The Company You Keep
By: BJ Lawson
My primary opponent has continued his negative campaign with a mailer accusing me of associating with Republican Congressman and Presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul. Let me make several points perfectly clear:
- I am proud to support a Presidential candidate who is a strong pro-life physician, delivered over 4,000 babies, and never performed an abortion nor needed to perform an abortion to save the life of the mother.
- I am proud to support a Presidential candidate who has been a principled advocate of limited, Constitutional government for the entirety of his 20 years in Congress.
- I am proud to support a Presidential candidate who, as a Congressman, does not participate in the lucrative Congressional pension program. (I won’t participate either — a Congressional pension is an insult to working Americans everywhere.)
- I am proud to support a Presidential candidate who understands economics, and understands that our government’s disastrous fiscal and economic policies are putting our survival as a sovereign nation at risk.
- I am proud to support a Presidential candidate who served his country honorably in the Air Force, and who has attracted the most donations from military personnel.
There are certain individuals who believe Rep. Paul is somehow “extremist”, and represents “libertarianism” taking over the Republican party. These individuals need to listen to Ronald Reagan, in an interview with Reason magazine in 1975:
REASON: Governor Reagan, you have been quoted in the press as saying that you’re doing a lot of speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism. Is there a difference between the two?
REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
It’s time we stop putting ourselves, and each other, in boxes. It’s time we stop feeding from the trough of the mainstream media, start reading, and start thinking for ourselves. Our nation and our future depend on it.
I am proud to announce that I will be introducing Rep. Paul at his speeches to UNC and Duke this Friday, May 2. As a fellow Duke Medical School alum, it is an privilege to introduce such a staunch defender of our American republic. Why is defense of our American republic so critical at this moment in history? Please take twenty minutes to watch the following three videos:
Do we have what it takes to transition into a Constitutional republic, where all are truly equal with certain unalienable rights?
The company that one keeps is incredibly important, and I am well-known for engaging with a variety of people across the political spectrum. Does conversation and discussion with others mean I endorse all of their ideas? Of course not. But how are we going to make progress as a nation if we do not talk with each other about the issues at stake?
If you want a candidate in November who will hide behind the philosophical moat defined by the Republican party, you should vote for my primary opponent. My primary opponent is running a campaign based upon fear and unquestioning devotion to a party that, based upon the national debt alone, has objectively lost its way.
If you want an honest and forthright candidate who builds bridges, can win in November, and will be a principled advocate for a Constitutional federal government, then I greatly appreciate your financial support and vote on May 6th.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
I emailed this to Augusts Cho on April 15th:
“Mr. Cho,
I was reading some of the things posted on your website and I became confused. I am doing a short write-up for a website and if there is no response to this email I will tell them that I received no comment from the Cho campaign. First of all, I am rather confused on your exclusion of libertarian views. This is confusing to me because in the next paragraph you say, “I am also guided by conservative convictions that I share with President Ronald Reagan.” In the July 1975 interview with Reason magazine, Ronald Reagan said this:
‘If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism… The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.’
My question for you is, do you or do you not have conservative (and Libertarian) views like Ronald Reagan had? The comments on your website (and in the comments in the debates) have contradicted each other, so I’d like to clear this up.
Another concern I have is your support of the REAL ID Act. This has been viewed as a step towards a national ID card. Much of the Republican Party is strongly opposed to the REAL ID Act for this reason. Conservatism is about limited government and individual freedoms, but you support an act against these views? An example of the party’s opposition to this Act can be seen in the actions of such Republican congressmen as Jim Guest of Missouri’s 5th district. Jim Guest is the founder of L.A.R.I. (Legislators Against Real ID) and The Committee for America’s Freedom.
I would also like to ask you about your views on the economy. You have said that there is no reason to worry about the fact that the government is spending more money than it is earning. Aren’t these views similar to that of David Price’s, who has clearly done nothing to provide the American people with a responsible government? Isn’t fiscal conservatism about working to cut government spending and establishing a policy that makes sure the government hes less debt, which is a clear burden on the taxpayer?
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions,
Jeremy”
Mr. Cho has not responded.
April 28th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Anyway, here is another quote by Reagan:
“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”
Cho is doing an absolute horrible job at running for congress. He’s trying to attack his opponent by complaining about support of the most conservative member in congress????? Maybe somebody needs to remind him that this is the Republican party…. Cho says he support Reagan’s views… what a liar!
April 29th, 2008 at 12:36 am
You should go ahead and publish a picture of Ron Paul with RONALD REAGAN right beneath yours with him. They were good friends, and Reagan had good things to say about Dr. Paul. Ron Paul was also one of the very first politicians to recognize that Reagan would make a good president and endorsed him in 1976.
It shows the limited depth of Cho’s campaign when he can’t come up with a better attack against you than “He supports a certain Republican for President!”
If you listen to Reagan speaking in the ’70s, he sounds EXACTLY like Ron Paul and nothing like Cho. He also has a common sense way of relating to people that is like a certain Dr. Lawson!
Go Reagan, Go Ron Paul, Go BJ Lawson!
April 29th, 2008 at 1:02 am
Real leaders are guided by principle other than self-promotion. Real leaders engage. Real leaders include. Real leaders are honest, even when honesty may get them in trouble. Real leaders openly allow themselves to be held accountable. Real leaders offer vision, not hate. B.J. Lawson is a real leader.
Regardless of views, the fact is that no Republican candidate who says they are running for Congress because they are “getting sick and tired of all the liberals selling our country off piece by piece, selling it to the highest bidder” can be elected in the 4th District, where Democrats outnumber Republicans 4-1. No Republican who says he wants to be the ACLU’s “worst enemy,” or anyone’s worst enemy, can win in the 4th District. A Republican candidate must to engage with Democratic voters to win the 4th District. A Republican candidate must build bridges with Democratic voters on issues where our principles motivate goals shared by theirs. A Republican candidate must offer change- real change- when a Democratic opponent offers more of the same. A Republican candidate must be willing to work harder than almost any other candidate around the country; must go door-to-door; must spend hours putting together detailed presentations for the intellectual youth at our Universities; must embrace the communities in our district that are struggling rather than tell them, “There’s no problem”; must remain positive when his opponent becomes negative; must uplift rather than tear down; must say “There’s a place for you in my campaign,” not “I want to be your worst enemy.” A Republican candidate for Congress in the 4th District must be a real leader. A real leader like B.J. Lawson.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:06 am
Mr. Cho, along with a large chunk of the wayward Republican party, seems to define GOP conservatism only in relation to Democratic liberalism. That is, a Republican exists only to counter and refute the positions of Democrats, without question, and without exception. (Obviously, the same holds true for most Democrats now-a-days as well.)
BJ Lawson apparently doesn’t take this hard line reactionary approach, and has thus earned the scorn of Mr. Cho and his brand of Republican. Frankly, if there weren’t so much at stake, this scorn could be seen as a badge of honor. There is a lot at stake, though, so folks like BJ Lawson and Ron Paul (and those of us that support them) must fight to take the GOP back. Not just from the “big government conservatives,” and “American Greatness” interventionalists, but, perhaps just as importantly, from the people that choose to define conservatism based only on what the Democrats are doing.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:51 am
I (not the congregation that I serve) endorse Dr. BJ Lawson because he is exactly what the 4th Congressional District needs. He is not one who is beholden to either party. He is a man of principle and of morals. We were privileged to have him and his daughter this weekend serve alongside us as we helped the community in Hillsborough Heights beautify their park. BJ is a man who understands the importance of action over rhetoric. I am looking forward to having a fresh voice in Congress who is able to protect our civil liberties and who will represent his district well. This is why I support Dr. Lawson. He is going to be a wonderful and fresh voice for change and action.
BJ Lawson for District Four!
April 29th, 2008 at 11:19 am
BJ You used the term “indictable citizens” on the Bill LuMaye show. We are all “indictable citizen taxpayers” because we all do not fully understand the US Tax Code and therefore probably err when we fill in our tax forms each year and therefore we all ought to be in jail. Even the most honest of us. Therefore, DELETE THE TAX CODE. And maybe we can start being totally honest again!
Gerry Coleman
May 1st, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Spare me! Ron Paul and you are just not Reagan Republicans. Libertarianism is not conservatism. There are many areas of agreement but there are important areas of disagreement. Just go to Augustus Cho’s website for a summary of the major and important differences. You say Mr. Cho is running a negative campaign linking you with Ron Paul. However this does not compare to your attempts to run a personal attack campaign on Mr. Cho. Your supporters are even calling Mr. Cho a liar because he says he is a Reagan Republican. I have talked extensively with Mr. Cho about his positions. I also voted and followed President Reagan’s views and Mr. Cho’s views matches up better to Ronald Reagan than yours do.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:47 pm
Bill, neither William Lawson or Ron Paul are a part of the Libertarian Party. They are Republicans. Also, the Libertarian Party is somewhat of a branch of the Republican Party anyway. You are also incorrect in saying that libertarianism is not conservatism. Fred Hutchison describes it as another part of conservatism that originated in the 20th century. Also, as you know, Reagan has said that the root of conservatism is libertarianism. This is why Mr. Cho has contradicted himself. Finally, Ron Paul is considered one of the most conservative members of congress, the “taxpayers best friend,” and one of Reagan’s first supporters. Ronald Reagan also endorsed Ron Paul when he ran for congress. While you say you voted for President Reagan, you should know that Ron Paul was a leader in this movement.
Seeing as you are focused on Dr. Ron Paul, perhaps you should see this as well: http://www.militaryforpaul.com/reagan.html
This explains some of the things I have mentioned and it shows some pictures of Congressman Paul and President Reagan together. So you see, it is very strange to say that Ron Paul (or someone with Ron Paul’s ideals) is not a Reagan Republican. These two men worked together to bring conservative values to government and they were also friends. You may have also heard of Barry Goldwater or “Mr. Conservative.” His son, Barry Goldwater Jr, who was a congressman, has also endorsed Paul for the presidency. Ron Paul and B.J. Lawson are very-much-so Reagan and Goldwater Republicans.
Mr. Cho on the other hand, supports big government things such as the REAL ID ACT. This act is opposed by every conservative I can think of. Mr. Cho also has no foundation of fiscal conservatism. It’s more than just saying no to more taxes. By the way, perhaps if Mr. Cho had responded to my email it would have cleared up the confusion. However, I have a feeling that this isn’t confusion… Augustus Cho just doesn’t have conservative values. If you disagree, please ask Augustus Cho to respond to the email that I sent on April 15th. Thanks.
May 5th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Oh am I disappointed. I was ready to vote for Lawon until I saw him shake R.P.’s hand. The only thing worse that Ron Paul is the torrent of crazy Paulian responses — suffice it to say that with nose clipped, I shall vote for Cho. I’m afraid D Price will take it again. Bummer.
May 5th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
NAAP - Keep reading, my friend. You do not yet understand what is at stake:
http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2008/04/13/why-im-running-for-congress/
May 5th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
NAAP:
Please trust me when I tell that you that whatever problem you have with Ron Paul, the idea of seeing Augustus Cho as the parties nominee is ridiculous enough to ask you to put them aside.
I encourage you to read the blog post that BJ linked above…its great.
May 7th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Well, you beat Cho, and clearly so, congratulations. I frankly didn’t care for Cho either; but…
Justin; do you not see the baggage RP brings to any dance? BTW; RP was beat by a guy that has already withdrawn and now supports I forget whom; no blimps or silly rEVOLution (that’s ‘love,’ backwards, like ELO albums from the 70’s) phrases really mattered at the polls. It all reminds me of LaRouche, not in policy — which I can’t stand, but in baggage. Is that really that image you want to strike up? That Mr. Lawson doesn’t get this baggage is a major concern. That will make Mr. Lawson an easy mark for a seasoned vet like Price. Yet again.
Now then, you want to ask tough questions for a better answer. Any non-Dem can do that; frankly, that was an uninspiring story, with due respect to the patient.
Of course I’ll support Lawson with my vote this fall. I can not stand Price’s politics, but idealogical zealotry only animates the fringe. The sky’s been falling, whether left or right, since I was a kid. Good luck with that message.
May 7th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Does anyone understand what the person above this post is talking about?
May 7th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
NAAP:
What are you talking about? You think that BJ is going to be an easy target against Price? What about Cho? If you seriously believe that Augustus Cho stands a better chance than BJ Lawson of beating David Price then you are seriously delusional.
BJ beat Cho by 14, 310 votes. A resounding victory, in the face of negative campaigning by the party establishment and by people who want to throw around Ron Paul’s name as if it was a dirty word, or a kiss of death on a republican campaign.
May 7th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
Well actually, the thing I don’t understand is his problem with Paul. It’s bad that his supporters show the word “love” backwards in the word “revolution”??? What?!? This makes no sense, you don’t even say anything about the issues? Some candidates are going crazy over calling themselves “Ron Paul Republicans”. The conservatives go “I’m a true Goldwater, Reagan, Paul Republican,” vote for me. You should see some of the races on VA… they’re trying to put Paul’s name into everything.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
I’m not at all surprised that a few of you are unable to follow my point. That is consistent with denial. Yea, sure. Ron Paul really is all that and a cup of coffee. That’s why he commanded 4%, to Huckabee’s 9% in the NC primary. That’s gotta bolster your enthusiasm. That Lawson trounced Cho (for which I gave kudos) will be meaningless in the general election. But hey, enjoy your rEVOLution.
May 12th, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Jeremy: about the vast conspiracy pinning Lawson with Paul — you gotta be kidding me with the victim card — The only picture missing at this website is the photo of the umbilical card between Lawson and Paul.