Endorsements Not Worth A Feather
Dear Editor,
How can the Rhino Times claim to give its readers a good foundation for deciding which candidates they should support, when the Times makes endorsements on incomplete or non-existent data?
I am referring specifically to your list of endorsed candidates, particularly the race for sheriff of Guilford County, in which there are five Republican candidates but you only interviewed one? How can you possibly claim to have a rational basis for your endorsement when you won’t even talk to 80 percent of the candidates?
Why should we have any faith in your judgment when you don’t tell us that you only interviewed some candidates? You didn’t even use the tried and true method of sending out questionnaires as virtually every other news outlet does. Your so-called endorsements now carry the weight of a feather, less if that’s possible. And knowing what we do about your method for selecting a favorite in the sheriff’s race, how can we have any faith in your other endorsements?
Diane Huskey
Editor’s Note: Nowhere in the endorsement does it state or even imply that only one candidate was interviewed and all endorsements, articles, editorials and even letters to the editor are based on incomplete data.
Questions About City Council District 1 Candidate
Dear Editor,
As I could not find any information regarding City Council District 1 candidate Timothy Kirkpatrick, such as professional/political background. I did a basic google search.
Am I correct that Timothy Lamont Kirkpatrick DOB 10/22/1972 had a warrant for arrest issued on or about 7/31/2013 for failure to appear in court is the same Timothy Kirkpatrick on the ballot?
If so, why in the world is it not being reported? Doesn’t the public and, in particular, the constituents of District 1 need to know this?
What has become of the First Amendment?
Kim Anderson
Supreme Court Decision To Give Power To The People
Dear Editor,
Regardless of where you stand on the subject of abortion, the protests taking place are a subtle example of how well mobs can be controlled by just a few people. It also shows how easily people will rush to support (or oppose) something without stopping to look closely at the subject and consider all the angles. These protests are such an incredible example of my point.
These protestors are marching, screaming about how if Roe v. Wade is repealed there will be a wholesale slaughter of unborn children everywhere in this country, and that’s a lie! It also shows how ignorant and easily manipulated the people participating in these protests are. Note I said “participating,” not organizing. I believe those people, the organizers, are the ones that are dangerous and need to be watched. The rest are sheeple, unthinking drones that don’t truly think things through and allow themselves to be used by these people. I believe the drones are being whipped up and doing what they’re doing behind the scenes by these controllers.
Having an opinion and expressing that opinion peacefully is the basis for our society. But before you go out to conduct those protests, think through what’s being proposed. The Supreme Court is not proposing to ban abortion. They’re saying this is a decision that belongs to the states, and as such the people, not the Supreme Court and nine people. That’s the whole idea on which our government is based. We rule ourselves from the bottom up, not the top down. Ruling from the top down is known as dictatorship. Is that what you want? Not me.
Think and educate yourself on how our system of government is supposed to work. If you want to march, march on your school boards and demand that our children are educated on how our system of government is supposed to work, not how they want it to work. And as much as I hate to say this, I have changed my attitude on term limits for members of Congress. It was never meant to be a profession, a job, which is what it’s become. And that applies to both R & D critters.
We also need to repeal the 17th Amendment and restore the balance of power at the state level.
Wake up, people. Educate yourself on how the system is supposed to work.
Carpe diem,
Alan Marshall
How were the candidates picked for endorsement if a questionnaire and/or interview was not conducted? Lazy Journalism. Not good when our County, Districts, Schools, State all depend on who wins.
What are you going on about Alan? Abortion is going to be banned in several states. If I recall correctly, Mississippi has a law on the books that automatically triggers the ban on abortion should the SCOTUS overturn Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade has been the only protection of the right to abortion in many southern states.
Just because you keep your head in the sand doesn’t mean other people do. Split hairs all you like, reversal of Roe v Wade will lead to up to 26 states banning or greatly restricting abortion.
And they should. abortion is murder.use condoms and this wouldn’t be an issue.
Chris I have to admit that I frequently get chuckles out of the stupidity that you constantly regurgitate. Maybe if you would shut up and read/ research you might have a better grasp on affairs of this great country.
Maybe if you engaged in real comments versus only posting childish name calling you could enlighten me.
When are you going to start
Like you call everyone “nutter.”
I always justify my comments with some basis of fact versus just straight up name calling. I have actually backed off the nutter term now that we have moved off of the anti science kick of the anti vax crowd. I will always call those that deny scientific consensus as nutters. Like those in bible study that claim the earth is only 10,000 years old because some Australian’s interpretation of The Book of Genesis.
But mostly I am just here to provide the alternative view to the hate, misinformation and ignorance directed at anything democrat by many of the commenters or regular letters to the editors writers. It is healthy to avoid only getting news and information from a single view point. So I am providing a public service.
Chris: That would be a true “God send”. Birth control is available to every woman. All they have to do is go to the local health departments or planned parenthood offices and ask. Also, the morning after pill is available as well if you believe your form of contraception did not work. This is not an issue about poor or minority women not being able to get proper birth control. They can if they are not too lazy to seek it. It is about women who do not consider the outcomes of having unprotected sex and then deciding to “kill” the outcome. I say “no way.” It is time to put this horrible institution to bed and bury it for ever.
Birth control pill has many issues (a family friend has a few birth control children) and condoms are not favored by younger adults unfortunately. IUDs are expensive and not covered by all health insurance plans. When ever I see someone refer to others as Lazy for not taking advantage of all life has to offer, I see someone who likely lacks any real understanding of what it takes to walk a mile in the shoes of others. (i.e. real empathy).
Abortion is not a first choice birth control policy for any woman. But when other methods fail, it used to be a solution of last resort like a safety net. As that safety net gets pulled away, it will not only be the young women impacted but society as a whole as well. Unwanted / unafforded children have to be care for and public funds will be the last safety net available unless modern republicans get their way with that too.
This case is more involved than you’re making it. The Supreme Court relied on the 14th amendment of “privacy” in roe v wade for abortion, but hypocritically said the 14th amendment did not apply to assisted suicide. No difference, death is the outcome no matter how you look at it. Legally it should be overturned as it overstepped its boundaries. Ignorance is rampant in today’s society and that is just sad. Everyone offers their opinion and believe it to be gospel because they heard a brief “news” report. When did personal research and truth seeking die?!? This is a state decision and rightfully should be. Let the people decide, not federal government. And again a pregnancy can be avoided by saying no. It doesn’t cost a dime to say no. Murder out of convenience is no excuse ever. States rights are being infringed upon little by little and if people don’t start standing up you will be looking at an Orwellian society. Wake up and do your research.
Dead right, NdP. Leftists are terrified of state-by-state democracy in the same way they’re terrified of the freedom of speech Elon Musk promises to bring to Twitter.
That’s because all Leftists are closet totalitarians.
Let me quess….another old guy telling young adults to not have sex unless they can afford to have more children? Given that the cost of living the American dream has sky rocketed over the last generation or two, that is a high bar for YOUR permission for them to have sex.
How about you do your research and learn how much harder it is for young adults to earn enough to go to college, own a home, and have children. The cost of the American dream has risen a great deal over the last generation. Add an unplanned child into the mix and that cost receives even more barriers such as cost of childcare, cost of family healthcare, cost of additional food, etc…
Do YOUR research.
Actually, I think Nom de Plume once said she was female.
Guess again, Einstein.
Fine another old lady jealous that younger adults have better sex than she does. LOL
You really are a jerk, aren’t you?
Too bad your mother didn’t use ole Bens recipe on you. The world needs less liberals
Such a Rebel. What a joke.
Even allowing for your statements to be true and not your usual overblown B.S., that means up to 24 states will have little to no restrictions on abortion.
I personally am not for a total ban on abortions, but do believe there should be very, very, VERY strict requirements on it and continue to be directed and controlled by a patient’s doctor.
Roe v. Wade was and is the quintessential example of the federal government overreaching their authority. Roe v. Wade should never have been taken up by the Court but should have been sent back to the individual States to be decided by the people through THEIR ELECTED representatives.
The Supreme Court is to rule on EXSISTING law, not MAKING it.
Exactly! Thank you!
Protecting individual freedoms is NEVER an over reach of the federal government. It is actually the basis of it’s existence.
What is even scarier about the States that are banning abortion, a few of those states will be land locked by other states banning abortion and won’t even have the option of driving over the state line for a legal abortion. But since you want to very very very very strictly restrict abortions….that is pretty much the same a banning.
But you be you.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself said Roe V Wade was going to be overturned because it was government overreach. The Roe decision and its overturning are not about abortion rights, but States’ rights versus Federal overreach. Each state has the right to decide what laws are on their books. Even the crime of murder is a state law, not a federal one. Each state sets its own rules on what constitutes murder, what degrees of murder are, what each degree’s elements are, and what the various punishments would be.
Abortion is no different, especially based upon the Roe ruling, which even Ginsberg knew was too much of an overreach on a case that did not solidly apply at the federal level. She actually had a case in the works that she hoped would have addressed the abortion issue more cleanly, Struck v. Secretary of Defense, but the military changed its policies before the case made its way up to the high court. Instead, we got stuck with the Roe ruling, regarding which she said, “Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped, experience teaches, may prove unstable. The most prominent example in recent decades is Roe v. Wade.”
The Federal government and it’s constitution exists to protect the individual rights over the State. The ‘means to an end view’ of Row v Wade was certainly a fine line reading of the 14th amendment’s protection of right to privacy but if you listened to the verbal arguments of this most recent case, the right to body autonomy seems a foundational right. The only real stretch is the view of viability of a fetus and when does a bundle of cells have rights. That was again the focus of the verbal argument but doesn’t seem to be the basis for overturning Rowe v Wade. I think that is the split that has so many up in arms. No way this was a State rights issue. The State has no more say over my body than they do my freedom of speech. Of course since I am a guy, the State doesn’t regulate my body as they seem to be fixated on with women.
Women need the federal protection from these States that want to govern a woman’s right to chose how her body is treated.
I have never been a single issue voter (except I am very pro gun) but this may a line I draw during future elections pending a federal law that protects a woman’s right to chose. Still thinking on that though as single issue voting is a trap used by power hungry candidates to rile up their base.
So how can some states (ten of them to be exact) allow assisted suicide and others cannot?
Wait, I know. It’s because the decision to legalize assisted suicide is a states’ rights issue, not a supreme court issue.
If Roe v Wade was sound, the assisted suicide people would be all over it to get “My body, my choice” approved for both abortion and assisted suicide. It would have been an easy win. Both instances deal with individual rights about one’s own body, assisted suicide even more clearly so than abortion, which has a second life swinging in the balance.
Abortion is a states’ rights issue. RBG knew it and repeatedly said it. Disagree all you want Chris, but your own super liberal supreme court justice said it was going to go down sooner or later.
Excellent and informative comment, Don.
And another reality check for Captious Chris.