We need to remove the Aycock name from our fundraising dinner

from a couple different sources:

For most of the 20th century, Charles B. Aycock was treated by historians and North Carolina politicians as an admirable, almost saintly figure but often overlooked was Aycock's role as a leading spokesman in the white supremacy campaigns of 1898 and 1900, which historians say were marked by widespread violence, voter intimidation, voter fraud and even a coup d'etat of the government of Wilmington. ... The campaigns had far-reaching consequences: Blacks were removed from the voter rolls based on literacy tests which Aycock established as Governor, Jim Crow customs were encoded into law, and the Democratic Party controlled Tar Heel politics for two-thirds of the 20th century

Prior to his rise to the governorship, Aycock participated in the murderous Wilmington Insurrection of 1898, which proved to be the one and only coup d’etat in United States history

North Carolina recently completed a study of the 1898 takeover of Wilmington by white supremacists/Democrats, an armed coup d'etat in which blacks were murdered and an elected Republican-Fusion city government was overturned. Aycock was one of the leading voices behind that outrage, and he rode the white supremacy wave through the 1900 election.


Removing Aycock

If we're going to succeed in removing the name Aycock we're going to have to stop trying to get rid of Jackson too. Keep it simple; get the vote through.

Personally, I'm embarrassed that we've spent some much time on this symbolic matter when there is obviously more urgent business to deal with.

Our current Governor was comfortable race-baiting on immigration issues in 2008 and we're worrying about what Aycock did in 1898?

While we're removing names for acts of official discrimination

...what about removing Frye from Sanford-Hunt-Frye?

From Q-Notes:

The Sanford-Hunt-Frye Dinner is supposed to be a time to honor men who have served all North Carolinians. Frye isn’t one of them. Yes, Sanford and Hunt weren’t necessarily the most LGBT-friendly of people or leaders, but neither of them ever issued a statement, signed a bill or acted officially in any capacity to harm LGBT people as much as Frye did.

In 1998, the Court handed down what is perhaps its most anti-LGBT ruling in recent decades. In Pulliam v. Smith, decided 5-1 with Frye in the majority, the Court overturned a N.C. Court of Appeals ruling and took away a gay father’s custody of his two minor sons. Armed only with anti-gay prejudice, the Court relied on no real evidence to support its decision. Those familiar with the law know the Pulliam opinion is a farce, and in December 2008, the North Carolina Law Review published a 15-page comment calling for Pulliam to be overturned.

The decision in Pulliam — which can still be used against gay and lesbian parents today — is a travesty and a miscarriage of justice. Frye is partly to blame.

While Frye deserves recognition and honor, we shouldn’t forget the sad, anti-gay legacy he leaves in North Carolina jurisprudence.