Price v. Lawson - The UNC Debate
By: BJ Lawson
I was nervous going into Tuesday night’s debate. This was the third event with my opponent in three days, as we shared the stage at Town Hall events in Raleigh and Durham on Sunday and Monday nights, respectively. I quickly learned that reasoning often loses out to sound bites, especially if the sound bites are what the audience wishes to hear. Is it possible to strike a balance between intellectual rigor and emotional appeal?
In an effort to step back and regain perspective, I went back and reviewed the YouTube clip that provided my first introduction to Dr. Ron Paul back in May of 2007:
Seeing this footage again, well over a year later, reinforced exactly why I am running for Congress. At the time, I was utterly shocked to hear a politician advancing logical arguments in a debate, as opposed to stringing together meaningless soundbites and partisan rhetoric. It took several weeks of intense research to determine that I wasn’t actually listening to a politician — rather, Dr. Paul was a statesman with a thirty-year history of defending our Constitution, and a government that serves the individual.
As I watched Dr. Paul’s debate footage again, I began to relax. Specifically, I focused on his calm, measured demeanor, and his straightforward way of confronting complicated issues. Do I wish to be a politician who wants to be elected? Or do I wish to be a servant of the people who seeks to understand the issues, and act in my constituents’ best interests?
Dr. Paul’s performance crystallized my goals for the evening. Sound bites are insufficient in a world that is rapidly trending in dangerous direction. Wanting to get elected is not equivalent to wanting to serve. I resolved to do my best to communicate honestly on the issues, contrast my opponent’s voting record with his rhetoric, and most importantly, remain measured and calm in the face of his inevitable verbal gymnastics.
So here it is:
Opening Statements:
Research Funding:
Bailout and Economy:
Domestic Issues:
Energy:
Civil Liberties:
Education:
Foreign Policy:
Pakistan:
Closing Statements:
October 18th, 2008 at 12:02 am
Way to go, BJ. You shredded that smug, incompetent, bailout-loving parasite.
-jcr
October 18th, 2008 at 12:08 am
Well done BJ. I’m a democrat, and I just donated again to your campaign! No party has a hold on liberty, we need constitutionally-minded men and women of integrity to defend it. Best wishes on Election Day and keep it up!
October 18th, 2008 at 1:49 am
BJ,
Well done, I think you scored a knockout. I especially like it at the end where you said you refuse to be defined, it was a great way to end the debate because your opponent had been trying to define you as W Republican the whole debate, and that statement took the air out of his balloon.
I am an independent, not because I am middle of the road, but because I believe both parties are corrupt, out of touch and could care less about the people.
I think Congressman Price is out of touch and is too entrenched and needs to go fishing.
You Mr. Lawson are the real thing, and I believe Americans are enraged right now and are
going to throw the bums out and Mr. Price will be one of the first to go.
While I know Mr. Price talks about how unpopular George Bush is, he needs to look in the mirror because his own congress is much less popular with a pathetic 8% favorable rating.
“Aye, fight and you may die, run and you’ll live. At least a while. And dying in your beds many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for one chance, just one chance to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take our freedom.” — William Wallace
October 18th, 2008 at 2:14 am
Lawson,
Keep on keepin’ on, in this election and beyond, no matter what. You have great debate skills! And, you are pretty smart too! You know the issues, you know the constitution, and you know how to run a campaign (and business, I hear!). There really is nothing wrong with you.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:28 am
Thank you.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:29 am
Great debate. I wish you were running for office in the 14th District of California. Good luck in November!
October 18th, 2008 at 4:40 am
wow… the performance from both candidates was not really anything special, until i got to the pakistan question… great rebuttal Dr. Lawson, and the conclusion was excellent too!
October 18th, 2008 at 7:15 am
Excellent job, Dr. Lawson! I’m so glad to see how the liberty revolution sparked by Paul is multiplying in a new generation. May he be joined in Congress by dozens like him this term, hundreds next term!. This debate is a clear example of Mark Twain’s quip: “Politicians are like a baby’s dirty diaper. They both need to be changed often… and for the same reason!”
It’s funny how Price gives himself credit for opposing Bush policy and holds it against Lawson for doing the same!
October 18th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Way to go! You are a competent, smart young man. We need more of you
to run times 435 to run in all congressional districts.
Price is like hard, stale bread…..he can be broken into crumbs and you’re
the man to do.
October 18th, 2008 at 9:24 am
I support, campaign for, and contribute to any candidate endorsed by Ron Paul, and Mr. Lawson is no different.
But these videos are downright horrible. Between the horrid audio and the camera moving around I couldn’t watch it for more than 1-2 minutes. Couldn’t they use a wireless microphone? Couldn’t they use a tripod?
I’ll struggle through these video because I’m genuinely interested in what’s being said, but I think the staff should have done a better job w/the video.
October 18th, 2008 at 9:34 am
It must have driven you crazy that Price insisted on calling you Mr. Lawson instead of Dr. Lawson…
Anyways, I think you did great. You have a way of pointing out your opponents fallacies with out coming off as defensive or hostile. You squarely put Price in his place with class!
October 18th, 2008 at 9:51 am
D. Price is so full of s**t. He is soooo over with and out dated. I agree with Joe that Mr. price needs to go fishing…..just as long as somewhere along the journey of his fishing trip, he JUMPS OFF A BRIDGE. I wish you the best B.J. and sincerely hope that you will speed your way into congress and possibly affect the country’s outcome in the short and long term. Your understanding of the basics of banking revels Mr. Price’s knowledge of just about anything in your entire debate. That is except for the typical partisan B.S. that Mr. Price can’t seem to get away from. Keep up the study as you have learned much in the last year, and don’t give up, you are making great headway.
P.S……just in case you don’t hear it very often…..Thanks!
October 18th, 2008 at 10:11 am
*SO* inspiring. What a relief to hear such blatant honesty about the condition of our so-called representative republic. What a joy to witness one of the good ole boys called on the carpet in serious debate. I live in TN but I’m donating to your campaign. I wish we had a constitutionist candidate running in my state.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Nice job B.J.! We are rooting for you here in the the 14th District of Texas!
October 18th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Congrats BJ - We’re pullin for you all the way from LA County! In 2010 we need to find more like you!
October 18th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Great job B.J.
I had never heard of you until Ron Paul sent out the email asking for us to support you. Because of that email I have twice donated to your campaign because I trust Ron Paul. After watching this debate I can say that I am extremely proud to have supported you. I will continue to support you. Regardless if you win this election or not I hope that you will use your considerable talents to continue to fight to move this country in a new direction.
One thing representative Price did in this debate and that the presidential candidates did to Ron Paul was to point out that we would abolish the department of education and other government bureaucracies and mandates because they are unconstitutional. You nor Ron Paul answer that charge. I think that this movement must make people understand not only that things are broken, most of us understand that, but must also explain how your vision of limited government will make things better. How will your vision improve education, energy issues, the economy etc… in this country They have to be specific ideas not just “a free market will solve the issues” but explain WAYS that the free market will fix these issues. As I see it this is the greatest weakness of this movement.
Mike Lindsey
mike_lindsey@alltel.net
October 18th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Mr. Price it is AMAZING how many words come out of YOUR MOUTH, and yet you say little of value. You are so blind to what is going on in congress and in our country, you actually believe your own hypocrisy which spews forth from your mouth. Mr. Price, I am glad that 50 freaking years ago you helped with the civil rights movement. What have you done to protect the Constitution and civil rights TODAY??? NOTHING!!! BJ you did great. May the people of your state WAKE UP and handily throw Mr. Price out of office. I live in Arizona and I am very happy to have donated to your campaign. I am confident after you are elected you will be another voice for REASON, the Rule of Law, the constitution and the people of this great country and follow in the footsteps of Dr. Ron Paul. In order to be a great man, first you got to be A MAN!
October 18th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Great job Dr. Lawson!
This message of truth and freedom is how you will succeed in this election.
Liberty and truth always prevails.
We are rooting for you over here in Arizona.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:41 am
I loved your simple rebuttal on the Pakistan question: what gives us the right to pick and choose the leaders of other countries? Your opponent’s answer was ridiculous, and any intelligent audience members must have picked up on that. Nice work - keep tearing it up!
October 18th, 2008 at 11:42 am
I’m glad you’re out there Mr. Lawson. This other guy sounds like the slimeballs in Atlas Shrugged that lead the way to the end of the world. I feel like that book is coming true - fortunately, the good guys win in the end. You’re definitely one of the good guys playing an important role. Even though this guy is a well rehearsed snake of a politician, I think your integrity and passion is appealing and refreshing - as things become inevitably more dire, your approach will eventually win. Best of luck, and I’m with you!!
October 18th, 2008 at 11:47 am
I watched the whole debate and I think you did a fantastic job! I couldn’t believe how snotty that congressman was being with you by constantly saying “the party of my opponent” when he is clearly more aligned with Bush than you would ever be. You have my full support and I hope to call you my president someday too.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:50 am
You did a great job. It is funny how one simple question you posed to Price befuddled him so. Don’t let him try to paint you in a corner because you are running as a republican. I am a democrat who will vote for you. The lines are confusing at this moment but will be clear as we go on. Keep up the good work and good luck. Remember, you are trully the real change we need.
October 18th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Dr. Lawson,
You did great in this debate! Price really made no significant points, but you on the other hand, made many great points that showed the shortcomings of Price and the validity of your own stance. It is inspiring to know that it was only in 2007 that you were exposed to Dr. Paul, and here you are on the brink of joining him in Congress!
Congratulations on a job well done,
David Carlson
http://www.davidcarlsonpolitics.com
October 18th, 2008 at 11:54 am
His only arguement was to connect you with the current administration. How ironic that his platform and track record resemble significant connections to current policy while yours do not. I sincerely hope many of your ideals are carried through congress this year in North Carolina, and other states across the country.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Lawson,
I think that you will gain votes from the debates. I assume that your name recognition in the district is significantly lower than that of David Price. So, that means practically anything attention will gain you more voters than you lose. You do not have to beat Price to win from a debate; you just have to ensure that you do not embarrass yourself. You did not embarrass yourself at the debate, so you will gain votes from the debate.
October 18th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Job well done BJ. While I don’t reside in the 4th district and for all practicle puposes have no direct incentive for your victory, I am also an American who over the past one year plus has become educated to the pollicies and practices of our elected “officials” (I use that term loosely). While it is very obvious that Mr. Price has no real bearing on the document referred to as the Constitution, I know that you do and that sir is what I desire in any representative in my Congress. While I can not vote for you personally, you can rest assure that I will continue to support your campaign both financially and spiritually. You keep up the fight and I know that the people will come around and understand that in order for us to achieve the success that we desire, we must make changes in our policies and phillosiphy. You GO SIR!!!!!!
October 18th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I posted my reaction at BlueNC.com
– ge
October 18th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I find it embarrassing that the race between Dr. Lawson and this partisan hack is close. Anyone supporting Price should be ashamed of themselves.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Nice job BJ…. keep stomping down political parrots with TRUTH.. Me and many others around the stated got your back..
October 18th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
states*
October 18th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Good debate in which Dr. Lawson came across in a very polished fashion for a first time candidate in the face of the more experienced candidate seeking reelection, and laid out the important issues to get America back on track.
October 18th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Great debate BJ…I just made donation…I wish there was someone like you running in my Florida district.
October 18th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Dr. Lawson,
You are terrific!!!
You’ve successfully illuminated the contrast between America’s vintage Free-Market approach and the socialistic approach of your opponent.
The next real test is if you can get through the thick skull of the general electorate.
October 18th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
I came to this site after receiving a mailer from http://www.lawsonforcongress.com.
I must say that based on the mailer, I was not expecting much. It seemed to try to hide your party affiliation stating on the first page that your campaign is composed of “Democrats, Unaffiliated, Republicans, Libertarians” and only on a tiny box on the last page did it list your affiliation.
So, I admit, frankly, that I am surprised having reviewed the debates to find your platform to be more clear and thought provoking than I expected…so I can’t just dismiss it out of hand. So, here’s some of my more pressing questions about your campaign.
In your mailer, you state that you “reject offensive war” and that war is only to be used in “self-defense” or “defense of innocents.” You also state that “David Price has consistently voted for war throughout his Congressional career.”
Could you back up the latter claim, please? According to my own research (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000523/key-votes/), it sure looks like Congressman Price was speaking truthfully when he said that his voting record indicated an attempt to tie funding of the war to timetables for troop withdrawals, efforts that were stymied by members of the party you are representing.
Also, just to be clear that we are not equivocating over terms, do you reject the so-called “Bush doctrine” that actually claims the war in Iraq is “self-defense”? Could not your “defense of innocents” standard be used to justify interventionist wars? I’m not trying to parse words here, just trying to make sure I understand your position.
I agree that Congressman Price in the debate above appears to be trying to run not against you but your party, and I understand how that creates an irony because your stated positions are often in opposition to those of the party you are running under. But that leads me to the very real question of why, if you hold the positions you do, are you running under the banner of a party that has a record of being more hawkish, more in favor of the erosion of civil liberties, more responsible for deficit spending, etc. than the party you are running against? Why not mount a primary challenge to Congressman Price or run as an independent?
As you can tell, I’m not a huge fan of David Price, but I’m pretty skeptical of someone running as a Republican saying he is a safer bet to oppose the policies and influence of the the Republican party. I suppose this rather long message may make me appear to be a troll, but the truth is I am undecided as far as the NC-4th house race is concerned.
October 18th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Dr Lawson, you and people like you are the hope for the future of our country. God bless you!
October 18th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Thank you for posting the debate, as I was unable to attend. You continue to make your liberty loving Americans proud–keep up the excellent work and take some comfort in knowing there are many working behind the scenes on your behalf–I included.
October 18th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Is there a transcript available? The audio isn’t the best quality and it’s sometimes difficult to understand what is being said.
October 18th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Take a listen to a new radio ad Ron Paul’s organization (www.campaignforliberty.org)
wants to run in opposition to Price’s vote on the bailout:
http://campaignforliberty.com/aud/CampaignforLiberty-NC.mp3
October 18th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
B.J. -
Thank you for running for government office.
Your willingness to throw yourself into the political fray inspires me, and I hope it will inspire others to take the stand we’ve needed to take for so long.
After watching the debate, it’s clear that you are one of the people we need in government. Like Dr. Paul, you utilize reason, rather than regurgitate a party mantra, or repeat what the news anchors spew from their television pulpits.
By the way you cut to the core of our foreign policy problems when you asked “What gives us the right to choose leaders of foreign countries”. Keep up the good work.
-Brandon Atkinson
October 18th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Awesome BJ! You and Ron Paul inspire me. I am very excited that you’re running. Keep up the great work.
October 18th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Kenneth - Thanks for your questions, and for asking. I’m skeptical and cynical enough that I appreciate the need for parsing words.
I’ve put some additional work into documenting the assertion that David Price “consistently votes for war” here:
http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/lawson-vs-price/prices-war-record/
The bottom line is that he has voted to initiate and continue hostilities under Democratic administrations, but has not voted to initiate hostilities under Republican administrations. Thus, he appears to be motivated by party politics as opposed to principle.
We’re constantly at war, however, so it’s obvious these games of party politics are used as a tool to keep the electorate divided while enough swing votes are always present to ensure that wars are funded, although never constitutionally declared.
I reject the “Bush doctrine.” Iraq is not, and was not, a war of self-defense, and is not justified either in self defense or defense of innocents. The question of “defense of innocents” in my opinion is best exemplified by Hitler steamrolling unprovoked into Poland — that’s a scenario where defense of innocents could be invoked. Internal struggles in other countries are not, in most cases, defense of innocents.
For example, consider Somalia — Somalia has a human rights tragedy with African Muslims at war with Arab Muslims. Which side should we choose?
The answer is neither — we cannot, and must not, take sides with military intervention in other nations’ civil wars. For additional perspective, please see here:
http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2007/11/18/guidelines-for-the-use-of-deadly-force/
I am running as a Republican because the Republican party has desperately lost its way and needs to be rebuilt from the inside out. Please understand, I’ve always been a Republican — it’s just that the party establishment no longer reflects my values, nor the values of most Americans, with respect to good government that serves the American individual instead of corporate interests.
Since the Republican party has moved in a dangerous direction, it needs to be reformed. If I abandon the party, then it will continue to act against my interests, and the interests of the American people.
Would you prefer to have a party that acts against our nation’s interests, or would you prefer to support principled candidates who wish to reform a sick party so we can again have a productive dialog that is truly transpartisan and focused on American solutions for American problems?
Finally, while the Democratic party may appear more benign than the Republican party, in reality its leadership is not. The bailout is a perfect example of how BOTH parties need a housecleaning at the top. Pelosi is basically a surrogate for the current administration, and our incumbent takes his orders from Pelosi instead of the people and our United States Constitution.
We need principled leaders working for change in both parties, and I look forward to working with such leaders to advance a constitutional government that serves all Americans equally regardless of party affiliation (or lack thereof).
October 18th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
John Stossel just did an excellent 20/20 program on the role of government, and what tends to happen when we look for politicians and bureaucrats for help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phs6CwnutoY&feature=user
Highly recommended.
-jcr
October 18th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
One of the moderators should have reminded him that he was running against you, not the Republican Party from the 90s.
We’re rooting for you in the 41st District of California.
October 19th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Dr. Lawson,
Something to Consider….
It is EXTREMELY diificult to be responsive to 700,000 people. But that is what a Congressman is asked to do. In your case, when you get elected, you will also have the rest of the country asking for your help because there will only be a few free market Congressman.
So here is my suggestion -
As a Congressman, you will get one million dollars per year for staff. Use some of the money to create a Web 2.0 system that computerizes and publishes your consitiuent services. As you are campaigning, advertise your intention to use the tax money confiscated from voters to give them a real Congressman - who interacts with the people.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
RE: Mike Lindsey - “abolishing the Education Department.”
Ron Paul specifically stated that “the states should handle educational issues”. Local problems are best handled locally. No one in “this movement” said anything about locking up the schools. We just want the Federal Goverment out of it. Talk about micro-managing? Every Sate, every town, every neighborhood has it’s own specific challenges. Challenges that only the LOCAL people would be familiar with and best suited to handle. Keep the big goverment out of our hair.
Let the people run their own lives, their own towns, their own finances and their own freedoms.The Feds can collect money for education and issue laws to protect children but the minute details should be handled by the State.This is what the Constitution advises and this is what “our movement “is trying to express.
If you want a goverment that (in Ron Paul’s words) takes care of you from “cradle to grave” then Communist China would be a wonderful place to live. Everything is taking care of by the BIG, BIG Goverment. Health, education,jobs,housing,etc. But unfortunately,there isn’t much freedom for the individual.
I would rather find my own job, my own place to live, my own Health Insurance and take responibility for my fate. Just as long as I have my freedom.
Peter
October 19th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
The generational differences are huge, Democratic left of center old-guard vs. Libertarian true conservative (root derived from conserve). BJ would do well to learn from Price as he is well-heeled to the nuances of Washington. We desperately need a paradigm shift from the politics as usual. BJ should learn that his positions as right as they are will require softening if he is to enter a realm that has sadly changed little in its history and has become more polar since Rove, the Gingrich revolution and the fundamentalists commandeered the Republican Party. We unity and common ground.
October 19th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Peter,
I think it’s worth noting that no totalitarian government has ever delivered on those promises of taking care of people from cradle to grave. They just made it illegal to report on their failures. Mussolini didn’t make the trains run on time, and Castro didn’t deliver health care to every Cuban.
-jcr
October 19th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
BJ wins!
October 19th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Thank you BJ for defending our freedom and our Constitution with honesty and integrity. Best wishes to you from Connecticut. I wish I could give you my vote for Congress in November.
October 19th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Mr. Lawson, I was pleasantly surprised to see you would at least come to the aid of a 100% innocent attacked nation like defending Poland against the Nazis. But I am very interested to know what if anything you would do about the tragedies going on in Darfur? Military action would be risky and not exactly libertarian-like, but the people are defenseless and there seems little doubt that there is a horrific genocide going on there. So what would you want to see this government do, if anything?
October 20th, 2008 at 3:38 am
Thank you Mr. Lawson for absolutely crushing this big government interventionist windbag. Your Constitutional response to Pakistan was one of many breaths of fresh air and I can only hope to refer to you as Congressman Lawson. Although I cannot vote for you being in Ohio, I am proud to have donated to your campaign and contributed to your success. You are living proof that win or lose all Ron Paul-minded patriots have already won. The apple cart has been tipped and the status quo on Capitol Hill still doesn’t know what happened. As Ron Paul stated, this is only the beginning.
October 20th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Scott — Darfur is a humanitarian tragedy, and the roots of the conflict are multifaceted. Essentially, however, Darfur is locked in a cycle of retaliatory violence between Black Muslims and Arab Muslims. Which side do you want to choose?
Darfur is an internal struggle. We cannot, and must not, intervene militarily. The solution must come from those in the region, and we should focus on diplomacy and humanitarian relief through private organizations.
I discussed this issue back in January here:
http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2008/01/06/grassroots-conversion-and-what-to-do-about-darfur/
… and outlined criteria for using “deadly force” here:
http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2007/11/18/guidelines-for-the-use-of-deadly-force/
October 20th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Excellent job Dr. Lawson!
Peter, China is actually not that communist any more. At this point I think their economy is more free than ours.
October 20th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Work a poll station for BJ!!! We need to get this guy elected!!!
October 20th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Mr. Lawson, calling Darfur a “struggle” is a stretch. The janjaweed and the government are clearly the bad people. I understand that we should not pick sides in 99% of situations, but the janjaweed and Sudanese government are just as bad as the Nazis who invaded Poland. You said it would be right to pick the side of innocent Poland against the nazis, well the “black muslims” of Darfur and refugee camps are just as innocent…and even MORE defenseless! Your classifying of this as a “struggle” in which we should not pick sides is disappointing. If Defense of Innocents doesn’t apply here, I don’t see how you could apply it to Poland against Nazi Germany. It is clear in both situations which side is innocent and which side is evil.
So if you do stand firm on your position there, let me ask you this…shouldn’t this country at least try to get heaps of aid and security to the eastern edge of Chad? The Fur people in refugee camps in Chad are hardly any safer than if they were still in Sudan. Women are at high risk for rape inside and especially outside of camp, and the men are at risk of murder or castration if they leave the camp (leaving the camp is necessary for firewood). Surely you would at least want the government to work with that Chadian government to protect these people?
October 20th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Scott — As concerned citizens, we should all work to make a difference wherever we are called. For many, that will involve supporting relief efforts in Darfur or its refugee camps. For others, it may be working for change in Myanmar. There are no shortage of places for us to make a difference around the world, or around our community.
The bottom line is that the situation in Darfur is complicated, and recent reports suggest it’s not even fair to claim it’s a simple case of oppression of one group by another:
In such a highly-fractured situation, solutions must come from the inside. Attempts by an outside third party to bring peace by force are futile. Deploying American troops will only provide another target for combatants to shoot, cost American lives, and do nothing to advance a peaceful solution.
October 20th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Excellent job BJ! I’m rooting for you here in Pennsylvania District 7.
October 20th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
I only watched the closing arguments. I must say that anyone who spends half their time attacking the Republican establishment, George Bush, and John McCain in a race against BJ Lawson is clearly lost. You’ve changed the discussion and he has absolutely no idea how to handle it. Partisan politics is the only game he knows and his discomfort with your issue-driven approach showed in his closing statement. Best of luck Mr. Lawson.
October 20th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Be a Ron Paul people, run for congress, run for the senate, run for local elections. Be AMerican
October 21st, 2008 at 2:40 am
I found the Pakistan rebuttal not only on point and something that needed to be addressed, but also enjoyable to watch. hehehe.
October 21st, 2008 at 3:04 am
Very good close for you BJ. If I could change any part of it, it would be that regardless of which candidate wins, the People need to hold “their” representative accountable and get acceptable explanations for the way “their” representative votes, especially when that representative is being told by over 90% of his electorate how they should be voting.
October 21st, 2008 at 4:31 am
Scott,
If you want to get involved in the war in Darfur, then by all means, do so. There is a long and honorable tradition of Americans going to war to defend innocent people in other countries, such as the American Volunteer Group (better know as the Flying Tigers), and the Americans who joined the RAF before the United States was draw into World War Two.
The situation in Darfur is truly appalling, but that doesn’t make it a matter for the government of the United States to get involved in. There is no authority granted in the constitution to send our armed forces to act as the police force of the world.
-jcr
October 21st, 2008 at 2:41 pm
It’s clearly evident that Mr. Price, the incumbent, is firmly entrenched in the ways of “mainstream” establishment politicians—not giving cleat and concise answers to questions and rambling on in ways to distract the audience from the original question.
Why is it SO hard for these “mainstream” con-artists to acknowledge –let alone OBEY– the Constitution and talk about returning to the principles on which the republic was founded? I wish I knew. They seem to avoid discussing them in detail every time the subject is brought to light.
October 21st, 2008 at 3:47 pm
To B. J.:
I listened to this debate twice, audio only, and haven’t watched the video footage. I am actually glad I “only” listened because I was concentrating on what was being said.
I feel that you did an excellent job, especially since you were going up a more seasoned public speaker. What I kept hearing from you B.J. was clear and concise answers. What I kept hearing from David Price was typical “political” responses.
B.J., it is my fervent hope and prayer that you will win this election. Our country needs you….AND more like you. It was so wise of you to go back and listen to Dr. Paul’s debates. There is ALWAYS a difference when we hear the “truth” as opposed to what you refer to as sound bites.
Don’t ever lose your sincereness, don’t strive to become a polished speaker. Always strive to tell the truth, and remember that if you are elected, it is as you stated above, to represent……”we the people”.
I was pleased with the debate…………I am sure you garnered some additional votes! I only wish I were in your district so I could vote for you come Nov.!
October 21st, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Thanks for your input Peter.
Yes - let things be handled closer to home. I understand this. But I still think the movement must give more examples of how and why that would work better…besides the obvious reason of decreasing waste and corruption. I want to know because the argument always comes down to this when talking about this to others. I don’t know how to defend the idea that state government is better than federal government and how specifically it is better in each instance. Is there a reading list that might help me to understand the principles well enough to defend them? I want to know how to grow our army. I can’t do it without the proper tools. I really think this is what keeps more people from joining the movement. They agree that what we have is bad but they don’t know how Ron Paul’s ideas are better.
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:06 am
Mike,
I would recommend picking up a copy of Ron Paul’s latest book, The Revolution, A Manifesto. He recommends a list of books at the end, which together make up a fine basis for understanding the philosophy and the practice of liberty.
-jcr
October 22nd, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I second John’s comment. Ron Paul’s book changed the way I view politics. It will make things much clearer if anyone is confused by what Ron Paul (or B.J.) says about certain issues. And beyond that, there are, as John says, a whole list of books you can look into if you want to know more (which i’m sure you will after reading it).
David Carlson
http://www.davidcarlsonpolitics.com
October 23rd, 2008 at 12:23 am
I agree with all the sentiments regarding your performance, Dr. Lawson. It was very strong, rapid-fire and put him on the defensive throughout. My only minor quibble regards a couple of questions wherein you remained seated.
My first thought was that it was a mistake, negative body language or something along those lines. But near the end, I felt as if you were more relaxed and confident hence you didn’t need to stand for a quick rebuttal. Meanwhile, Price stood every time but by the end he was fumbling with how to respond to you and was no longer affecting the body language of a “regal politician” that he had started with.
October 25th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
(((Mr. Lawson, I HOPE you read this…)))
I think he did a good job- but I would give him a few suggestions from my perspective.
I know without a doubt he is very intelligent. He wouldn’t have been able to do the things he has done if he wasn’t incredibly bright.
I just want to see him stand each time he speaks. I know he probably has a million topics running through his head at once but I would slow down his speech and I would attempt to speak a little more with passion- because I know he has it.
I have no doubt he hasn’t spent an enormous amount of time breaking down each topic and attempting to find the best solution- he is a scientist. However it wasn’t ‘logic’ that got him involved and to run for office… it was his passion. At the end and a few times I got a glimpse of that passion- I would just advise him from my stand point to try to connect with that passion. The other guy is good at slowing things down and ’seeming’ to be sincere about it (although I don’t think he is.)
The other guy is good- good at b.s.-ing, which is why scum like him stay in power. I would clearly advise BJ Lawson (yes I’ve donated to his campaign) to take a deep breath, slow down a little bit, feel that sense of ‘passion’ in his gut each time he goes to speak- and just express himself.
Unfortunately most people are ’sheeple’ and don’t spend much time thinking about each topic- they unfortunately decide much upon emotion. I KNOW you have the emotion behind what you are doing… I have no doubt, I just want to see and sense it more. I want a chance to connect with you a little bit more. Show us that you are disappointed with the way things are going- (although I did get a sense of that here and there), take time to ‘feel’ your feelings while you are speaking… people connect with that. They trust someone they believe feels like they do.
Slow it down a little bit, ‘feel’ and experience why it is you are doing what you are doing, and while I do think it is important to use your head of course, make sure the people see that you are passionate about this.
I need to see that- I think most people need to see that, I think you’d be better off. I KNOW I support you, as ‘if’ I were a regular person- get me to believe it. The end was good, but I wanted to see a little bit more of that throughout.
Stand up, stand tall, slow it down, feel your emotions, and speak from your heart as well as your head.
THANK YOU SOOOO MUCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU ARE DOING- A TRUE PATRIOT!!!
-Jason
October 26th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Great videos! However, the last six videos did not play. Can they be made available again?
Lawson, you were great. Price has got to go!
Please someone let me know how I can view the last six videos.
October 26th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Whether you win or lose, Dr. Lawson, your candidacy is an inspiration to me.
October 27th, 2008 at 12:33 am
[...] of the specifically identified “Democratic Congress” for- well, anything. As he says in the debate at UNC, Dr. Lawson believes that history has shown that the party in charge means nothing. As I discussed [...]
October 29th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I donated and I hope you outpoll the smug incumbent, but I can’t bring myself to actually vote for any registered demopublican in a general election. I will be writing in Libertarian Max Longley. Unfortunately my vote will be discarded, because people like Price fail to de-rig the elections. They’re more concerned with pretending to support democracy overseas (at our expense of course) than in actually getting their own constitutents’ votes counted.
October 29th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
[...] taking another look at the debate between Congressman Price and Dr. Lawson, his “Keeping in Touch” newsletter that he sent to the 4th District voters (at taxpayer [...]
November 1st, 2008 at 12:02 am
Dr. Lawson, It has been a pleasure to send you a few donations and even more so to hear you speak live at the Blaine complex in Minnesota and via a webcast at a friends house in Charlotte. Even though I live in the 10NC CD if you are elected I can say I have a representative in congress. I await election night with great anticipation.
Good luck and Godspeed.