newsobserver.com projects - UNC-Greensboro - Comments

Re: Profs: Stop false campaign rhetoric

captsfufp — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:38:28 -0400

Joe the Plumber is "mythical?" I swear I saw him on TV...

Re: Profs: Stop false campaign rhetoric

domewatcher — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:22:06 -0400

The artilce below this is, "Obama, Perdue on Mailer." That story alludes that Bev previously sent the mailer of her and Obama to blacks. Now, some time later, she is apparently sending the same mailer to whites.

Basing a campaign mailer on race? Is that racism or just campaigning? The fact that the first mailer did not go to white voters....is that racism? Was the first mailer an effort at pandering? How many professors does it take to change a lightbulb?

Can we get a ruling from the 140 professors on this mailer? I think I know the answer to the lightbulb question.

Re: Profs: Stop false campaign rhetoric

domewatcher — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:28:11 -0400

This idea has some merit. Why don't we allow these 140 self appointed censors to approve any campaign literature of the McCain/Palin ticket. It's sounds like they would be fair and impartial and would give the thugs, racists and inbred rednecks who oppose Obamanation a fair chance.

But then again I don't know how much of this to believe.....140 professors agreeing on anything?

Better leave this up to Andy and Opie.

utter garbage

jonoflocke — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:22:35 -0400

This "racial code" malarkey has got to stop; these professors are behaving as abominably as they wish for the McCain/Palin campaign to appear, by virtue of their making accusations of racism according to "code" known only to them.

Re: Profs: Stop false campaign rhetoric

rpkt06 — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:17:08 -0400

Is this a joke?? What we need are professors who aren't incompetent idiots who have never succeeded in anything outside of a classroom. These professors have failed in the real world, so they take their bitterness and anger to our classrooms, pushing their liberal agendas. Stop demonizing the Republican Party!!

Re: Profs: Stop false campaign rhetoric

domewatcher — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:16:09 -0400

Are these the same professors who recently came out in support of William Ayers?

Re: Hagan's Republican cosponsors in '01-'02

scharrison — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:23:54 -0400

Right, but it's an indicator of "overt" support. What I mean by that is: on issues that could be politically dangerous for an opposing party member to support, such as a Republican getting behind entitlements or raising taxes, or a Democrat doing the opposite, using influence behind the scenes can be just as effective yet much safer than formally cosponsoring one of the other sides' bills.

But until we can read minds or record every word spoken, your way is probably the best (only?) way to gauge this.

Re: Hagan's Republican cosponsors in '01-'02

ryanteaguebeckwith — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:10:39 -0400

I think that cosponsorship is an indicator of how much a senator sought out members of the other party on pet causes. Especially when a senator is in the majority, as Hagan has been.

— RTB

Re: Hagan's Republican cosponsors in '01-'02

ryanteaguebeckwith — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:19:24 -0400

One thing at a time...

I'm taking suggestions for other objective ways to measure this.

— RTB

Re: Hagan's Republican cosponsors in '01-'02

scharrison — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:54:55 -0400

Ryan, while cosponsor numbers are one of the methods for determining bipartisanship, it's really only part of the picture, right? If you look at (Senate) voting tallies, you'll find that most of the legislation passed on the floor does so with little resistance from Republicans, even the ones that have only the (primary) sponsor and no co-'s.

Now, whether all those Republican "yea" votes are because the legislation is solid or due to backroom haggling, it still represents a substantial level of (maybe covert) bipartisanship, although it's much harder to quantify or attribute to individual lawmakers than the (overt) sponsorship statistics.

Re: Hagan seeks $48m in state spending

ryanteaguebeckwith — Sat, 24 May 2008 11:12:56 -0400

A fair point, but appropriations bills are the only public records available.

There's no way to know who put individual earmarks into the budget.

— RTB

Re: Hagan seeks $48m in state spending

dahedgehog — Sat, 24 May 2008 02:37:19 -0400

C'mon, RTB, you know enough about the budget process to understand that sponsoring appropriations bills (let alone cosponsoring appropriations bills) is NOT an accurate measure of what members are actually asking for.

Re: Hagan seeks $48m in state spending

Wildgoose — Fri, 23 May 2008 17:57:41 -0400

Wow, just think about how much pork she could get in the U.S. Senate. This is a true big bucks lady!

Re: Wayans brothers to hit trail for Obama

Isaac136 — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:31:14 -0400

I was wondering whether it were an April Fool's joke, too, because I think it would be a hell of a thrill to see the Wayans Brothers -- or even just ONE of 'em, here. They're wonderful, hilarious, smart and energizing. If they're really going to show up to stump for Obama, HELL, we all benefit.

I would NOT miss the chance to see these guys.

Hope it won't no April Fool joke~

Re: Wayans brothers to hit trail for Obama

natdug — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:06:28 -0400

You sure this isn't an April Fool's joke?