Comments | Eastern NC Now

Big Bob: You have NO idea what the rules are, and once again, you're shallow words are completely empty.

You throw the "Insurrection" word around and you have NO idea what that word means.

Commented: Friday, December 22nd, 2023 @ 11:19 am By: Stan Deatherage

. People need to understand MAGA (R-crazy) don’t play by the rules. They either get what they want, or get violent. The only thing good about Jan 6 is we know how far the insurrectionists will go. Beware of anyone tearing down the our form of government. Fight for change? Yes? Violence? No

Commented: Friday, December 22nd, 2023 @ 9:20 am By: Big Bob

In these terrible times of the Corrupt Leftist Judicial system, it is good to know there are splinters of sanity.

Commented: Friday, December 22nd, 2023 @ 4:47 am By: Stan Deatherage

There are some serious judicial ethics issues with the failure of these four justices who ruled against Trump to recuse themselves from the case, and especially with two of them.

In North Carolina, judicial ethics rules do not allow judges at any level to make political contributions except to someone running for another judicial office. That rule has a lot of merit. Many other states have similar rules. The judge in the Trump civil case in New York had a chief clerk who got caught violating a similar rule, which in that state applies to judicial branch personnel beyond the judges themselves and an ethics complaint has been filed against that clerk by a GOP member of Congress. That clerk had given a lot of political contributions to Democrats.

Two of these four justices who ruled against Trump in Colorado were major political contributors to Democrats, one of them a five figure political contributor, and the other a mid four figure contributor who also hosted a Democrat political fundraiser at his home. In particular, if these judges were ethical, they should have recused themselves from the case. The other two were smaller contributors but there is a good argument that they, too, should have recused themselves.

The background of all four as Democrat political contributors does not pass the smell test with their ruling on Trump.

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 9:57 pm By: Steven P. Rader

Well, if 4 Democrat political contributors wearing black robes in Colorado can outvote the 3 state supreme court justices who although Democrat appointees were NOT Democrat political contributors and abuse their office to remove the leading Republican candidate from the Republican primary ballot, then Texas should go ahead and remove Biden. If one can do it, the other should be able to as well. Sadly these despicable Democrat hacks on the Colorado court have started a War on Democracy.

It is dictators who remove their political opponents from ballots, and the group filing the lawsuit in Colorado is led by a Biden administration political appointee. Biden is doing just what Putin has done in removing his strongest political opponents from the ballot. The Iranian Ayatollahs have also played that game, and lots of other despots around the world.

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 4:48 pm By: Conservative Voter

There is also a third group that is violating a specific provision of our immigration laws, and that is the NGO's and others who facilitate illegal aliens entering and remaining in the United States. The boom needs to be lowered on all these groups with fines, deportations, or indictments as appropriate.

Hungary's "anti-Soros law" is even tougher than our laws against assisting illegal aliens. It makes it a felony to help any foreigner enter or remain in Hungary illegally, with a waiver if the foreigner is later determined to be eligible for asylum, which few are in Hungary. Those who aid someone entering Hungary illegally can be arrested before there is any determination about asylum, but if the foreigner qualifies for asylum, the charges are dropped.

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 4:01 pm By: borderhawk

Well, there are two groups violating out immigration laws. The ones who enter, and the ones who hire them. How is it moral to ignore those who exploit and benefit from this system?

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 2:40 pm By: Big Bob

Bob, how it is moral or ethical to give those who willfully and wantonly break our immigration laws and lie to our officials about fake asylum claims preference over those on waiting lists who have applied properly and sit and wait properly and legally in their home countries for what immigration slots we may have available? Those on the waiting lists are properly vetted on criminal bankground, and fully examined medically, and they are trying to do it the right and legal way. Why should they be at the back of the bus behind lawbreakers?

When I ran a program in Moldova I had an employee who applied to come to the US as a legal immigrant. He had worked for years for an American organization and handled our accounting, complying both with Moldovan and US laws. His wife was a law student, and they both were very fluent in English. There were limited slots for immigration from Moldova and a long waiting list unless he scored on the "visa lottery" where he had no luck. Finally, he applied to Canada instead. The Canadians found their economy needed his accounting skills but required him to pass the Test of English as a Foreign Language, which is a difficult test but he passed on the first try. He and his wife had to take comprehensive medical exams and undergo an extensive background check, both of which they passed with flying colors. He is now a citizen of Canada living in Alberta, working as an accountant, and his wife went back to school, changing her major and is now working in Canada as well. When I think of people like him who tried legally and were unsuccesful, but Biden is letting in a raft of Venezuelan prostitutes who are unvetted lawbreakers, it is very frustrating.

How in the world can you justify letting in arrogant, self-entitled lawbreakers in preference to those you go through the expensive and timeconsuming, and often unsuccessful process to come legally?

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 1:51 pm By: Steven P. Rader

The perspective that is the gold standard is actually from a prominent black leader, Dr. Martin Luther King who declared that people "should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin". Anyone who looks at people through the prism of race is a racist whether it is on the DEI side or the KKK side. Same difference, Bigot Bob.

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 12:28 pm By: John Steed

I think its more, when your perspective is only white, everything else is threating and feels like racism.

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 12:07 pm By: Big Bob

The thing that tells me all I need to know is that there are people wanting to remove a monument to reconciliation.

To reconcile is to conciliate or make friendly again. It is to bring into accord as in settling or composing a difference. It is to harmonize, to bring into harmony.

The flip side of reconciliation is agitation, confusion, alienation, and disruption. Other ingredients in this particular issue are disrespectfulness and hatefulness bringing about more alienation and furthering the other negative conditions listed.

Removing the monument to reconciliation from Arlington National Cemetery is a real bad idea.

Commented: Thursday, December 21st, 2023 @ 11:40 am By: Charles Hickman