newsobserver.com projects - Hackney: I didn't cut off debate - Comments

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

grassrooter — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:55:22 -0400

A nation goes down to destruction, TB

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

Isaac136 — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:50:55 -0400

grassrooter,

You're kidding, right? That was sarcasm, surely.

(What does happen in "history" when "sin rules?")

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

grassrooter — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:09:07 -0400

No, Thomas Brock, it is not. Our youth and all of our citizenry deserve
to be protected from the onslaught of the radical and persistent homosexual
agenda. How can we possible not be alarmed, when we know from history what
happens when sin rules?

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

FFC1304 — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:57:46 -0400

with all the other democrackkk domination, it doesnt help much.

How DID NC democrackkks EVER get to be SOOooo CORRUPT?

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

Isaac136 — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:54:24 -0400

Gee, FFC, how do you explain the statements of the GOPers who work with him in the General Assembly? Are they liars or hypocrites or just really stupid?

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

FFC1304 — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:10:20 -0400

Isaac, you pitiful twit, of course, Hackney is a democrackkk insider.

his transparancy looks rather clouded like Jim Black...

STRIVE to be SMARTER than a NC democrackkk!

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

Isaac136 — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:08:00 -0400

The number of GOP members who spoke on Friday to praise Joe Hackney for the job he did and who went up to shake Joe's hand at the session's adjournment indicates that the respect in which he is held is quite genuine. He's no "party boss." He's a completely different kind of politician -- an honest one -- and he played fair.

It's amusing to me that anyone who professes to care about ethics and politics would begrudge Hackney the compliments he has received or deny their validity.

Just Curious...

ThomasBrock — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:58:06 -0400

How can you say with one breath that Democrats have made "bad freedom starving [SIC] legislation" and in the next "we are going to pass a NC Constitutional Amendment to protect the traditional definition of marriage"?

Isn't the latter a perfect example of the former?

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

grassrooter — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:38:11 -0400

Abridging open and free exchange does not only limit Republican input in Raleigh, when the Democrats hold the plurality, but also Democratic members of the General Assembly. It is just the power bosses of which Hackney is one that control the bills and have the bigger say. It is not just about cutting off debate. It is about a network of overreaching, concentrated power throughout state government.

Our Republican members, although in the minority, need to be more tenacious and firm in their disapproval. Review the Republican Party
Principles. We have been emphasizing them in Buncombe ever since Tim
Johnson, PHD, became our GOP County Chairman. Congressional Candidate Carl Mumpower from the Eleventh has made an excellent start in directing our attention to the importance of the Republican Party Principles. And we are going to start holding every elected Republican to a higher standard. We elect you and you have no choice but to listen. Then we won't have to discuss Hackney and cutting off debate and bottling up bills and making bad freedom starving legislation sound like a breakthrough in good government.

You will notice the "grassroots has come alive". Thus Jessica's Law will soon be a reality and the bullying bill hopefully is dead. Why do you think that happened?

Next term with more Republicans down there we are going to pass a NC Constitutional Amendment to protect the traditional definition of marriage and other good family strengthening legislation that will perhaps send a message to our North Carolina families that we as a state government are with them rather than against them.

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

Isaac136 — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:54:06 -0400

FFC, I know you're just a harmless old crank, but must you be so uninteresting, too? For god's sakes, work on it.

To suggest that Hackney is an "insider" in anyone's club demonstrates profound ignorance of the man and the General Assembly.

The reason Hackney was elected Speaker is that after the Jim Black fiasco the members knew they had to put up a Speaker whose record and personal integrity were (and are) unimpeachable. He has earned praise from Republicans as well as Democrats for his leadership and his fairness.

He's a rare find.

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

FFC1304 — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:48:47 -0400

other than being an insider of democrackkk corruption, please explain why Hackney is the best? better than Jim Black???

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

Isaac136 — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:36:04 -0400

Joe Hackney is the best Speaker we've ever had in the House, bar none.

Got a problem with that?

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:53:35 -0400

Please watch your language. Thanks!

— RTB

Re: Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

Isaac136 — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:50:23 -0400

Joe Hackney is the best damned Speaker we've ever had in the House, bar none.

Hackney: I didn't cut off debate

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:40:55 -0400

House Speaker Joe Hackney said he did not cut off debate.

At a press conference today, the Chapel Hill Democrat said he personally strived to let the Republican minority have its say on bills.

"The few times debate was cut off these two years, it was a vote of the members of the House to cut it off, which is of course in the rules," he said.

Earlier, House Minority Leader Paul Stam complained about those few times, though he noted that it was much higher under disgraced former Speaker Jim Black. Hackney said he recalled past cutoffs, especially when Republicans were in charge in the late 1990s.

"I know there was one or two years there when debate was cut off a couple hundred times, because I kept count," he said. "I resolved then that if I ever got in a position to do something about it, that I wasn't going to do it that way."

He noted that there were some times when a House Democrat wanted to end debate early and he did not recognize the motion.

"In the last 25 years of cutting off debate, we're in the top one," he said.