Cho vs. Lawson
By: BJ Lawson
I have been advised to respond to my opponent’s “Cho vs. Lawson” page on his Web site, where he trivializes my positions on a number of important issues in an effort to draw overly simplistic comparisons. I do not believe his approach will resonate with the intelligent voters of the Fourth District, who have often told me that they appreciate the nuanced discussions of the issues on our Web site and in our campaign blog.
One important distinction is that my opponent consistently fails to differentiate between the Constitutional role of the federal government versus the appropriate domain of state and local governments. Beyond that difference, however, I am not going to compare myself to my opponent based upon the issues. I have already enumerated the issues most critical to our nation’s physical and economic security at this crucial time.
Instead, I am going to compare myself to my opponent based upon a different, but equally important, set of criteria: transparency and honesty. My campaign reflects the way I believe government should operate: an honest discussion of the issues, openness to questions, and transparency in operation. This commitment is reflected in our real-time fundraising ticker, my being available for questions, engaging in discussion on our campaign blog, and encouraging voters to personally engage with me and my family as fellow citizens.
Mr. Cho, however, feels otherwise. During this “job interview” for public service, he has repeatedly avoided questions about his background, current occupation, and fitness for office. In fact, I was surprised to learn that my opponent actually threatened legal action against a long-time party activist who persisted in asking him a number of basic questions. Not only did my opponent retain an attorney to send a threatening letter to this retired lady, who is currently fighting cancer, he also distributed that letter to the Fourth District Executive Committee and members of the NC GOP leadership.
His email with this threatening letter from his attorney is posted for your review. Is such behavior fitting for a Congressional candidate? What kind of candidate makes a statement like:
If she has told you anything derogatory about me, it is in your best interest to not believe it or repeated [sic] it.
Is he threatening the reader?
His justification for threatening this lady was a claim of “slander”. However, my opponent should realize that applying for federal office is an invitation to have your fitness for office questioned and tested on a daily basis. Threats and refusing to answer questions do not make the questions go away.
As a result, this individual responded appropriately. Her attorney replied with a letter questioning the slander claim when she was simply reflecting questions being raised by the broader community. The letter from her attorney, with the associated questions and documentation, is available here. I’m not going to list all the questions, but here are a few:
- Questions are being asked about your current occupation. When asked, you have told people that you are an “author”. However, you stated in a personal interview on December 5, 2007 that you have made no money from writing or the sale of your books. By what manner do you currently generate income? If you are not generating income yourself, how do you pay for the expenses of daily living?
- You have maintained that you are, or were, an ordained Presbyterian minister. When and where were you ordained? At which churches did you serve, and for how long? Can you provide professional references regarding your career as a pastor?
- Public record searches report that you own no real estate. Do you own any real estate, and if so, where? The house at which you are registered to vote (106 Aster Place) is owned by Mona Lee. Is 106 Aster Place your permanent residence? There is another property in Chapel Ridge also owned by Mona Lee. Who is Mona Lee, and how are you related to her?
- Public records indicate that you had a Delaware driver’s license, and no North Carolina driver’s license, until just before you filed to run for Congress in February. Public records further indicate you were cited for not having complied with North Carolina’s change of address/driver’s license law (NCGS 20-7.1), seen in court on 7/26/2007. When did you finally obtain a North Carolina driver’s license? Did you just move to North Carolina in 2007, or did you move to North Carolina in 2005 and violate North Carolina motor vehicle laws for two years?
- Public records indicate that you were cited for violating NCGS 20-174.1 in July of 2007: “No person shall willfully stand, sit, or lie upon the highway or street in such a manner as to impede the regular flow of traffic”, seen in court on 7/26/2007. Why?
- You stated to members of the Fourth District Executive Committee on November 13, 2007 that you have not paid back your student loan debt. How much student loan debt and/or other debt do you have outstanding, and how much is overdue? Are these federally subsidized student loans? Are these loans in default, and what are your plans for paying them back? Will you authorize a credit report?
Does anyone believe that a candidate who cannot answer these questions in a satisfactory fashion, or is unwilling to do so, is a viable candidate against David Price? How can the leadership of the Fourth District not insist on these questions being answered by a candidate who could potentially represent the Republican party? Isn’t it time we expect more of our elected representatives? And what on earth was he doing standing, sitting, or lying upon the highway in such a manner as to impede the regular flow of traffic?
Before you cast your vote, remember: character matters.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:30 am
Haha, yea… this is rich.
Now how exactly do you get cited for NCGS 20-174.1?!? That’s not jaywalking folks, thats a very obscure infraction. I can only imagine.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:30 am
Why did Cho fail to pay back his student loans? Everybody knows that you are supposed to start paying those 6 months after you graduate.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:01 am
Wow. I thought you might of had some competition, but this Cho guy is a real tool. I can’t comprehend people actually voting for him.
If I was your adviser, I’d advise you mail this to every voter in the 4th District. Unless, of course, they all have the internet and read your blog daily :).
May 1st, 2008 at 5:56 am
And I thought the stances he made on the issues were bad….. wow!
May 1st, 2008 at 6:09 am
Good stuff. I’m glad that the truth has been brought to light, and my hope and prayer is that the voters of the 4th District will keep these facts in mind when going to the polls next week.
May 1st, 2008 at 6:59 am
Check out Cho’s attorney’s web site: http://www.everettlawfirm.biz/
And his lawyer: http://www.everettlawfirm.biz/Bio/WesleyEverett.asp
Read the list of questions that Cho wouldn’t answer, check out the core competencies of this attorney and law firm. It might be amusing if it weren’t so sad. I wish Cho would just answer the questions without acting so childishly so we didn’t have to hunt around and draw our own conclusions.
On the flip side, he’s making it so easy to choose a solid candidate on election day, is he not? It would be nice to see two good candidates to choose from but at least the district gets *one* this time.
May 1st, 2008 at 7:35 am
I just don’t understand what’s difficult about ANY of these questions. What’s hard about explaining whether you own a house or your wife does, or what her name is? What’s hard about giving out a basic resume listing your job history? That is odd that he has a weird criminal citation like that.
One of my daughter’s college professors was cited for a similar misdemeanor (impeding traffic), because she accidentally stepped into the street during a protest. How did Cho get cited for this?
May 1st, 2008 at 8:10 am
There is one other thing I’m also curious about; did Cho actually live in Newark, Delaware? Anyone else who is originally from the Philadelphia area would probably be familiar with a common practice up that way that involves living in Pennsylvania while using a Delaware license plate and driver’s license to get a more favorable auto insurance rate. This is not in any way an accusation but it would seem odd that someone would want to live as far away as Newark, DE to do work in the Philadelphia area, New Jersey, even New York. I probably wouldn’t have thought much if it if it weren’t for the issue with Cho’s NC driver’s license (or lack thereof).
I wish Augustus Cho would authorize a background check. I would be willing to foot the bill for it to see what’s going on here and clear his good name so we can move on with the primary election. He’s a public figure now and the voters deserve clear answers to these legitimate questions about his background. Certainly if he makes it through the primaries, David Price isn’t going to treat him so gently and you can count on him going deeply into all of these issues (and more).
May 1st, 2008 at 9:31 am
I love how in the bottom of the letter he sent, he quoted the line from Reagan about the economy that you have quoted a number of times in your speeches before county conventions! So not only is he not transparent, but he is also unoriginal!
May 1st, 2008 at 10:15 am
BJ-
I’m an undecided Republican, leaning towards you at this point. I do have to point out, however, that at the bottom of that page, Cho has a pretty extensive and intellectual analysis of the differences between your positions and his on economics and foreign policy. He points out where he disagrees with you and explains why he feels your stances are incorrect. Though I may not agree with him on everything, I’m impressed to see that Cho took the time to do this because I don’t see it very often. Why would you characterize this as “trivial” and simplistic” when it seems to be just the sort of thoughtful dialogue on the issues which you always say you want to have?
-Matt
May 1st, 2008 at 10:54 am
Matt — Good point — I just noticed the “click throughs” at the bottom which provide a broader discussion.
My primary objection was to the red/blue one-liners that are the focus of the page, and I agree that the background he provides is worthy of further discussion.
For example, on the economy:
***
(From choforcongress.com)
While my opponent and I agree on a number of things, including simple, fair and low taxes, elimination of unnecessary regulations and spending reduction, his economic platform consists of a number of flawed policies and ideas.
1) “Unsustainable” military/defense spending is the first place leaders need to look when searching for ways to reduce the debt.
2) Foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury bonds are problems which deserve the attention of policymakers.
3) Trade and current account deficits need to be given urgent attention because the U.S. is ““reliant” upon other countries to fund them.
4) Inflation is the result of the Federal Reserve printing money and the U.S. will be best served by allowing gold to be an alternative form of currency.
***
First off, the issues I believe are most important are relayed here, and in the underlying blog posts:
http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/issues/economy/
http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/issues/taxation/
http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/issues/rising-prices/
Next, I’ll attempt to rephrase these arguments that he claims are “flawed”:
Regarding (1): Our foreign policy is expensive, and we need to be realistic about our ability to continue policing the world. We can’t afford to police the world at our expense by continuing to borrow from China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia to fund our operating deficits. Ammunition prices at home are up 50% year-over-year (at least for 45 caliber target rounds at Wal-Mart). How can we defend ourselves if we can’t afford ammunition? I do believe that entitlement burdens (social security and medicare) are greater problems numerically terms of our long-term solvency. But we must start questioning how we fund the “protection” we’re providing around the world.
Regarding (2): FAILURE of foreigners to continue holding/buying our Treasury bonds would be the REAL disaster. We ARE dependent on foreigners, to the tune of $600-$800 billion per year, to keep buying our bonds. The issue/problem for policymakers is how do we reduce the size of government so we do not need to borrow so much money, and create so much new debt?
Regarding (3): We need to combat our trade and current account deficits by strengthening our economy, and getting back to being a nation that saves and invests, instead of one that borrows and spends. Proverbs 22:7 - The borrower is servant to the lender.
Regarding (4): Inflation has many causes depending on the market or commodity in question. But the broad-based commodity inflation we’ve been experiencing has been driven to a great extent by the devaluation of our currency and increasing global liquidity. The Economist magazine (4/26) reports that the global food price index is up 69% year-on-year this week:
http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/economist-mag-april-26th.pdf
That’s a huge number. It certainly reflects supply disruptions, rising demand from an increasing Asian standard of living, and irrational ethanol policies, but if you’ve been saving your money in gold your food prices haven’t gone up nearly as much. Furthermore, note that the Economist’s All Items Dollar Index is up 31% year-on-year… but gold is up 34% year-on-year. Thus, if you are saving in gold, you are preserving your purchasing power.
The Federal Reserve contributes to liquidity through its management of interest rates, as well as its willingness to supply liquidity to the banking system through the recent credit crunch. As a result of its policies, the broadest measure of money supply (M3, now privately measured) is up almost 18% year-on-year. Has your salary gone up 18% in the past year? If not, you’re missing out. The Federal Reserve is the wellspring of liquidity — liquidity is then amplified through the fractional reserve banking system.
The term “printing money” is used colloquially to describe credit (which equals debt) expansion — and thus expansion in the money supply. I perhaps should be clearer there — folks who are less familiar with these processes wrongly conclude that “printing money” means just printing paper Federal Reserve Notes. That process of printing paper currency is not the Fed, that’s the Treasury/Mint. Today’s money supply is largely electronic, and created through account deposits in the banking system.
Finally, one reason I support the Fair Tax is that by eliminating capital gains and sales taxes on items purchased for investment (i.e., silver and gold), we would effectively have monetary “choice” again. Citizens could choose to “save” or “invest” in a variety of metals/commodities without incurring any tax penalty, and only pay transaction fees. Then if our government and federal reserve are abusing our currency with multi-billion-dollar bank bailouts and failure to restrain government spending, average Americans would have options to protect their purchasing power.
What’s wrong with having that choice, and how are your grocery and gas bills doing?
May 1st, 2008 at 11:23 am
BJ-
Fair enough. I’m not saying his positions are right or wrong, I just wanted to clarify the point that what he has on there is just the sort of issue engagement which you (rightly) point out is lacking in politics today. I wanted to make sure that you weren’t seriously characterizing that as “simplistic,” regardless of whether you agree with him or not. I guess the question I have in my own mind is, how much of it is actually his voice. He doesn’t have a blog like this where he can directly respond to people, and I’ve heard through the grapevine that he has a really smart young policy guy helping him. For all we know it could have been written by him. Always tough to tell on these campaigns…that’s why I appreciate the fact that you directly engage with people on here and in person. That’s one of the reasons I’m leaning towards you.
-Matt
May 1st, 2008 at 1:27 pm
This information has come form a BACKGROUND CHECK? Why is BJ conducting a background check on his opposition?
Maybe someone shoudl do a background check on :
1. Did Lawson EVER attend a GOP event or meeting before he ran for Congress?
2. Did Lawson ever vote Republican before running for Congress?
3. What was the nature of this “leaving” his position as a physician at tender age of 30?
May 1st, 2008 at 1:49 pm
The ” really smart young policy guy” must not be TOO smart or he’d be helping BJ instead
May 1st, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Nurse-
Good point! Even smart people can sometimes be misguided in their ways.
-Matt
May 1st, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Kevin — Regarding background checks: since I’m new to the political process, I attended a Candidate School sponsored by the Civitas Institute in Raleigh last fall.
I learned many things at that class, including the importance of opposition research. Thus, it is simply smart practice when committing to a campaign to learn as much about oneself and one’s opponent as possible. The questions that were raised in this legal dispute were not my questions, however. They were simply questions being raised by voters in th 4th District that my opponent chose not to answer. As Sen. Fred Smith says, “If you don’t paint your own barn, someone else will paint it for you.”
Regarding your questions:
1) I was last actively involved in GOP politics as a high-schooler, before I became engrossed in engineering and medical school. As a lifelong Republican, I was raised on a steady diet of Rush Limbaugh and the National Review, and I phone banked for Bush I back in the good ‘ol days.
2) My votes as a citizen are my business. You can determine when I voted, however, by consulting voter history data available from the State Board of Elections. My votes as a legislator, of course, will be a matter of public record.
3) As I note in my bio, I left surgery residency in 2001 to start a hospital software company:
http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/about/
http://triangle.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2006/05/29/daily23.html?surround=lfn
Thanks to Google, you can read more about it by searching “mercurymd triangle business journal”.
May 1st, 2008 at 6:42 pm
In response to Matt:
The funniest thing is, on the issue of the Fed and inflation, both Augustus and the guy who I suspect is the “really smart young policy guy” you have heard about have both told me personally that they agree with our take.
May 1st, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Paige-
Good, that means there is hope! Perhaps when BJ wins this thing you guys can work on getting one or both of them to put aside their disagreements with you and support your cause!
-Matt
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:14 am
If you openly admit that you hired a private investigator, why isn’t that disclosed on your campaign finanicial reports?
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:53 am
Kevin, you’re becoming a pest. Where did BJ say that he hired a private investigator? Oh, that’s right. He didn’t. BJ brought up questions that VOTERS had that Cho decided not to answer. These were public records that other people chose to look up. Maybe you should read a bit more so that you’ll catch those things in the future.
May 2nd, 2008 at 6:19 am
Kevin:
Nowhere does BJ claim to have hired a private investigator. All that he says is that Cho, after being questioned by a long time party activist, obtained an attorney and slapped this particular person with a letter threatening legal action.
Is this really the kind of person we want as our party’s nominee and possibly next congressman? Mr. Cho has to recognize the fact that because he has entered into politics and has submitted himself as a candidate for public office. People have the right, and arguably the obligation, to question and vet candidates. Mr. Cho has refused to answer the simplest of questions now…does he really expect that David Price will just give him a free pass? BJ is the best candidate to stand up to the Price machine. He is totally transparent, and is willing to speak with voters about any issue…my experience has been that he really seems to enjoy engaging with voters, something that I cannot say for Mr. Cho.
Furthermore, you ask about BJ’s prior involvement in the GOP. The first time I met BJ was at a Republican Party event before he decided to run for Congress.
BJ Lawson is a man of character and integrity. He is a leader that we can all be proud of, and a leader that we can all follow. He has gained my support since his announcement late last year, and I hope that he’ll have yours on Election Day.
Best,
Justin B. Clark
Former Chair
Durham County Teenage Republicans