News-Record.com

How much of this increase is due to skyrocketing land costs in Charlotte?

I would venture to say a good deal of it, which is an argument for the Triad building now, not later.

Sort of like with schools, the land is cheaper if you buy it BEFORE you need it.

I'd like to buy a million-dollar mansion before the price rises to $2 million, but I can't even afford a measly million.

The latest jump in Charlotte seems to be blamed primarily on design problems.

The Observer quotes Democratic City Councilman Michael Barnes as saying: "I think there's probably been some fleecing going on here."

Doug,

I hope that Deena Hayes and Amos Quick are listening on the issue of having SRO's with necessary weapons in schools. Their argument that officers aren't needed in middle schools just got blown away with the senseless slaughter of 6 year old girls. If the people of Guilford County leave these decisions to them by default, it may be a deadly mistake. This could happen in Guilford. Suddenly, one of the least safe places for your children is school. Sad that our society has come to this, but true.

I agree that Republicans will, and should, pay a political price for the Foley scandal, but that is what will set them apart from the Democrats. Any time a Democrat has been caught in an illegal, immoral, or unethical scandal, they just ask for forgiveness and keep on trucking. I don't have to name names, everyone knows who they are.

I'm afraid someday we'll be talking about assigning SROs to elementary schools unless we can somehow get a handle on this violence.

Stormy, you're a moron if you think you can compare the clinton affair to a possible case of pedophilia.

Don't name names? Name names, go ahead, name all the names you want. Name 50 names, just don't name clinton in your "comparison."

Asking for forgiveness for cheating on your wife and inappropriate actions toward a 15 or 16 year old, when you profess to be a champion of laws put in place to prevent such measures, then expressing outrage at rumors that you might be gay, are two different things.

Not that it excuses it either, but it ain't like clinton just up and suprised us all when it came out. Friday's announcement was a shocker, at least for those of us who aren't Dennis Hastert.

Anybody watch that ohio debate on meet the press on sunday. Boy, things are getting really sad aren't they.

zatoichi, the young male in the Foley case was an "adult" under the law, same as Lewinsky.
Clinton engaged in ssex acts in our White House, Foley only talked about sex.
Should we prosecute and persecute people for "talking" now? Or only Republicans?
If Foley had been a Dem then Pelosi, Reid, Teddy Kennedy and Foley would have held a press conference where they would claim Foley was a "victim" and that his sex life is nobody's business.
You exhibit the typical left wing hypocrisy and double standard the voters have come to know well these last few elections. Please keep it up, you serve your party well.

Doug, trust me, making assumptions about the mental state of our schoolboard members, implying in any way a relationship to reality, is a losing proposition.

Sorry Jaycee, you're right. I guess at 16 he was a fully functioning adult male member of society. Not a high school sophomore.

Just as, if not more mature than the then 22 year old Mrs. Lewinski.

We have no idea what Foley did. Anybody got Ken Starr's number?

You serve your party well too. Maybe you'd like to tackle the whole abramoff/white house lobbying scandal next.

I also would have to reject any Clinton-Foley analogy.

This is more reminiscent of the experience of Gerry Studds, a Massachusetts Democrat who, in 1983, admitted having had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male page. He was censored by the House but insisted it was not anyone's business but his and his young lover's. He was elected five more times to Congress. Foley is a creep, but his resignation shows that, unlike Studds, he has a sense of shame.

Savage, if we hear any more discussion by GCS board members of removing SROs, I'll take it as evidence of insanity.

Zatoichi,

I will give credit to the Repubs, when they're caught in a compromising moral situation, at least they tend to resign from office in contrast to the Democrats who apparently consider moral indiscretions as not worthy of resigning over.

For example, former Mass. Democrat Rep. Jerry Studd continued in office after having actual sexual relations with a seventeen year old male page until his retirement. Democrat Barney Franks male partner was running a male prostitution ring out of Frank's residence, he never resigned. And what about the Democratic congressman from Louisiana who was recently caught in a sting by the feds with 90,000 dollars in his freezer, he hasn't resigned.

Those are some names.

Foley's actions were descipable, but I'll give the guy credit enough that what little integrity was remaining in him required him to resign.

Save me this high moral ground argument.

Yeah, I can use the internet too guys. I see that in addition to studds that year a republican from Illinois was censured in the scandal too, only that REPUBLICAN (crane) couldn't get re-elected, like the former.

It's not about who does or who doesn't have a sense of shame.

Foley didn't step down a year ago when Hastert knew about it. So spare me that. We all know that the only reason he resigned is because this is an election year, and there's too much at stake. He is a political liability right now.

Duh!

Jefferson from La. should resign, too. There's no excuse for that, I agree. I think Jim Black should probably start looking for a new job too.

But lets stop acting like one party is more morally righteous than the other. It's like russert said on meet the press sunday, many americans have this vote of no confidence in our government, and so do I.

Name names? We can go all day tossing abramoff and delay and jefferson back and forth. Scandal in politics may be just as old as the world's oldest profession.

But I refuse to give somebody's party a morally superior get out of jail free card just cause they stepped down a month before an election.

I'm clearly not making this a partisan issue -- although Democrats may be trying to seize the moment for partisan advantage. To me, it's a matter of decency and responsibility. Pages are under the care of congressional leaders and must be protected from this kind of reprehensible behavior by members. It doesn't matter what anyone's political party is. There should be accountability, however the chips may fall.

Zatoichi, perhaps you can shed some light on the fact that yes Federal legislators from both parties have, so to speak, been caught with their pants down, but apparently the Republicans are the ones who tend to resign (including Delay) out of shame, whereas the Democrats show little moral remorse by following suit.

On the surface it appears to me that Republicans require a higher moral standard than do the Democrats when it comes to their elected officials in light of the indisputable fact that they resign more often than their colleagues on the other side of the aisle when confronted with matters of immorality.

That's cause Democrats are more Christian and forgiving of thier brethren.It's a common trait among all democrats. Being forgiving is the moral thing to do. Republicans, they just can't turn that other cheek.

That's sarcasm, by the way. I don't believe my Christian God likes us playing him into our little political games, unlike our president.

Jon, you're getting into an incredibly stinky dog pile you don't possibly want to start stepping in with this standards argument. Just accept that you've lost this one.

Delay resigned cause he finally smelled the doo doo in his pants. Being a functioning human being, among other nose conscious homo sapiens, he, unapologetically, resigned his post.

Not because he's some noble knight of the Republican party. He was expendable.

Doug, what would you expect the democrats to do? They've gotta pull out the swift-boat-veterans-for-truth card. It's dirty tricks time, it's election season! Cut-and-run, smear-and-fear time!

Jon, what's your point? The only thing both parties TEND to do is play us for a bunch of dummies every two years. It's just whoever looks like the bigger dummy in each of the two years loses.

Morality, terrorism, security, gas prices and your so called standards are the cards, politics is the game and we're getting played!

zatoichi, I posted this on another site, but it's my thoughts on the matter:

Democrats are shameful, despicable, homophobic gay-bashers.
You’re attacking someone for having a private conversation with another adult about sex.
Is this what it’s come to? People afraid to even TALK about a subject the Dems declare is taboo?
I thought the Dems were the party of “tolerance” especially when it came to sexual orientation.
Are the Dems now coming out against those with alternative lifestyles? The Dems are supported in great numbers by these folks, are they going to give up all the support from homosexuals and pedophiles they’ve had over the years?
Did you Dems gay-bash and hound Barney Frank and demand he resign?
What’s next? Cameras in the bedrooms of gays so the Dems can arrest them and throw them into jail? Homo squads on local police forces to hunt down the “queers” the Dems hate so much and arrest them?
You guys are disgraceful.

Apparently George Soros and his privately-funded CREW had this info months ago. What did they know and when did they know it? Shouldn’t they be investigated, hounded, and lambasted for hiding and secreting information?
Liberal hypocrisy and left-wing double standards are alive and well in the party of “tolerance,” aren’t they?

Yes please leave G-d out of this matter. I don't think he enjoys being thrown into the diddie with the likes of Studds, Franks, Foley, and Clinton, oops there I said it.

zatoichi,

See, I told you that I didn't have to name names. Everyone, including, you did it for me. You only assumed that I meant Clinton. Seems that you are pretty defensive about it, and don't call me a moron. If someone has a different view of things than you, it doesn't make them a moron, on the contrary, it might mean that they actually have some good sense.

Now, I really don't care how old Lewinsky was. Her age wasn't the issue to me. She was working as an intern for the government, and in essence, Clinton as POTUS was in a power position over her. He took advantage of his power position, having a sexual affair in the Oval Office. Any way you slice that one, it was despicable, the same as Foley's indescretions. W would be lynched by the Democrats and the MSM if he was found doing that, which he should be (if they got to him before Laura). And, to make it worse, he lied and tried to cover it up when it was revealed. "Any time a Democrat has been caught in an illegal, immoral, or unethical scandal, they just ask for forgiveness and keep on trucking." You just validated my statement by defending Clinton. Come to think about it, I don't remember Clinton even asking for forgiveness. On the other hand, Clinton not resigning may have saved the world from a President Al Gore. I guess things could always be worse, huh?

While Foley should be gone for his behavior, the timing of this has a particular air of dirty politics. Apparently, this information has been known for some time, and now weeks before the election, it gets leaked to the media. This was leaked after the primary, and now the Republicans have to run a candidate for a safe district, and the voters have to vote for the new candidate by voting for Foley. How diabolically clever, don't you think? Accidental timing? I don't think so. To use your term, he was swift-boated.

zatoichi,

One last thought on Clinton. When the President of the U.S. commits such disgusting acts as he did in the White House, and it becomes public, and he is given a pass for it, what is the message that is sent throughout this country? If the President can act in that manner, and it can be justified, then where is the bar height set? What was the message that was sent to millions of young people? The disaster that we are seeing in this country with an amoral generation may very well be traced back to having started with this sordid affair.

Let's take a step back and look at the whole Foley uproar:
It's about 2 adults having a conversation about sex.
That's all. Not even real sex, just talk.

Is this really anybody else's business?

Have the Democrats become the "thought police" or the "sex police" now? Does every citizen now have to worry which words they choose when having a conversation with their spouse or friends? If a Democrat overhears them can they now be prosecuted?
This is silly beyond comprehension. Of all the straws recently clutched by the Desperate Dems, this is perhaps the thinnest.

So, the Republicans would have been hunky-dory with Rep. Foley continuing these lovely little dalliances? How would your own boss react if you started sending similar suggestions via email and IM to, say, the 16 year old son of a co-worker, especially if you were male? Do you think your boss has no right to know if you are conducting yourself with such interesting choices of words directed at young men of such age who also may happen to be serving under your authority, rendering them rather vulnerable?

I doubt most Republicans think all this is just fine, just as most Democrats are most concerned.

Freddy,

Those are interesting questions, but I suspect that unless the emails and messages were going over your company's proprietary equipment, your boss wouldn't have a right to know what you are doing. If you are conducting communications over your own equipment, it seems that it would be a matter of your privacy, which the courts have so fiercely protected. As I understand it, the 16-year old is considered an adult in D.C., so technically it wouldn't be a crime. Granted this is unacceptable behavior and Foley should leave office, but your analogy doesn't seem to work.

Funny how the Dems did everything in their power to PREVENT the government from intercepting electronic communications of terrorists plotting to attack the US but DEMAND access to private communications between consenting adults on matters that are not their business.

Regarding the Fed's eavesdropping in their campaign against terrorism and keeping us safe, an Appeals Court just overturned the Carter appointed judge who had denied a lengthy stay to the ruling prohibiting eavesdropping prior to being heard by the Supreme Court.

Jaycee, your comments about "two consenting adults" are downright preposterous. Forget about politics - it's completely inappropriate for a 50-something man (a powerful one at that) to send sexually suggestive messages to a 16-year-old child.

You obviously aren't a parent yourself, or you wouldn't be so flippant about this. But I can tell you that if a grown man sent these kinds of e-mails to my 16-year-old child, I would consider it far more than "just talk."

Doug, you are a father - and apparently a pretty good one, given how your sons turned out. What would your reaction be?

I would be furious and would demand that this predator be dealt with. House leaders were grossly negligent is letting him continue in office.