Posted on 02/04/2010 4:16:10 PM PST by AK_47_7.62x39
I got a mail today from BJ Lawson, the FABULOUS principled candidate who ran against David Price in the last congressional election.
He is considering running again, after initially deciding not to.
Dr. Price is a wonderful man, and a decent human being. He is a Duke graduate physician, who started his own company and understands business. He is a solid hard money advocate and a solid Austrian school economics guy. He is a gunner (serves as a range master at the Durham Outdoors Club), pro life, limited government, pro grass roots, anti federal encroachment type of guy.
He is still in the initiatory phase of running, but is sending out letters to past donors and supporters. This guy was a Tea Party guy before there WAS a tea party!!!
He is the real deal.
Please, if you want to see principled, small government, common sense, anti federal power guys in DC, watch for developments here in NC.
I think Price is vulnerable. He got de-throned once in 94. Obamamania won't get him by this time. Keep an ear out.
And, this seems a bit opportunistic of Lawson at this point. He gave it a great try in 2008 but got clobbered and now he has that stench on him. He lives in a Dem-held state House seat, why not try for that?
Good points, especially your last one. I personally asked BJ to consider forming a "tea party" like organization dedicated to replacing the horrid NC Legislature (Republicans almost as bad as Democrats in some districts) with candidates who know how to say "NO" to the Fed. He did not have a lot of interest in the issue.
Me? I think the future of politics and reform in the USA is local, and lies more in nullification and assertion of individual/state rights rather than the "Pickett's Charge" approach of trying to reform the unreformable in DC. That may come from my own political views which at times veer closer to anarchism, or at least anarchocapitalism, than what is referred to today as conservative. I recognize that FR is not a pulpit for Hayek/Mises stuff, and that rigid application of these ideas have implications not popular with the management, so I will leave that subject.
However, your idea about putting up good people for state legislature is wonderful. Getting the HORRIBLE Deborah Ross unseated (she has "Castle Doctrine" legislation bottled up in committee) would be a fabulous place to start. I can't run, because of a lot of baggage. Can you? Do you know of someone in her Raleigh District who could? I am a decent political organizer in my spare time, and a fair to middling fund raiser. I would go balls to the wall for someone who unseated this "little Pelosi."
That’s him, Thomas Stith (I was thinking of Stith but came up with Stokes, which I should have known was not it because that’s the name of the pair of brothers that served as Cleveland mayor and Congressman, respectively). I e-mailed Mr. Stith in 2004 to try to convince him to drop his long-shot primary run for Lt. Gov. (which was obviously going nowhere) and run against Price, noting that if he could hold President Bush’s share of the vote but get 30% of the black vote in Durham (IIRC) he’d beat Price. He wrote a courteous reply thanking me for the e-mail, but decided to stay in the Lt. Gov. primary, where he never became a factor.
AK-47, what’s Mr. Stith up to now?
AK-47, what’s Thomas Stith doing
Sorry for asking the same question twice there at the end—I’m on my iPhone and it won’t let me see the entire text before posting.
>>>>>Really, I think there was “nuff said” from that corner before you opened your mouth, if that is your er, “contribution.” If you are accusing BJ of being a “socialist”.... then “I am an ignorant troll” might be a better summation.
You may or may not agree with BJ running, and that is fine.
I myself wish he had declared earlier. You may prefer Roche.... although I don’t know why, as he supported the bail outs just as enthusiastically as Price (some “conservative”, huh?)
To declare him a “socialist” just shows me that we Republicans should not feel left out! No. Every time I wonder if it is just Democrats who have mindless idiots who’s sole ability seems to be producing a torrent of ignorant spew, I find they have mirror images over here.
Absolutely and totally brain dead ignorance.>>>>>>>>>
The above from the guy who posts this:
“Dr. Price is a wonderful man, and a decent human being. He is a Duke graduate physician, who started his own company and understands business. He is a solid hard money advocate and a solid Austrian school economics guy. He is a gunner (serves as a range master at the Durham Outdoors Club), pro life, limited government, pro grass roots, anti federal encroachment type of guy. “
ENUF SAID.
Ditto on Frank Roche. He seems to be the most Conservative in this race. Lawson seems to lean a little too much into the Buchanan camp on foreign policy and defense.
Lawson lives in House 41 according to his registration, which is the swing district that Ty Harrell stepped down from a few months ago.
I have no idea what he’s up to. As his page said, he ran a respectable race for Durham Mayor 2 years ago.
I heard Frank Roche speak at a Republican meeting. He’s a fiscal conservative. He also gave conservative answers to my questions on social issues.
I don’t really know him, but he says all the right things. So unless someone can give a good reason for not backing him, he’s my choice.
He supported the bank bailouts, which were the most ill advised wastes of money we have seen in decades, and effectively socialized a huge section of our economy, plus moved the ground to make it easy to make Government Motors a reality.
I don’t understand how that is “fiscally conservative.”
There’s no need for BJ Lawson to enter the race. The GOP already has a solid conservative in the race - Frank Roche - who has the advantage of not being a Ron Paulian whackjob.
There's nothing to understand. Roche didn't support the bailout.
BJ and ROCHE on LuMaye interview:
http://billlumaye.blogspot.com/2010/02/replacing-congressman-price-next-wave.html#comments
BJ pretty much was the underdog in this first “debate”.....and it does not seem (if one really listens to what he says)...it does not seem that he knows what a carbon tax really is - yet he supports a carbon tax and would do away with a federal tax. He claimed carbon tax to be a “consumption tax” but then went on to say that food should not be taxed.
Folks...carbon tax is cap-n-trade - plain and simple. Cap n trade is progressive.
Yes, I heard the Roche-Lawson debate on LuMaye’s show yesterday too. I tried to call in and ask him a pointed question about the carbon tax, but some lady got in first and beat me to it.
I agree - the carbon tax is a VERY bad idea, and I really get the sense that B.J. Lawson doesn’t comprehend exactly what it is that he is advocating.
Let’s think about it - Lawson says that replacing the income tax with a carbon tax will remove the negative drag on jobs, economic growth, etc. This is nonsense.
First of all, in one sense, a tax is a tax is a tax. The more tax, the lower the growth and the fewer the jobs. Especially true if, as Lawson says, we replace the income tax completely with a carbon tax. We will then have a carbon tax that is high enough to bring in replacement revenue (which may or may NOT come with cuts in spending). We could end up with a big huge whopping tax that WE the PEOPLE have to pay.
Think of it - huge tax on our gasoline in our cars. Added transportation costs on every good we buy from a store. Increased cost of living. Paying more to heat our homes. And also - consider this - petroleum, which obviously falls under a “carbon tax,” is a primary feedstock for the polymers industry. Taxing it will add to the cost of each and every consumer good made from plastics that use petroleum as a feedstock. That means the price of everything from Bic pens to automobiles would skyrocket.
In short, BJ Lawson’s carbon tax idea is very, very bad. VERY bad. I’d rather keep the present income tax regimen than switch to this carbon tax - though obviously, I’d much prefer a THIRD option.....
BJ is also a supporter of PAYGO...this is a democratic solution to spending money before they have it, assuming they will be deficit neutral. Here from indyweek.com/2008 he says “Additionally, we must reinstate Clinton-era budget controls such as PAYGO” REALLY!! According to the Heritage foundation “PAYGO has proven to increase taxes and do nothing to reduce the deficit. PAYGO EXEMPTS discretionary spending – that accounts for 40% of the budget. PAYGO does not apply to current entitlement spending. The only thing PAYGO does is raise taxes accordingly” http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed070209e.cfm
BJ, BJ, BJ!!! Do you know what you are talking about?? Any CBO analysis will show that PAYGO has done nothing at best!!
Another good example of PAYGO is from “The Hill” http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/51821-brown-deems-democrat-paygo-bill-a-ploy-and-demands-real-fiscal-responsibility-rep-henry-brown
I encourage everyone to read...and not just listen to candidates “rhetoric and ideologies”...listen to their words...I will be pointing out some more inaccuracies with this past interview....there are MANY.
What I think we have here is a progressive in conservatives clothing.
Yes...please add me. Any other info you care to know about - feel free to ask. I will be posting regularly until primaries.
Great, welcome aboard. Are you with Roche’s campaign?
Yes, please add me to the NC ping list!
Not a campaigner...not for me...just seeing things for what they are....it is what it is.
Are you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.