Nominate Larry Kissell for Netroots Endorsement at MyDD

MyDD wants you to nominate the next netroots candidate:

"Ok, so the last two netroots endorsements were Patrick Murphy and Darcy Burner. Both were chosen because they have strong netroots support, and because they are in areas that are trending Democratic (the 'Northeastern strategy').

After Yearly Kos, we figured it would be a good time to open up the floor for more nominations.

There's some targeting that goes into these nominations, but the most important qualifying criteria for a netroots endorsement is local blog support. So if you have a local blog and are following/supporting a candidate, please make your case for the endorsement."
"The point of the netroots endorsement is to beat Republicans directly, lock down their resources indirectly, and support local infrastructure (including the 50 state strategy). So please, nominate away. And include local blog links when you nominate."



I'll just spiff up the last

piece I wrote unless someone else wants to do it. Apparently, if you didn't spend thousands going to YKos you won't be considered. He doesn't come out and say that, but read it and see what you think.

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


I added a comment in support of Kissell. He needs more help, though.

Larry Kissell

O.K. so this is a nomination for Larry Kissell


It's appreciated; you should also follow the link in the post and leave one at MyDD.

Kissell has 28 nominations

About twice what any other candidate has and there are some names missing. I bet when Monday rolls around we can get some more folks to head on over and put in their two cents.

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

follow the cash

Kissell's one of the few candidates that took large campaign contributions from Rachel Hunter. Is anyone certain Kissell isn't another slightly creepy, slightly nutty conspiracy kook? He actually did endorse her bid for the state supreme court and won't retract it nor return her money. Problem here folks.

No one is saying that Larry is Creepy (slightly or otherwise)

In fact, the only descriptions I've heard point in exactly the opposite direction—that he's an open, friendly, and likeable guy. Did he really endorse Hunter? I haven't seen that. What's your source?

There's disagreement around here about what Larry should do with Hunter's grand. But (other than the above comment) there is no disagreement about the fact that Larry is a good man, more than competent to represent the 8th, and a better choice for the job than Robin Hayes.

Thanks for the prompt to donate to Larry's campaign, here. He can apply this morning's contribution to getting his message out and figuring out how to handle disconcerting donations (or really, whatever else he wants to use it for).

When a Dem gets a contribution from a Republican

I always say that the money spends better...I know Hunter isn't officially a Republican anymore, but obviously her views are typical Republican views. I say Larry should keep the money and use it to get out the African American vote in his district. Why give it back to the nut? It isn't like he took money from Enron execs, DeLay, or Abramoff (that was most likely from illegal sources) like the Repulicans did. His folks say he didn't endorse her and that this is just like the Dean Smith Hunter'endorsement'. To me, this is just one more Republican conspiring to undermine a good candidate that should get the netroots endorsement!

I've got a conspiracy for ya...

Very creepy, overly nutty conspiracy kook makes mountain out of mole hill.

Is this all you and the Hayes campaign have? I love it.

Larry didn't endorse Hunter any more than Dean Smith did. It's a thank you card from MARCH. Get over it.

I got your e-mails and saw a few of your obsessive compulsive posts before they lost all charm as even cursory entertainment.

Carry on right wing noise machine...

To all of BlueNC, thank you for all the traffic to MyDD and nominations for Larry's endorsement by the netroots. We couldn't do this without you.

Well said.

You know you're getting to them when the trolls come around with this kind of lame bullshit.


I'm certain. He's as honest as they come. He did NOT endorse Hunter at all. I know that for a fact. He sent her a thank you note...just like he sends to everyone who contributes to his campaign. Hunter's campaign has a habit of inserting fake "endorsements" in bold and quotes - like they did with Dean Smith.

JohnB - your attempts to smear a good man are despicable and petty. You call $1000 a large contribution? That doesn't hold a candle to the $77,000 that Robin Hayes took from felons, liars, adulterers and bigots over the past few years. Have you emailed the Hayes campaign to ask when they will be returning the money? Didn't think so.

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


It's a shame you have to come over to BlueNC to be heard just because blogomonster eventually installs persistent cookies that don't allow access to your blog without registration. But that's the free market for you.

And those pesky free marketeers are always telling other people what to do with their money. Shouldn't that be free marxeteers?

"I love how the Democrats insist on nefarious cabals and conspiracies among their opponents"
JohnB, WakePol, 11/01/05

Anway, I thought giving was receiving, not the other way around.

If a tree falls during a clear-cut, does anybody hear it?

Returning Campaign Contributions

In a perfect system, we would have publically financed campaigns, with both sides having equal amounts of resources to get their message out. Any kind of ethical theory we come up with about contributions will have to recognize this as the ultimate goal.

When a candidate accepts a contribution, what is that candidate saying? That he or she agrees with the person who is making the contribution? Certainly not, since almost every major candidate has at least two contributors who are on opposite sides of some issue, and it is impossible to assert a contradiction.

I don't believe a candidate is saying much of anything by accepting a contribution. What publically disclosed lists of contributors mean is something about the contributors, not something about the person that received the contribution. The people on that list are saying that they prefer this candidate to the other candidate. This is, of course, relevant to judging the candidate that has received the contribution, but only in light of understanding the reason the contribution was given -- and these reasons will only become manifest in considering the whole list of contributors in comparison to the list of the opponents' contributors.

Nothing I'd like to see more than the Hayes campaign make an issue of this contribution. The Kissell campaign could then talk about the pattern of their contributors. Yet, that won't happen. The only thing that giving back this contribution would accomplish is that Larry would then be listening too kooks -- it would be possible for his opponent to hamstring his fundraising in a way that he would not be able to do to his opponent (since, as we know, Hayes didn't even give back Abrhamoff (sic) money, which other national figures did.

This Kook Spies a Few Problems in Your Comments

SpII, you present two ways to interpret the acceptance of a contribution: that it indicates agreement with the donor (no one is seriously arguing that), or that it indicates nothing. You say that the latter is your position, but you end up contradicting that.

I think it's safe to say that, in politics, little or nothing is without symbolic meaning. When a candidate accepts contributions from someone who holds beliefs notoriously contrary to those that the candidate promotes, there's an apparent problem. You yourself say that donor lists are "relevant to judging the candidate that has received the contribution." It only stands to reason, then, that the candidate would exercise control over that list. And the only way to do that is to give back (or refuse) donations from the shadiest contributors.

One other point: it's far from clear to me that publicly financed elections are an unmitigated good ("a perfect system"). You seem pretty sure about it though, so I hope you'll take a few minutes to make the case in a future comment (or blog entry).

Flexible ethics

I have to confess a certain amount of amazement at the responses. Aside from Lance, it is an aggregation of rationalizations and shoddy logic, nothing more.

The fact that most of you are Kissell supporters should not blind you to this particular lapse in judgement. The responses say quite a lot about consistancy and ethics folks. Rachel Hunter is attempting to buy her way to respectability, which is why her husband baits the Wake Democratic Party when he says if they don't like her now they should give the money back. He/she is gambling they can't afford to give the cash back and will remain silent and keep her candidate bio on their web page.

I started looking into Rachel Hunters campaign, not Kissell's. Hunter lives near me and I've endured her politics for a few years now. What she is doing is trying to buy acceptance. Nothing more. This woman is nothing but a conspiracy nut and an utter opportunist. She was a Libertarian, she was a Republican, now she's a 'progressive' Democrat. She will be whatever she thinks gives her the best chance to get elected. Period. She no more buys into the "progressive" agenda than she did the Libertarian or Republican agendas. When I first encountered her she was screaming about the "separation of school and state", ie, advocating an end to public schools and adoption of a voucher system.

$1,000 contributions coming to two NC House challengers, one District Attorney candidate, and a US House challenger is, in fact, substantial. It should also have provoked at least a cursory examination of her record and statements BEFORE cheering on her candidacy.

This is a woman who has compared the State Democratic Party Chair to Adolph Hitler. I'm not a Democrat and I find that outrageous. She compared the State Republican Party Chair to Mao. I'm not a Republican and I find that outrageous. The fact that you all can justify keeping her money in light of her racist rhetoric (Meek's characterization of her words) is, bluntly, shocking. This is a woman who until recently had a diatribe on her web page claiming she knew NC judges that maturbated in their judicial chambers. She is now running for the NC Supreme Court. Politically, she lives in an area best cordoned off, figuratively speaking, as a bio-hazard. Her candidacy does nothing positive for the judiciary, for the electoral process, or for the ethics of any candidate that stands by/with her.

Now, if it makes you feel better, by all means, keep on attacking me. It doesn't change the fact that Jerry Meek was and is dead on correct in his assesment of her as is Ferrell Blount. If you folks would ever allow yourselves the liberty of not assuming the most vile intentions on the part of people that don't think exactly like you do you might be able to see the corrosive effect this individual has on politics.

I do wonder how a candidate, like Kissell, can be made aware of what she is doing and NOT return her cash. He gets the benefit of the doubt initially. But that runs out after all the publicity regarding her fake Dean Smith endorsement, her racist rhetoric, and now her attacks on her own party Chair.

Final point, if Hayes had taken money from someone Blount and Meek agreed was using racist rhetoric and then compared the two of them to Hitler and Mao would any of ever shut up about it? Of course not.

So much for principles when there's an election underway I suppose.

Chopped liver

1 lb Chicken, beef or calf liver

4 tb Chicken fat

2 sm Onions, diced

3 ea Eggs, hard cooked

1 ts Salt

1/4 ts Pepper

Wash the liver after broiling. Heat 2 tb of fat in a skillet and saute the onions. reserve the onions and saute the livers in the remaining fat. grind or chop the livers, onions and eggs and mix them to a smooth paste. add the salt and pepper, and additional fat, if desired. blend the mixture well. serve on crackers or matzoh, on lettuce or as a filling for celery stalks.


Sounds to me like JohnB's made up his mind! If Kissell doesn't do what he thinks is right then, not only is Kissell 'crazed', but he's a broken candidate.

I got into a little trouble around here when I suggested that Kissell keep the money, advertise that he's going to transform it, then publicly spend it on AIDS education or minority empowerment. Transform the money because the money is only a tool. Hunter intended the tool to give her influence, but the tool can be turned on her and used for good.

JohnB is so shocked (shocked!) by our responses because they don't help make the case for Robin Hayes. Johnny, you be good and go peddle your redstate "Think my way or be wrong" ideology elsewhere.

Scrutiny Hooligans -

no difference at all

Sad to see the alleged "progressives" are no better in their concern for ethics than the people they condemn. Don't be hypocrits going forward and condemn Hayes' integrity Anglico, you don't have the credibility to do that.

I'm only surprised at how cheaply some here would sell their principles. All for a $1,000 donation. Wow, turns out Rachel invested wisely.

John B

I don't know who the hell you are, but the last time somebody came around here with judgments about my credibility, she turned out to be just another Republican liar carrying water for Art Pope. I'm guessing you're probably cut from the same rotten wood. So unless you want to say who you are and why you're suddenly oh-so-concerned about Flip-floppin Robin Hayes losing his damn seat, maybe you should find somebody else to annoy.

no deference at all

My personal, firstnamelastname, opinion is that while you may consider it ethical to reward Hunter's outrageous behavior by returning her funny money it would be more ethical to use it in providing a remedy to that outrageous behavior.

Once accepted, money subsequently found to be of questionable origin, should be put to some good use, preferably in a direction 180deg from the source.

I don't believe the same money should be passed back and forth creating more mischief. Otherwise we'd have Monty Pythonesque Wacky PACs sending out the same buck, month after month, just to provoke reactions and blogorrhea.

Of course if the source is bipolar and 180deg from itself you might want to try 270deg or 90deg or the Z plane. If all else fails try 451deg - Farenheit - just don't give it back to the bozo donor.

wrong on several counts Anglico

I'm neither a Republican, nor an affiliate of Art Pope. I realize he is the boogeyman du jour for some of you, but everything in life you don't like isn't connected to Art Pope.

I am not terribly concerned with Hayes. I don't live in the district. I am interested in the Hunter campaign since that is state wide and that affects us all. If enough Democrats vote strictly on party affiliation and enough independents don't bother to vote in the judicial race there could be a catastrophe. Luckily, Hunter and her lunatic husband have incinerated her campaign.

Having Rachel Hunter on the State Supreme court would be a disaster and it would make North Carolina a national laughingstock. The people of this state deserve better. What's more, the voters need to understand who is taking her money in her desperate attempt to buy relevance and political friends. THAT is why I question Kissell. Since you and the others here want to justify and rationalize his taking money from someone spouting off with racist rhetoric you demonstrate a very inconsistant approach to public ethics. You cannot damn Republicans for things you excuse Democrats for doing. It's just your opinion that Kissell is putting the dirty money to a "higher use". Nothing more. From what I'm seeing, he's just another politician taking money from ethically questionable sources.

You folks really are intolerant of dissenting opinions.

No, we aren't

but we are intolerant of ignorance which is the main reason you don't see any pro-Hunter posts on this blog. You don't seem to like the fact that you can't bring us around to your way of thinking. It's one thing to express an opinion. It's another thing to spread lies and rumors in the guise of stating your opinion.

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

John Barbara just confirmed you are right A!

John Barbara makes your obession of the Art Pope as normal and sane as
compare to the addiction and obession of RLH that haunts his psychic every 5 minutes on the internet. Hey John! I understand that you just attack
your former conservative buddies at Cary politics and called them a bunch of communist progressive democrats. Boy you really know how to win
friends and voters to your future mayor campaign in Cary.

What do Rachel Lea Hunter's neighbors in Cary say?

In an informal straw poll conducted on, 87% of those who voted agreed that Rachel Lea Hunter has no business serving on the NC Supreme Court. Out of 8 voters, Rachel Lea Hunter received only 1 vote ... from her husband, Connie Mack Berry, Jr.

The Charlotte Observer: Rachel Lea Hunter is Madame Loony Tunes

The Charlotte Observer wrote:

Madame Loony Tunes
Even Democrats, Republicans agree on this candidate

A candidate for N.C. Supreme Court justice who promotes herself as Madame Justice deserves a nickname in her campaign, all right, but not the one lawyer Rachel Lea Hunter wants.

Ms. Hunter, a Democrat, has never been a judge, but she wants voters to oust Associate Justice Mark Martin, a Republican, and elect her. She wanted the State Board of Elections to put her on the Nov. 7 ballot as "Madame Justice." No way, the board said.

She should try Madame Loony Tunes.

Ms. Hunter is no slouch at getting her name in print. Not long ago she managed to get her picture taken with former Tar Heel basketball coach Dean Smith and posted it on her Web site as an endorsement. It wasn't, Coach Smith said.

A former Republican, Ms. Hunter characterized GOP congressional candidate Vernon Robinson -- a publicity hound himself, we might add -- as "a good slave returning to the plantation" for his allegiance to the Republican Party. (Mr. Robinson, a black conservative, once campaigned with the motto "Jesse Helms is back, and this time he's black.") Responding to complaints, Ms. Hunter changed her description of Mr. Robinson, calling him "Uncle Tom."

She also called state Democratic Chairman Jerry Meek "Der Fuhrer." That came after Mr. Meek announced the party would not endorse her in the race against GOP Associate Justice Mark Martin because she "lacks the judgment and temperament" for the job. State GOP Chairman Ferrell Blount noted that Republicans and Democrats finally have something to agree on.

All this reminds us of an episode a decade ago when we poked some fun at a Mecklenburg candidate for state office. Jack Daly, an unsuccessful candidate for state auditor who got more votes than most other Republicans on the ballot, issued a press release saying, "I sure shut the critics up! People who said I wasn't old enough to run are now practically worshiping at my feet. It's been amusing to watch the party naysayers begging for forgiveness."

We especially liked his admission that calls for him to run for governor or party chair were a bit premature. "I'm not necessarily the Wonder boy people are making me out to be," he said.

No, indeed, we agreed. Wonder Boob was more like it.

Maybe in addition to Democrats and Republicans, North Carolina needs a new party for people who like the Comedy Channel style of politics. They might not win anything, but candidates such as the Wonder Boob and Madame Loony Tunes sure would provide comic relief.

I will take your money with barrels of ink as my smear weapon

That's odd! The Madame Justice site just posted under the Breaking
News section ...The following " Looney Charlotte Observer
attacks a women with a tumor and takes her money" * Note
The Madame Justice campaign has purchase over 8000 thousand
dollars in Campaign Blog Ads for the past year on Charlotte.Com.

Welcome back Connie

"bunch of communist progressive democrats"

Actually, no, I made no such accusation, that's just random words strung together by Connie Mack Berry Jr without care or concern for the truth, much like the alleged Dean Smith endorsement.

Where is that resume and that get well card John?

I did not! I did not! You are lying Max and a curse on your
doghouse.* paraphasing the amazing future mayor candiate
in the history of Cary..

Mayor in waiting! Why can't we get a picture of you and
your educational resume in your campaign? And stop calling
your friends animal right freaks because the city has a
Dog excise park for it's citizens.

More like the voice of sanity


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