Matheny, Perkins Ought to Change Party Affiliation to Democrat

In the wake of the library filter debate, it is useful to reappraise some of our local elected officials.

I began to wonder why Zack Matheny and Robbie Perkins even bother attempting to maintain any kind of identification with the Republican Party. 

Both of the men rejected the concept of requiring filters for adult customers of the libraries.  But that is only the most recent issue.

Both have been big supporters of governmental expansion at the Coliseum.  Both supported the aquatic center and the amphitheater.

Both have tended to support the policy demands of the major downtown groups including Action Greensboro, the Greensboro Partnership and Downtown Greensboro.  Both have supported various financial incentives, funded by taxpayers, for office and/or residential development downtown.  I believe both were Greenway supporters.  Correct me if I am wrong about that.

Both are certifiable members of the local borrow-spend-tax club, supporting various unnecessary projects funded through bonds.

Both have allied themselves with a corrupt urban political machine comprised almost entirely of Democrats.

On the library filter issue, local bloggers Ed Cone and Roch Smith were very happy with the policy outcome of which Matheny and Perkins were part.  I was not.  Ed is heavily identified with the Democratic left.  Roch is an independent, but my recollection is that he canvassed door-to-door for Barack Obama.  The worldview Matheny and Perkins espouse is not inconsistent with that espoused by Roch and Ed.

When I think about these two council members, I also think about their personal character.

Let's contrast this with Nancy Vaughan and Mary Rakestraw.  Both of these council members, like Perkins and Matheny, committed a moral error when they decided against filtering adult use of the library computers.  But at least Vaughan is honest with her party identification.  She married a liberal Democrat, and switched from Republican to independent.

Rakestraw tends to vote conservative on the vast majority of other issues.

And so I wonder why Matheny and Perkins continue to self-identify as Republicans.  By what objective standard can they be described as Republican?

After all, if you walk like a Democrat, talk like a Democrat, and vote like a Democrat... then you are probably a Democrat.

 

Comments

[cheripickr]

"On the library filter issue, local bloggers Ed Cone and Roch Smith were very happy with the policy outcome of which they were part."

How were they a part? The former never makes any argument one way or another and the latter only Rain Mans on others' arguments. I may be naive to local politics, but are you saying that there are council members who look to these two (or any blogger for that matter) to decide how to vote? It seems to me that the council was disinclined toward filters, for whatever reason, from the outset. If anything, they moved in the other direction, if only in a relatively token manner.

[PseudoSam]

"I also think about their personal character."

With this coming from a man who has no problem smearing people by bearing false witness, I'd say any condemnation of character from you is a badge of honor for your targets.

Candidates happy to wade into your cesspool of extremism to accept your praise will soon find out how toxic you are. Check the list to the top right of this blog for the candidates we can count on not getting elected.

[PseudoDwarf]

See there PS, it looks like Guarino is also obsessed with Ed Cone.

Joe is exactly right about the unwarranted pats on the back that CP identifies. Further, if you want an example of people who "wade into" a "cesspool of extremism to accept" praise, look no further than you liberal suck ups who all want to be Cone's boyfriend and feel compelled to defend him, write his rebuttals for him, and attack his critics in order to gain his favor.

He attacks Joe and Charles Davenport Jr. regularly on his blog, so maybe he's obsessed with them.

[Spag]

Joe, I hate to demonstrate my obsession with you through my annoying tactic of being accurate in my criticisms, but you wrote "Roch is an independent...". That may be so, but that's only because the Democratic Party isn't liberal enough for him.

If you're lucky, you will have your own collection of Dwarfs immediately rush in to your defense and start attacking me.

[bubba]

"How were they a part? The former never makes any argument one way or another and the latter only Rain Mans on others' arguments."

It's not necessarily what the say, it's more about how they say it, and what they DON'T say, and how they don't say it.

[bubba]

"Candidates happy to wade into your cesspool of extremism to accept your praise will soon find out how toxic you are. Check the list to the top right of this blog for the candidates we can count on not getting elected."

Yet another "progressive" rocket scientist weighs in with the requisite babble, dribble, drool, and spew.

Where are are the rocks these people hide under?

[Joe Guarino]

It appears the intent of one of my sentences was not clear, so I edited it. It should read as follows:

"On the library filter issue, local bloggers Ed Cone and Roch Smith were very happy with the policy outcome of which Matheny and Perkins were part."

[Stormy]

It seems that the only weapon that progressives have in this election is to charge Republicans and conservatives as being "extremists". You see that word used all of the time by them. It seems that they are unable or unwilling to campaign on their policies and legislative "achievements", such as Obamacare. So, now, the two most used progressive words are "racist" and "extremist". So be it. Do your worst as you go down in flames. The American people are tired of this type of politics. They want some action in solving our problems.

Joe, you make the point that Matheny and Perkins act as Democrats rather than Republicans. We find ourselves in 2010 where the label of Democrats and Republicans make no sense. With two political parties, the tents are too big, and when you see a big tent, the circus is usually in town. Politically, America is now totally polarized. There is no real middle ground available. For example, where do libertarians go? Libertarians can be progressive or conservative. Would it make more sense now for people to label themselves as Progressives and Conservatives (or maybe Constitutionalists), which would more correctly label themselves politically? European countries have more than two political parties, sometimes as many as 6 or 7. Those political parties are more focused, and the members tend to identify more closely to that party's principles and positions. The downside, of course, is that one party rarely gains a majority, so they have to make governing coalitions. But, in America, people have to shoehorn themselves into our two-party system which dominates politics. There really is no room for a 3rd party or even 4th or 5th party. Perhaps, the best designations for two political parties would be Big Government and Limited government.

[cheripickr]

Well said, fellow racist/extremist.

[Jon A Firebaugh]

Free Speech for porn but not for Juan Williams.

Juan Williams is now an Islamaphobic Bigot according to NPR. Look for him at you next Tea Party Summit, or maybe he'll team up with Mark Steyn on his Canadian "free speech" tour next week. Or maybe NPR just lost more credibility, and more voluntary donors, (except for http://bigjournalism.com/wthuston/2010/10/18/george-soros-millions-buying-political-reporters-for-npr/ George Soros).

[Spag]

The wonderful thing about the "extremist" argument is that poll after poll shows that far more Americans identify with conservatives than liberals, yet liberals accuse conservatives of "extremism". I have tried to make it a point to label liberal ideas as "extreme" just to beat them at their own game. The major difference is that my label actually has a factual basis.

[cheripickr]

Funny how those two larger cesspools of extremism, Raleigh and Charlotte, saw nothing controversial about blocking porn from their public libraries. Odious and ominous I tell ya. What a fiasco those processes must have been. Thank God for our superior enlightenment.

[Joe Guarino]

Cheri, I don't think you understand. In Greensboro, the way we do things represents the epitome of wisdom. We are supposed to be smug, supportive and self-assured with respect to all things that city staff do. Places like Raleigh are backwoods that don't benefit from the higher level of enlightenment that we enjoy here.

[bubba]

"Free Speech for porn but not for Juan Williams."

I do not frequently agree with Juan Williams' opinions on many things, but he's one of the few intellectually and academically honest liberals at any level.

This nonsense over what he said is outrageous. His fellow "progressives" need to let it be known in no uncertain terms that the sacking of Williams by NPR is unequivocally wrong.

[Stormy]

Now is the time for taxpayers to call upon our Congressmen and Senators to terminate the federal funding of NPR. They have shown that they are clearly a partisan organization with the firing of Juan Williams. NPR stated that his opinions were not consistent with NPR's editorial standards and practices. So, I would suppose that means that his opinion wasn't liberal enough. No federal funding for a clearly partisan media organization. It so happens that this happened in the same week that George Soros gave $1 million to Media Matters to wage war on Fox News and Glen Beck. He also gave $1.6 million to NPR to fund 100 "investigative reporters". It is clear that Juan Williams was the first casualty of the war on Fox News, and George Soros has bought and paid-for NPR, just like he claimed years ago he did with the Democrat Party.

It's declared war, friends. I have emailed all of my representatives in Washington and demanded that NPR bed def-unded. Yes, including Kay Hagan.