Comments by John Taylor | Eastern North Carolina Now

Comments by John Taylor

Holder is leaving now because the optics of a pardon would be much less humiliating to the Dems in the 2016 Pres election if he were a civilian vs. the AG....just my .02
Commented: Sunday, September 28th, 2014 @ 11:03 pm By: John Taylor
It's typical, the very first responce to your "rhetoric" fails to mention any facts, court cases, etc...to refute the points you made. The best arguement made in the opening salvo is that you are a "hater", so tired of hearing that trivial responce.
Commented: Sunday, September 28th, 2014 @ 11:00 pm By: John Taylor
No respect at all for Holder. And I challenge anyone to give 2 examples (that haven't been overturned by the courts)of anything his DOJ has done that showed his respect for the Constitution being applied fairly and equitably to everyone. (And please don't mention Bush or Cheney in a feable attempt to your opinion)
Commented: Sunday, September 28th, 2014 @ 10:56 pm By: John Taylor
This makes no sense at all..Tillis trying to paint Hagan as a Wasington establishment elitist, then has Jeb and Lindsey come in to help out????? Tillis can't slam Hagan on her record, then bring in two RINO's for endorsements..It really isn't that hard to figure out Tillis.
Commented: Sunday, September 28th, 2014 @ 9:24 pm By: John Taylor
We "win" by minding our own business? Are you serious? If the United States ever practiced the Imperialism it has been accused of, most if not all of Europe, half the Middle East and a good portion of the South East Asian countries would be colonies, but they aren't..I didn't think anyone would be able to defend Holder's horrible tenure without taking a shovel and digging up stuff totally irrelevant from the Bush administration. If you are going to defend Holder, talk about the specifics of what you think are the fine examples of his DOJ fairly executing thier duties to uphold the Constitution. Let Holder and your praise stand on it's own merits.
Commented: Sunday, September 28th, 2014 @ 9:15 pm By: John Taylor
Just a few comments based on my humble experience. Accreditation, I believe this is a decision based on management/leadership. The effectiveness of a department is going to be determined by the soul and determination of it's members, not accreditation. Numbers/$'s can be manipulated depending on numerous variables from how a department chooses to report it's crime statistics in relation to the UCR to where items are listed in the budget. The average voter isn't familiar with the vast majority of what it takes to run an operation of this size. I bet most of them are looking for Sheriff Andy Griffith, a fair, modest and Christian man. This election shouldn't be about numbers, it's going to be a finite amount anyway, it should be about how leadership chooses to spend them.
Commented: Saturday, April 19th, 2014 @ 12:28 am By: John Taylor
As a new Granddad of a few years, and follower of the conservative moment since I was the first registered Republican in my family in 1979, I cringe when I see candidates attempting to elevate thier status by doing such idiotic things as this. If one truely understood the motivation, at least during the primary season, of the voters within thier party, they would extoll the virtues that they would bring to the ticket vs. trivial attempts at influencing the low information voters (hint: those not voting in the Republican primary)to come into thier fold. Stan's stance is without question, I know I don't have to make a call or write a letter, I totally trust his interpretation of how each issue affects Beaufort County. Something I don't know about Mr. Cox, even though he spent mega $'s on a very poor mailing. Is this how he will spend our tax $'s???? Some of the Sheriff's candidates should take note of how this negative spam is in poor taste and stop the back biting. With high information voters, issues matter.
Commented: Friday, April 18th, 2014 @ 11:30 pm By: John Taylor
What a wonderfully written piece! Will certainly go back and read your previous articles on this tragedy. It has always frustrated me of the hypocrisy when folks push for abortion but also support the ability of the State to prosecute the murderer of a pregnant woman with two murders. Again, thank you.
Commented: Friday, March 2nd, 2012 @ 10:36 pm By: John Taylor
gee Stan, wish I was old enough to remember Rowdy Yates I pictured Clint as President in more of the Dirty Harry style. Can picture him walking up to Obama and asking "Well, do you feel lucky punk?"
Commented: Tuesday, February 14th, 2012 @ 10:29 pm By: John Taylor
I'll be nice, but these folks that switch with the wind for their opportunistic political selfishness should be called to task. How can anyone that has stood with a party that has very clear, definable, differences from conservative republicans, change their affiliation and expect open arms? You just can't genuinely stand on a platform that supports abortion, gun control, redistribution of wealth, bloated federal government, etc....and just "change". I feel like he's another rino trying to mix with the herd and breed. If he didn't wholeheartedly believe on what he stood with in the past, then what are we to believe when he startes promising all the good conservative things he's going to do. And trust me, this isn't a republican wave he wants to ride next year, it's a conservative wave. He hasn't playe here before and I'd rather he had taken his board and surfed somewhere else.
Commented: Tuesday, February 14th, 2012 @ 12:14 am By: John Taylor
Totally agree with this opinion one the use of wind power to generate electricity. Wind power was commonly used to pump water "in the old days" and it can surely generate electricity now. We just don't have the equivalent of the water tower to store the electricity till it can be used. Can't we just grow food to eat, use the sun for our tans, and pump oil for our trucks and cars?
Commented: Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012 @ 11:16 pm By: John Taylor
I'm no authority but thanks. Don't mean to imply they are not dangerous, but if I had to defend my home or family from an intruder(s), the stun gun would not be my weapon of choice. If a LEO has to arrest a physically violent unarmed, possibly intoxicated, person, I would rather they use the stun gun and leave their firearm holstered. I no longer have a dog in it either that's why I don't hesitate to say LE are responders, just like EMS personnel. Protect yourself till they get there!
Commented: Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012 @ 11:08 pm By: John Taylor
While I do agree that this type of weapon, used by trained LEO's are dangerous, I can hardly agree they should be classified as "deadly", as you have stated. The statute refers to a firearm or other "dangerous" weapon, that endangers or threatens a life. I personally would take 100 hits from a stun gun at center mass rather than one .40 caliber hollow point. My reason is that I may die before the 100th hit by the stun gun, but by that point it would have been used far outside of the parameters that LEO's are trained to follow. Any jerk with a trigger finger and 20/100 vision could hit me center mass with the .40 caliber from the same distance that this weapon was used at. In this particular case, criminals were using the dangerous weapon. I doubt they had much training that was approved by the manufacturer and/or medical professionals.
I believe this decision, if it survives any appeals and forces LE to restrict the use of the Stun Gun to the same level of the continuum as their service weapon, we will see more officers hurt and more criminals shot. The use or threatened use of the Stun Gun as a lower level of force has probably saved countless more lives and injuries than we will ever know.
Commented: Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012 @ 10:42 pm By: John Taylor
Older     

HbAD0

 
Back to Top