Under the Dome reports that an executive order signed Monday by Gov. Bev Perdue requiring state board appointees to complete "a detailed, two-page application ... disclos[ing] criminal conduct, conflicts of interest, references and other valuable information" would in fact leave the public in the dark about the history of these applicants.
"Legal counsel has advised that the new application as was the prior application will be a part of the personnel file that is confidential," said Chrissy Pearson, Perdue's press secretary.
"That means someone with a criminal background, for example, could become a political appointee and the public would have a difficult time obtaining that information. Nor would they know if a major fundraiser, political party official or powerful special interest recommended an appointee," Dome continues.
Senate Minority Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, has promised to introduce legislation opening up state personnel laws.
Second, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi infamously told people last month that "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." (The fog has cleared; turns out where there's smoke, there's fire indeed, a huge bonfire of the liberties.)
And cutting it short at a fourth, there is an atrocious pattern of people who support the president thinking that his legislative aims means things will get magically handed to them for free; see, e.g.:
The president and his cynical power brokers rely on this deplorable naivete and incomprehensible ignorance to buttress their flagging poll numbers.
I wonder how many of the minority of voters who had supported "Obamacare" before it was signed into law still like it when, well, they're finding out now that no "Christmas" is coming?
Below is a copy of the email I sent to Bill Harrison on Monday.
As you are aware, the News & Observer website published your untoward comments about North Carolina charter schools. According to the Under the Dome blog, you said,
He can't support lifting the cap "when we get charter schools that are more about employing relatives than educating kids," he said.
"I need to be quiet now," he said, as other board members laughed.
If the News & Observer took your comments out of context, please issue a press release clarifying your statements. Otherwise, if you have evidence of nepotism within the charter school community, please direct Jack Moyer to release all public documents related to investigations of those charter schools that, according to your statement, are more about employing relatives than educating kids." I request that Mr. Moyer forward the documents to the email address below.
As presiding officer of the State Board of Education, I formally request that you implement a public comment period at every State Board of Education monthly meeting. This would allow those charter schools you accuse of nepotism to respond to the allegations in a public forum. If you are going to call them out in public, they have a right to respond in public.
Insurers do not have to cover pre-existing conditions until 2014.
Adults up to age 26, like college graduates, still have to figure out health insurance until September when they can get covered again on their parents' plans
Many small businesses will not qualify for insurance tax credits
Other small businesses are already trying to figure out how to contain costs by balancing the numbers of part-time and full-time workers
So who's to blame for this confusion? Reporter Margaret Talev blames reform opponents. At eHealthInsurance.com, "the call center had been inundated by uninsured consumers who were hoping that the overhaul would translate into instant, affordable coverage. That widespread misconception may have originated in part from distorted rhetoric about the legislation bubbling up from the hyper-partisan debate about it in Washington and some media outlets, such as when opponents denounced it as socialism."
Got that? Opponents calling the program "socialism" led people to think they could get insurance for free and that the effects would happen immediately. Not the president's claims that "a host of desperately needed reforms will take effect right away, this year;" not his calling insurance companies deceptive and dishonest hostage takers; not his and his supporters overblown promises; not their ridiculing of opponents' concerns.
Nope. It's the fault of those who questioned the logic of the bill in the first place who are to blame for raising people's hopes about the bill.
The Obama Administration doesn't want to call our fight against terrorism a "struggle against militant Islamic radicalism."
Maybe we should call it the "Misunderstanding against people who'd be our friends if we could just get along."
The following is a good example of how misguided the Obama Administration is on foreign policy. In explaining why the U.S. shouldn't focus on discussing terrorism with Muslim countries:
Visiting communist China in 1984, Reagan spoke at Fudan University in Shanghai about education, space exploration and scientific research. He discussed freedom and liberty. He never mentioned communism or democracy.
"They didn't look up to the U.S. because we hated communism," said Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, Obama's foreign policy speechwriter.
China, from its perspective, wasn't being harmed by communism, and for that matter, the United States wasn't at direct risk either.
Going to Egypt, where Obama reportedly only made a passing reference to terrorism, is a lot different. Egypt doesn't (or shouldn't) like or want terrorism and the U.S. is at a direct risk. In other words, terrorism is a big problem for both the United States and Egypt. Communism wasn't seen as a problem for both China and the U.S.
Obama made his major focus, when speaking in Cairo, the fight against polio in some Muslim countries. This is a good issue to cooperate on, but it isn't a major issue facing the United States.
The president's goal shouldn't be getting the approval of other countries and to be a philanthropist with American taxpayer dollars. The role of the President is to represent the country on the most important issues facing this country. Not taking any meaningful time to discuss terrorism while in Egypt is a failure on Obama's part. The polio endemic in some Muslim countries just doesn't rank that high when compared to the national security of this country.
For one thing, the Tea Partiers are almost certainly more in tune with the views of the average American voter than is Obama. Pollster Scott Rasmussen found that 48 percent of his respondents say their views are closer to those of the Tea Party than to Obama. Not surprisingly, far more Republicans than Democrats said that to Rasmussen. Less predictable and more important, 50 percent of the independents identified with Tea Partiers over Obama, while only 38 percent of independents said the president's views matched their own. It appears the independent center of American politics has shifted decisively to the right as the Tea Party has grown during the past year.
It turns out as well that Tea Partiers aren't exclusively conservatives or Republicans. The Winston Group has done perhaps the most extensive polling among voters who identify themselves as Tea Partiers, and found that "57 percent of Tea Party members called themselves Republicans, another 28 percent said they were independents, and 13 percent were Democrats. Two-thirds of Tea Party members identify as conservatives but 26 percent say they are moderate and 8 percent described themselves as liberal."
I'm referring to the huge expense associated with the census. Lots and lots of overpaid and underworked federal employees. Michelle Malkin's column today has the ugly truth. Like everything else under the Obama Regime's control, the Census is being used for political purposes.
The latest Carolina Journal Online exclusive features Anthony Greco's CarolinaJournal.tv report on a bill that would help lawmakers keep track of all targeted tax breaks the state awards. Click play below to view the report.
John Hood's Daily Journal focuses on the ongoing Carolina Journal expansion.