Jim Neal on the Mike Signorile show

Moving on up: North Carolina Democratic Senatorial candidate Jim Neal will be on the Michelangelo Signorile Show today on Sirius OutQ radio at 4:30PM. Jim, who's making history as the first openly gay man to run for the U.S. Senate, plans to unseat Liddy Do Nothing Dole, came to the Blend for a live blog on Sunday (liveblog here, summary here). The Jim Neal for Senate and the LGBT Americans for Jim Neal for U.S. Senate Facebook groups are up. The campaign page is here. You can sign up for a free trial to listen online.

UPDATE: Here is the audio. Click the link or the player below.


Thanks for letting us know

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

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

Can someone ask call in and ask a question for me?

I'm at work and simply can't.

I'm wondering if anyone will pin Jim down on whether he is in favor of gay marriage or not. He's given responses that seem to indicate he is, but he hasn't given a straight yes or no answer.

Will someone ask him to answer yes or no to whether or not he supports marriage equality for gays?

For that matter, how he feels about EDNA. I'm interested. Also, Pam, could you do wrap-up of this for those of us limited to terrestrial radio?

Why give the Repugs their soundbite?

I'm just curious.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

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

maybe it's an important question to have answered.

At least Neal has been willing to answer it in a positive way thus far. To my knowledge, it hasn't been asked of Hagan.

As for the Republicans- they'll turn anything into a soundbite. Are we to stop asking questions and tell our candidates not to say anything because the Republicans might be listening?

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


The reason I find this anser odd is becuase Jim is so direct with all of his other answers (one of the reasons I like him).

I find it odd that he's not giving a yes or no answer on this.

the issue is bigger than a soundbite for me and many others

And I'm interested to know. If he's going to do the standard 'civil union' dance-around-the-subject thing, I'm going to be dissapointed. I think this is an appropriate forum. After all. He's courting the GLBT vote and their money.

I don't think it's a civil union dance.

Marriage doesn't have to happen in a church - nor does it have to be performed by a member of the clergy. So as long as a marriage license is issued by the state, and the marriage is performed by - a magistrate? That's not "civil union" - it's marriage. It's just not in the church. And why should it be?

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

I have my sources...

I hope to snare the audio of the interview later. If so, I'll have it up at my blog.
Pam Spaulding
Durham, NC USA

Pam's House Blend

Pam Spaulding
Durham, NC USA

Pam's House Blend


In case I haven't mentioned it recently, Pam, you rock.

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

ugh, again with the same lie...

That the "National" Campaign Committee recruited a primary challenger just because he is gay. A proven lie that keeps getting advanced by Neal's supporters. But a great answer by Jim on the "slap in the face" question, despite its false pretence.

He's a very interesting guy and can really hold his own in an interview. Although still, no outright answer on the gay marriage question from what I heard.

Thanks for the audio Pam! You're awesome.

Ugh is right.

Just because you say something is a lie does not make it so. Just because you argue something is proven does not make it so. You have offered NO evidence to support your position beyond the word of the candidate herself.

If you have that evidence, let's hear it. Otherwise, the only statement you can make with integrity is that you really don't know whether Neal being gay played a role in all these events at all.

I do know. As I've said before and will say one more time, I have had direct and candid conversations with people close to the events as they unfolded. It is very clear that "gay" was a significant factor in the decision by people in Washington and in North Carolina to encourage Hagan to run. Whether it entered her own business-friendly mind is irrelevant.

I will not stand by while somebody calls me a liar, which is exactly what you are doing. Please don't do it again.

I wasn't talking about you, but since you mentioned it...

I was referring to what the host of the show said. But you are saying it as well (again) so I will stand up and say that it's not true. You still have not given one shred of evidence to support that claim and the burden of proof is with the accuser.

I'm sure that Jim's sexuality played a role in some people not supporting him. But to say that it was the sole reason is a lie. The host said that some unnamed great political power recruited a candidate to run against Jim only after they found out he was gay. LIE! It's a lie because Kay had been floating the idea of running for months and lot of Democrats have been encouraging her to run longer than that. She and many others said that she was planning to get back and others were encouraging her to get back in before during and after Neal's "outing."

To claim that Kay was recruited only after we found out Jim was gay is, in the words of Tar Heel Dem over at The Political Junkie, silly. Ask Julia Boseman if the North Carolina Democratic Party won't support homosexual candidates.

I do know. As I've said before and will say one more time, I have had direct and candid conversations with people close to the events as they unfolded.

You say you know? No, you don't. You know someone who says they know. If you know who these people are, please expose them. That's a few less bigots to drag our party down. So why not reveal who they are, or did your sources not tell you who they are? $100 says that they are backers, staff, or consultants of the Jim Neal campaign. That story plays right in to his campaign's message and framing by portraying his opponent as a tool for homophobes.

You realize that there is video of Hagan

declining to run in the race - because she "thought she could be more effective in the NC Senate"?

She was floating the idea around for months - and then she said no. She said no. Wait - did you read that correctly? She said no.

How often will she change her mind if she's elected? How will we know what influences her? Will it be what the voters want? Or what the DLC wants? How will we know? How do we trust someone who says no, and then says yes?

I can't.

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

Here ya go...

Yup - that would be it.

And remember, at this point, Neal had already announced his candidacy at this point, had he not? It wasn't until the week after the live-blog session here, when Neal told us he was gay and proud of it, that the scrambling started. From a pure political standpoint, I suppose I understand it.

But from an all out we're going to beat you whether you have alzheimer's or are just a stupid Bushbot standpoint, Neal is the best choice. He hasn't waivered or waffled on his stances. Hagan couldn't even decide whether she really wanted to run or not.

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


If you continue to claim, or defend those who claim, that Kay Hagan’s candidacy came about as a result party elder's efforts to take Jim down only after they found out he was gay, without one shred of evidence, I will be here to refute you.

You’re smearing the campaign of an honorable woman by saying this and you’re not giving any reason why other than, it makes sense or I heard it from a guy . This unsubstantiated rumor has now spread. Note that the national radio talk-show host repeated it in his interview.

Unless you come forward and tell us who your sources are or present some evidence to support your claim, or any evidence at all, I will not back down. You can close the comments or you can try and ban me, but I won’t stop until you bring forth evidence, or stop making that claim. Kay is an honerable woman and a solid Democrat.

I like it here. I have met some very interesting and kind people. But attempting to silence me for strongly disagreeing with you makes me not want to be a part of this community, perhaps what you intended.

You are not strongly disagreeing with me

You are saying I am a liar because I will not disclose my sources.

At the request of my colleagues, this post is still open for comments. You are welcome to write what you will and refute all you want. This is the last time I will respond to you on this topic.

I've been called a conspiracy theorist before,

but that in itself is a conspiracy to reduce my credibility. ;)

That being said, since your first post here:

I'm a long time lurker and this thread finally inspired me to register!

you've expended a great deal of effort trying to refute these claims, and now you've latched onto the gay marriage issue and have been hammering (here and elsewhere) Jim Neal for his stated position, dropping innuendo here and there to make him seem like he's hiding something.

Are you hiding something? Do you have a vested interest in this race that you haven't yet revealed here?

Tell you what, I'll give you a fair warning: if it turns out you are posting under false pretenses, and have received or will receive any form of compensation for your comments here, you (and whoever paid you) can expect a shitstorm of negative exposure for doing such.

If you're not, then please refer to the title of this comment and accept my apology.

On the subject of astroturfing

If I'm being paid, I should be fired. From earlier in the week concerning water boarding:

Come on Kay, that's a weak answer if I've ever seen one. She could have at least said that his answer on torture was "troubling." How controversial would that have been... really?

I wish someone was paying me to say this! But really, I used to live in Kay's district and volunteered for her and the Guilford Dems regularly. That's why I'm so offended by these allegations. I have known Kay and have known the people backing her campaign. they are honest and decent people being smeared on this site, which I won't tolerate.
I keep hammering the gay marriage issue becuase I think Neal is using creative language so as not to say how he feels either way about the issue. I may be too hard on him there. But if I am it's becuase the allegations made by his supporters against Kay gave me a bad impression about his campaign in general. I've said a number of good things about Jim Neal here, you just didn't do enough research to see that. Everyone loves conspiracy theories becuase they're always more fun than reality :)
But I'm not on any candidate's payroll or at all affiliated with Kay's Senate campaign, even as a supporter. I haven't even seen Kay in years and I give you my word, I'm no astroturfer. I even exposed an astroturfer here on BlueNC last week.
On the subject of astroturfing though, I'd suggest you look at the Neal campaign. I've also discovered one of Neal's staff astroturfing here earilier in the month, but I didn't want to cause a commotion and "out" him, so to speak. Would you stir up a "shitstorm" of negative exposure if I out the Neal campaign for astroturfing?

You better believe it.

Would you stir up a "shitstorm" of negative exposure if I out the Neal campaign for astroturfing?

One of the first suggestions I made when I came to BlueNC was to make it a rule that bloggers/posters state upfront if they are being paid for their advocacy.

It may not be a site rule, but it is my rule. I'll not waste my time and my energy trying to ferret out whether something is the genuine article or a paid advertisement.

Bring it.

First of all you did not expose an astroturfer

Using the word, asking if someone belongs to a certain group is NOT exposing an astroturfer.

For your information, if you google Hagan and Homophobe one of your comments comes up #3 on Google. This means that you have successfully connected Hagan and homophobia single handedly.

If you are trying to defend a good Democrat you might want to rethink your methods because they suck.

You have now pissed off over half of the front pagers and a good deal of the community with your refusal to accept reasonable explanations and answers and your personal attacks on us.

Now that you have accused Neal's campaign of astroturfing I require that you private message me the user name of the member you believe is astroturfing the site and a link to the event or discussion. If I do not receive this information in a reasonable length of time - oh say....an hour - I will IP ban you until you have contacted me to discuss your accusastions. Also, if you post this information publicly you will be IP banned from the site permanently. Last I checked you do not have admin privleges at BlueNC. Once you have supplied me with the information I will take steps to verify your claim. If it is true, you will be reinstated with apologies. If it is false you will be permanently banned from the site. It is 6:00pm.

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

Good idea . . .

to have a thread about policies, but in the meantime, the standard is defined as follows:

While we do our best to block spam, we do not block individuals from posting and commenting unless they are intolerably obnoxious.

While admittedly a subjective measure, I like the term "intolerably obnoxious." That said, I'm not sure whether Isabel's penchant for high-drama qualifies or not.

Betsy asked me not to kill the thread because the discussion needed to happen. Others seemed to agree, so I went along. Now here I am dealing with this crap when I'm supposed to be fixing dinner.

Old well.


It was not my intent to instigate a crisis (if that's what is happening), I was just sort of thinking outloud and letting my paranoia out for some fresh air.

I probably should have sent Isabela a PM instead of making public insinuations...

On that note, I'm going to fix dinner for me and my son. I trust you folks will have this all straightened out by the time I get back. :) (that's high comedy, in case anybody wants to know).

Yes, Jerimee I will

I believe the management team can handle BlueNC policies. Anything that needs to be opened up to the group will be. Thank you.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

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

Comments reopened

Anglico and I agree that we shouldn't penalize the community because of one member. We have reopened these comments because of the importance of the thread.

Please look for a revision of community standards and policies soon.


Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

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

please err on the liberal side

Excuse the pun, but I hope those tasked with the unpleasant job of determining and enforcing the policies of BlueNC will only seek to deal with speech that is destructive, as opposed to the merely annoying.

I have no idea what issue you are seeking to address, so I'm neutral regarding any specific, I'm just saying in general.

- - - - -
Thomas Jefferson said you always get the rulers you deserve.

Good advice.

It takes a village, so to speak.

Thanks Jerimee

I agree. I realize how irritated a person can get in these exchanges, but even in the worst chatrooms on AOL (I'm so ashamed to admit I've been there!) I could never go along with those who wanted to ban someone for his/her stubborness or ability to irritate. If a person is abusive, if a person is "trolling," etc . . . I can see the merit in saving a little cyber space, but otherwise, I hope BlueNC will continue to err on the side of letting folks be stubborn or otherwise insistent about their points.

I think the fact that Jim Neal is gay struck some of the old guard in the party as a problem *not* because they are homophobic but because they see it as a challenge to his being elected. It isn't that he is gay, per se, that bothers them, but that his being gay is going to tick off a lot of voters. Of course, it might. Wouldn't it be wonderful to discover otherwise? But the old guard is what it is and they see themselves as soldiers in a battle to win election. In that cause they will make sacrifices of principle. The rationale is that they will lose a given battle but win this electoral war -- and thus be in a position to achieve a lot of things that only a strong party presence in Congress can achieve.

At any rate, I don't hold against Hagan the fact that she was more actively sought after Neal's announcement. It won't be a factor in my decision about whom to support.

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

No Soup for You!

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

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

Rule #1

Jerimee may only post comments on Tuesdays and Thursdays between the hours of 9pm and 11pm, unless there is a full moon when he may post between the hours of 1am and 5am on odd numbered days.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

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

Um....why don't you guys wait until I post something

I'm the open forum person. Ask James...I'm the one who is opposed to deleting and closing comments, diaries, etc. However, Blue has gotten too big to just fly by the seat of our pants.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.

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

chiming in late

Thank you for reopening the thread. This is an important discussion, and we have to talk about stuff even if it pisses us off. I've done enough pissing off of people in my life to know that sometimes it's hard to stop - and sometimes it's important - and sometimes it's quite unintended.

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