All I'm doing at the present time is the grass roots stuff. Just lined up some important appearances at Western Carolina University, the largest university in this district which, as its name implies, draws about 95% of its students from here. From long experience on college campuses, I know I'll come away from that with upwards of 100 solid volunteers in all parts of the District.
The incumbent, Charlie Taylor, is running again. He hasn't said so, but I took the time early on, to talk with his wife and six members of his staff. In four weeks or so, I'll have videos of extemporaneous get-togethers in civic meetings and in private homes where I take on the critical issue of "why Armor, instead of Taylor?"
Make sure I have your snail mail address. When that video is shot, I'll burn a DVD and send it to you. It'll be raw footage (unedited) which I'm not about to post on the Internet. You'll be able to make your own judgment about my horsepower in this race.
On substantive issues, I've boiled it down to two: Jobs -- in agriculture, tourism and manufacturing. And education -- meaning student and teacher testing, charter schools, vouchers, and assisting rather than inhibiting home schooling. (Suffice to say, I'm a big believer in good, old-fashioned competition.)
Thanks for asking those pertinent questions.
John / Billybob
Hmmm. If Rep. Charlie Taylor is the Republican incumbent and running again, what is it that makes him not suitable to continue representing this district? Unless he is either a RINO or has some ethical problems, I dont see how running against him would be useful to the conservative cause or for that matter viable/winnable.
I am a believer in Reagan's 11th commandment and dont believe in unseating conservative Republicans (see below on what *is* useful IMHO - defeating RINOs).
It seems Taylor's record is pretty good from a conservative Republican point of view:
http://www.issues2002.org/NC/Charles_Taylor.htm eg on taxes he's lined up with tax cuts; and he's pro-vouchers, pro-life, etc. ...
# Voted YES on $99.5B economic stimulus: capital gains & income tax cuts. (Oct 2001)
# Voted YES on Tax Cut Package of $958B over 10 years. (May 2001)
# Voted YES on eliminating the Estate Tax. (Apr 2001)
# Voted YES on eliminating the "marriage penalty". (Jul 2000)
# Voted YES on repealing the estate tax ("death tax"). (Jun 2000)
# Voted YES on $46 billion in tax cuts for small business. (Mar 2000)
# Phaseout the death tax. (Mar 2001)
# Repeal marriage tax; cut middle class taxes. (Sep 1994)
I'd advise you to consider waiting for his retirement and/or lining up for the seat by taking on a state level position. JMHO - same sort of advice I was given. And I'd actually have to keep my powder dry here after all, sorry. If you want to discuss by freepmail go ahead...
I *am* giving money to Pat Toomey to unseat Arlen Specter, but that is because Arlen does *not* represent conservative judicial views - or conservative views period. Arlen said "Bork's narrow view approach is dangerous for constitutional Government" and yet he defends the egregious Roe v Wade, a dagger at the heart of proper constitutional jurisprudence IMHO. Arlen will "defend" his seat by taking union money and getting union endorsements so a liberal republican can beat back a conservative republican.
I want the conservative Republican to win.