newsobserver.com projects - Malcolm Graham - Comments

Re: Bill would give Tar Heels a taste

Kingixolib — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:16:00 -0400

It's amazing to me what these elected idiots consider important.

Re: Bill would give Tar Heels a taste

domewatcher — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:14:41 -0400

I don't know about going private with the ABC stores. It might do well but I would fear the good ol' boy network. Next thing you know they would be telling us they couldn't afford to keep selling liquor in North Carolina and we would have to subsidize the drunks even further.

But I'd like to see the DOT go private. Bidding their work out would save a bundle. But yet again there is that good ol' boy network waiting in the wings to pounce on these type opportunities.

Public patronage may be better than the lurking around of the good ol' boy network. So let's just drink our cares away at a liquor tasting at let somebody else worry about it.

P.S. I don't know about the other parts of the state but some of the liquor stores down east are some pretty nasty places. Sorta drab and not the place to be "tasting liquor." Could they set up tents or hold the tasting parties at the country club?

Re: Bill would give Tar Heels a taste

benrequena — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 06:10:04 -0400

You've just stated one of the fundamental flaws of North Carolina's government controlled liquor monopoly and why I created a facebook group to privatize NC's ABC stores.

You can join the facebook group here: www.bit.ly/NoABC

Re: Sex ed bill goes back to House

randyfields — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 07:12:06 -0400

Our kids deserve all the information they can get in this day and age - my son is about to graduate from high school and we are trying to make sure that he has all the information he needs when he leaves home - how to do the laundry, how to cook himself dinner, how to balance a checkbook (actually, that may be a lost art!), defensive driving - shouldn't pregnancy and STD protection be on that list? Obviously parents have a big role to play - but the job of the schools is to make sure our young people are prepared to go out into the world!

Re: Sex ed bill goes back to House

paigej — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:47:36 -0400

Sex education is widely supported by parents of all political persuasions. The N&O seems intent on ignoring this and pandering to sensationalism. Trying to be the NY Post does not become the state's news of record. Please get real: talk to a few parents or teens and stop perpetuating rightwing talking points.

Re: Sex ed bill goes back to House

Gosh — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:53:32 -0400

Huh?

Was it the quote about the "mutual masturbation" Republican talking-point you covered or the mere mention of Representative David Almond?

It's not like I brought up Cary Allred.

Sheesh, that would be inappropriate. Think of the children.

Re: Sex ed bill goes back to House

markjohnson — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:34:46 -0400

Inappropriate comment deleted.

Re: More water for Senate tea leaves

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:44:18 -0400

Hey DOME...WHEN will you be publishing the LIST of NC Legislators who purposely boycotted the Jesse Helms Honorarium last day or two?

Not that this has anything to do with anything, but I bet you could look up the photos of our legislators and guess.

Jerk.

Re: More water for Senate tea leaves

BitterEXdemocrat — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:39:55 -0400

Hey DOME...WHEN will you be publishing the LIST of NC Legislators who purposely boycotted the Jesse Helms Honorarium last day or two?

Re: More water for Senate tea leaves

Gosh — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:25:59 -0400

That said, Cunningham has a good biography and seems to be exciting the netroots.

Understatement of the year.

And I'm convinced the husband of a Lillian's List Board Member with his personal story can raise more money than my Grandmother.

No offense Granny Marshall.

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

PaulTerrell — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 21:08:54 -0400

Tricia Cotham should run so we can see how well her idea about raising taxes flies with both Democrats and then all of NC's voters if she wins the Democratic nomination.

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

CitizenOpinionated — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:51:21 -0400

Don't want to say I told you so but I told yall so...

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

cdtew — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:58:24 -0400

Shuler is a gentleman and has more in common with Burr than he does with the liberal NC Democrat apparatchiks. I'm glad to see he's standing by his word.

Re: Shuler: Not running for Senate

mfenley — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:52:52 -0400

Why would Schuler (or any other sitting member of the US House) want to give up a sure seat for what is going to be a very hard race to win. Regardless of what the PPP polls say, Burr has a solid track record, a strong campaign organization, a solid base, and very low negatives!

The Schuler seat - and maybe even the McIntire seat could easily go Republican and the dems would not only lose the Senate race, but two house seats!

Re: Burr has $1.6m war chest

Gosh — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:33:40 -0400

So, Bank Bailout Burr's top contributor is the bank he encouraged a run on after voting to bail it out.

His top industry contributor is Big Pharma, where he leads the opposition to any real healthcare reform.

Yet his top "employer" for donations is from homemakers?

Homemakers. Is anyone buying this?

Paris Hilton is a "homemaker" too. So's the gated community wife of every banker, big pharma and tobacco executive trying to launder money here.

Sick. The Real Housewives of New Jersey got nothing on Winston-Salem apparently.