After dark: State-sponsored bribery

A new video to celebrate a fancy new home for a hundred million of your hard-earned tax dollars.
Thank you for giving away our money, Pat!


A comment from Tom Sullivan

From another thread. Should be engraved on McCrory's forehead:

If people fail to vote because of obstacles being erected or conveniences being eliminated, it will hurt voters of every persuasion. The GOP is just playing the odds that it will hurt their adversaries more.

Voting is a right. It's not contingent on being "informed." Being "informed" (according to whose opinion?) is desirable, certainly. But we once limited the franchise to white, male landowners under the rubric that all others had no "skin in the game." We imposed poll taxes. We had literacy requirements. All those tactics were designed to separate the wheat from the chaff (to use a polite euphemism), to weed out Americans the elite considered unworthy to share in running this country. Women as well: too emotional uninformed. They gave reasonable-sounding explanations for all of these measures. (We should have an "informed" test before voting, perhaps?)

All those barriers have come down. Plus we've made it easier than ever to participate over recent years. But Republicans in Raleigh are trying to take this country back to the old days. All these voting changes -- from voter ID, to tax penalties for the parents of college students who vote at school, to limiting early voting sites and hours, and eliminating Sunday voting -- form a pattern They are aimed at keeping certain people away from the process, however they can justify it, even if they hurt some of their own, to narrow people's options, to limit their choices, to make it ever more inconvenient for Americans to participate in elections, as is their right. They're not trying to protect the integrity of the process. They're trying to weed out people they consider undesirables.

What a functional legislature might look like

Here's a pro-equality speech from a New Zealand legislature before their recent vote passing a marriage equality bill. It just seems to have so much less vitriol than what I've come to expect out of legislatures. And it's funny to boot.


Anyone Remember that? This is nothing different than what Democrats have done. So why is that ok (dell) and this is not?

Perhaps if we had low taxes we would not have to bribe companies to come here. They will come all by themselves.

MetLife's different because ...

... the firm McCrory worked for has MetLife as a client. It gives the strong impression of a back-door pay-off for a campaign bribe. Unlike Dell, MetLife already has a strong presence in NC and needs no incentive to stay here or expand.

These types of corporate handouts aren't right, whether it's Dems or Republicans giving the tax breaks. McCrory's action shows how these incentives can be misused for purely personal political purposes or even personal financial enrichment by public servants.

I'm a liberal and I thought the Dell incentives were a bad idea. Now, with McCrory, we get a bad public policy for North Carolina with the bonus of that new fragrance popular in Raleigh these days.

Mysterious .... bold ... alluring. Corruption ... free with your purchase of any North Carolina candidate. Now on sale at your local department store.

Perfectly put

True that.