's credentials as a "true Democrat" have been challenged, I simply challenged you and others to "retire" from being a Democrat if you are going to support a position that results in a Republican takeover. Criticizing the position not once but twice as ignorant was merely an insult and only begs the question that you still have yet to address.

Here is also what you have said:

we're Anglicoites?


That's a good one. Got any more ways to deflect so we don't have to discuss real issues?

No, really - let's see what you've got.

Please discuss the real issue that David Hoyle's retirement gives the Republicans a real chance to takeover the Senate.


I called your comment ignorant - not you. That's talking about ideas, not people. I stand by that comment - you saying that someone is not a Democrat because they don't hold a certain idealogical viewpoint is an ignorant comment. It show ignorance of what most Democrats understand to be Democratic values. However, I did not call you, yourself, wholly ignorant.

You have repeatedly attempted to paint every person who regularly posts at this site with a broad brush - by attempting to assert that we should not call ourselves Democrats if we hold certain views, that by posting here we are "Anglicoites" (as if that would somehow be a bad thing - and I'm not sure it would be), and by making personal attacks on individual posters who continue to attempt to engage you in discussion.

Of course Hoyles retirement gives Republicans a chance in the Senate - any election gives them a chance. That's why Democrats must work hard and work together to prevent them from taking over. However, that doesn't necessarily prevent those very same Democrats from taking issue with votes they disagree with. I maintain it is our responsibility as voters to hold our elected officials -- particularly those from our own party -- to very high standards, and to let them know when we disagree with their positions. If Hoyle is going to retire, I hope that the Party in that area puts forth a great replacement who has a good shot of winning.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

David Hoyle, Jr.

Is who have have heard was going to run for that seat whenever the day comes his father retires, but who knows.

I really dislike the idea of

inherited legislative seats, D or R. When did we establish a House of Lords?

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

Senator Goss won a seat

Senator Goss won a seat typically held by Republicans. Over $250,000 will likely be raised to try to keep his seat lest he experience the same outcome Senator Joe Sam Queen did following a similar victory in 2002 only to lose the next year in a presidential election. I have never said all five will lose but to suggest loss of control is far fetched shows you don't know what the Republican right fully understands. Again here are the five vulnerable seats:

1. Senator Goss
2. Senator Foriest
3. Senator Joe Sam Queen
4. Senator Dalton's vacant seat that can be won the same way as you describe how Jean Preston defeated Sheriff Pete Bland
5. Senator Soles who oly won by 2000 votes last year

Add Hoyle to the mix and you take a safe Democratic seat and give it to the Republicans

Greg Flynn, If I made your point, then why insult me? You now now that the ideologues who advocated for the transfer tax didn't put their money where their ideology was with the exception of a few persons such as yourself..

Next question, what do you think it will cost to protect those 5 seats, let alone Senator Boseman and Senator Snow's seats which also are districts that lean Republican. I can rest assure you singing Kumbaya won't keep them in office.

It is fasciniating the level of anger I have stoked by persons who do not think party affilation matters. I can rest assure you that most persons active in politics believe that party affilation matters even if Anglco and his defenders do not.

Snows seat

Snow won by 12,000 votes last time. It is still heavily Republican, but I think Snow can hold onto it. As of right now, I believe no one has announced to run against him, this of course can all change, but I don't think it will be that hard to hold.

Party affiliation matters a great deal to me.

There are many times that I would have registered as unaffiliated if I didn't think it mattered. But the only way to get candidates elected, and to get issues to the forefront of attention is to be organized. And the best way to be organized is to be affiliated with a party structure. I believe that for the most part, the Democratic Party represents the best ideals of the United States, and the best candidates come out of our infrastructure. It's rare that a candidate arises from a different party (or unaffiliated) for whom I would vote over a Democrat. It's happened once or twice in my life, but only once or twice. If I had lived in the Town of Southern Pines this year, I would have voted for an unaffiliated candidate for Mayor - but I didn't, so I couldn't.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

I think party affiliation matters very much

If I weren't such a danged die-hard Democrat, I wouldn't be so offended when Democrats forget what public service is supposed to be about. As a Democrat, for example, I'm grateful to Joe Sinsehimer, despite the hits the party has taken as a result of his exposing Jim Black.

Honestly, you come across less as someone who has a position to advocate as you do someone who has a personal problem with Anglico. You haven't stoked anger; you've made yourself look silly.

You accuse others of getting personal you while loading your posts with accusations, unwarranted assumptions and gratuitous (not to mention outdated) insults. You don't answer what people say but post retorts to assertions that no one has made.

Finally, and most unforgiveably, you are apparently not proof reading your posts.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke

ncadvocate, since you seem to have keen sense of the landscape,

who do you think are the vulnerable Republicans in the state? Can we do the math and see a draw even if we lose the seats you prediict?

Have you called to support H. Res 333 Impeach Cheney Today? call 202-224-3121 & ask for your Congress member by name

You asked

There are other 3 other potential Democratic seats.

Senator Kerr may not rum and his seat leans Republican.

Senator Boseman and Senator Snow will likely have high dolllar races but we will likely keep there seats.

The 3 best seats that a Democrat might could win are as follows:

1. Harris Blake's seat He won by 2000 votes in 2004 and if Oscar Harris had run last year we would have probably picked up that seat.

2. Neal Hunt He has not received a seriouis challenge though Gerry bowles was a good candidate who was unable to raise the money needed to compete.

3. Richard Stevens I don't think he has received a serious challenge. The cost to win these seats would conservatively cost a combined 1 million dollars.

The best strategy in this election is to defend our seats. Senator Goss needs to win because progressives put him in through effective grassroots organizing and little money. The Senate leadership missed this race last time.

There is a reason

The prevent defense rarely prevents a score if its used too often.

The best defense is a good offense and all that.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Snow Is A Democrat We Can All be Proud Of

Senator Snow was astute in keeping his promise concerning the transfer tax and voting against the budget. I know it was hard for him to do so but it likely means he may end up developing strength in his seat as Hoyle has done in his seat.

I don't agree with those votes.

But if he promised to do it, at least he was consistent with his promises.

Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi