Lawson for Congress

With just a few days until Nov. 4^th, it’s instructive to highlight the endorsements that B.J. Lawson did not receive – from the various newspapers in the area. The evolution of the language used in the non-endorsements generally grows from negative to positive in B.J.’s favor. We can only hope that readers of these Price endorsements could “read between the lines” and do their own research to reach their own conclusions before they voted.

Here are the highlights with links to the full articles and overall they are fairly entertaining:

News & Observer, October 16. The N&O took the lazy and biased road in endorsing the three Democratic Congressional incumbents in the area. The N&O devoted a lot of ink to Rep. Price, writing, “The voters of this district should be proud of their congressman, and proud of having sent him to Washington for 20 of the last 22 years. David Price of Chapel Hill is thoughtful, knowledgeable, responsive. His instincts and record are progressive — even though he sometimes catches flak from the left as a too-prudent pragmatist. Price, who is 68, surely knows his way around the partisan minefields…”

All they could write about B.J., because the Editorial Board REFUSED to meet with him and never interviewed him, is, “Republican opponent William “B.J.” Lawson of Cary, a 34-year-old physician and medical software entrepreneur making his first run for office, depicts Price as too willing to support deficit spending and too comfortable with corporate interests. He has some worthy goals. But he does not make the case for replacing a congressman who has performed in outstanding fashion.”

You will see 10 online comments when you click on the link, all calling the N&O on their bias and their dismissal of B.J. as a serious candidate. And my letter to the editor was published two days later because they ignored B.J. from the very beginning, as was one from Marcia Patton. Thanks Marcia!!

Independent Weekly, October 22. This one really left us scratching our heads the most, especially since Editor Lisa Sorg had written an excellent, in-depth feature story about B.J. the week before that received lots of reader praise. The Rep. Price endorsement is certainly not a glowing one, however, opening with, “This race is a tougher call than it looks: We cautiously endorse incumbent U.S. Rep. David Price for many of his progressive stands on the Iraq war, media reform, gay and lesbian rights, and reproductive rights. He also supports pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants.” The Indy then moves on to question and criticize Rep. Price’s stance on issues (or lack of stance) and voting records.

Their much shorter commentary on B.J. states, “Depending on your litmus test issues, Republican challenger William (B.J.) Lawson is a viable choice. While Lawson’s Libertarian free-market stances and opposition to Roe v. Wade preclude us from endorsing his candidacy, he has many progressive views, including opposing the war in Iraq, strong stands on civil liberties protections, and a disdain for extending to corporations the same legal rights as individuals.”

The campaign feels that there were definite politics in play within the Indy editorial staff in coming to their decision. We just hope that the article the week before spoke for itself and carried more weight in the minds of the readers.

The Chronicle (Duke University), October 27. Well it appears that Duke students have more loyalty to a former professor than to an alumnus twice over! We also know that Duke is a significant contributor to Price’s campaign too. In any case, it’s just more bias but they write some positive comments about B.J.: “North Carolina’s 4th District is facing its tightest congressional race in more than a decade…Both candidates for this seat have presented a unique and powerful vision of what this country should become. After meeting with both B.J. Lawson and David Price for a candid discussion of their views, however, it is clear that Price’s ideas and ideology are precisely what the 4th District needs to move forward.”

Here’s more: “Lawson’s success thus far in his campaign is not without foundation. A Duke-trained physician and entrepreneur, Lawson embraces lofty ideals in both the positive and pejorative sense.

Lawson’s advocacy on behalf of price sensitivity in higher education and endorsement of localism, coupled with his positions on the issues of Iraq and gay rights are laudable.
Unfortunately, Lawson displays a naivety regarding the machinations of policy creation in Washington and a myopic view of the policy implications of his ideals.”

This is contrasted with, “…David Price, a 10-term incumbent, offers both a deep institutional knowledge of Washington and a history of leadership on Capitol Hill. Price serves as a member of the House Appropriations Committee and is the Chair of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security, positions of notable influence that benefit his legislation on behalf of the 4th district.”

The Chronicle staff acknowledges that B.J. is a serious candidate, but it’s obvious that they want to keep an old, longtime incumbent in the broken Congress because he can do favors for the 4^th District. We shouldn’t be surprised. You will also see 28 comments sharply criticizing the Price endorsement too.

Herald-Sun (Durham), October 29. Unlike the N&O, at least the Herald-Sun has devoted ink to the Lawson campaign on a somewhat regular basis, publishing letters to the editor in support of B.J. and including his quote against the bailout legislation. But like the other newspapers, they took the easy road, writing, “Price has been representing the 4th District in Congress for nearly 20 years now, serving from 1987 to 1994 and again from 1996 to the present. Price has taken bold stands and also worked quietly behind the scenes. He has been a thoughtful and effective legislator and, we believe, deserves to be reelected.”

This non-endorsement is a bit more balanced in B.J.’s favor than the others. “His Republican opponent, B.J. Lawson, has taken on a tough challenge in a difficult year, although Price is not invulnerable, as his defeat in 1994 showed. Lawson, a Cary resident, is a young, energetic candidate with intriguing positions and an impressive background — he earned a medical degree before becoming a successful software entrepreneur…Lawson has some good ideas, including an emphasis on alternative energy that isn’t far from Price’s view. Lawson also says, correctly, that Congress is too influenced by lobbyists and corporate interests, that some members of Congress don’t read legislation before voting on it, and that the health system needs overhauled so doctors can spend more time with patients. If Lawson doesn’t win, we hope to hear more from him. He may represent the next generation of Republicans.”

Well gee, we couldn’t have said it better ourselves!!

The Daily Tar Heel (UNC-Chapel Hill), October 31. This final one to appear is really just as much of an endorsement of B.J. as it is of Rep. Price. They write, “This year’s election is unquestionably about change. So we are particularly hesitant to endorse a long-serving incumbent for the U.S. Congress, which has a lower approval rating than lame-duck President George W. Bush.”

It continues, “And as a 20-year veteran of Congress, Price is a fixture of the Washington political establishment.

His opponent, William (B.J.) Lawson, is by contrast a political rookie with some very fresh and compelling ideas.

Though running as a Republican, Lawson subscribes to a political philosophy that transcends typical partisan boundaries.

Lawson strongly opposes the defense facility and disagrees with Price on a number of issues like health care, drug prohibition and the death penalty. On these particular issues, Lawson seems like the more progressive candidate.

Lawson’s passionate disdain for a debt-obsessed corporate culture on Wall Street and lobbyist-run political culture in Washington also make him an appealing choice.”

BUT HERE’S THE KICKER, FOLKS: “But when it comes to which candidate would best represent District 4 and bring effective leadership to Congress, David Price gets our endorsement.

In this particular race, we’ll take Price’s record of proven leadership over Lawson’s fresh perspective.”

Nah, we don’t need new blood in Washington, do we???

This campaign has caught our opponent, David Price, flat footed — overwhelming him with our grassroots momentum, enthusiasm, and appeal to voters with the message of Liberty.

A wise man once said — freedom is popular — and with your help, we have gotten that message out.

Today we are going positive with a new TV ad, but we need your help to keep it on the air through Election Day.

In addition to all of our media efforts - your money is helping us hand out free pocket Constitutions to voters all around the 4th District. We have dubbed these efforts ‘Operation Priceless’. Our team is staffing every early voting polling place urging people to cast their vote for Dr. Lawson.

That call to liberty has David Price scared. The Freedom Movement is threatening the establishment once again.

So much so that Mr. Price and his DNC cronies are working overtime to paint Dr. Lawson and Ron Paul as dangerous George W. Bush followers.

Ron Paul dangerous? Really Mr. Price?

Dangerous maybe to 20-year incumbents, like Mr. Price, who take most of their re-election campaign funds from lobbyists and whose 2nd largest PAC donor is the Military Industrial Complex.

I suppose from Mr. Price’s point of view we could be considered dangerous.

Your support will help us become even more dangerous to those Washington elite.

Dr. Lawson needs our help to get new ads on local broadcast television stations - right next to McCain and Obama.

These spots are expensive because North Carolina is a battleground state, but they will put our campaign in front of more voters than any of David Price’s former opponents here 4th District.

Also, we must send out another mailer to all 150,000 potential voters here in the 4th District.

To do this effectively requires us raising another $200,000.

Will you please help us with a most generous contribution of $50, $100 or more?
Could you invest the max of $2300?

This is the year of change. David Price must go.

This country needs Dr. Lawson in Congress.

Martin Avila
Campaign Manager
Lawson For Congress

Paid for by Lawson For Congress

You know it’s getting close when a 20 year incumbent needs to attack his opponent, and his political ideology, head on. Anyone who’s in office for that long should be able to stand on the merits of his own record rather than launching attacks. Here is an excerpt from a letter that he recently sent out to his supporters.

…Proclaiming to be the protégé of failed Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, Dr. Lawson has a laissez faire, libertarian approach to government and the economy that I believe is fundamentally wrong. Our current financial crisis clearly demonstrates that the hands-off, anything-goes mentality on regulation employed by the Bush Administration and supported by Dr. Lawson simply does not work and is, very frankly, dangerous to our economy and way of life.

David Price has been playing politics here in the 4th district for the last month - constantly trying to tie Dr. Lawson to the Bush Administration in any way that he can. All of this started happening when we launched our TV and Radio Ads thanks to your support.

But this time he has gone too far.

To attack our political philosophy like this, and constantly show a clear disregard of limited government principles that our nation was founded upon says something to me. It should say something to you too.

We need to get this man out of our government.

David Price is stepping up his campaign in a big way, and we need your help to continue the fight.

Please make a donation today to support our efforts - we have 2 new TV ads and a massive mailer ready to go with your help.

Mr. Price, you just called out the Revolution.

It’s late, we’re just getting in, and neither JoLynn nor I have slept much in the past 48 hours. So this will be short.

Thank you to all of the donors, volunteers, and supporters who have built our campaign over the past four months. Our resounding victory tonight is not about me — it’s about a message that will transform American government, and the future for our nation. Our victory is also a powerful statement that we Americans are ready for change. We’re tired of negative soundbite politics that divides us against each other, and we’re tired of agendas being forced upon us by party elites who are increasingly disconnected from reality, and the challenges we face.

We are ready to embrace a federal government that focuses on its Constitutional responsibilities, and stops being a suffocating burden that will haunt our children and grandchildren.

During our victory celebration this evening, I had a number of people ask me the same question, “So how are you going to take the message to beat David Price?” While we have much planning and work ahead, one part of the answer is easy: “Order more Constitutions!”

We distributed ten thousand copies for this primary. Here’s to distributing 100,000 for the general election!

Unfortunately, we didn’t get any video at the event tonight. But I found this video amazingly impressive:

If you haven’t voted yet, this is the day!

An informal survey of mostly-Republican polling places suggests that turnout is light - one precinct in Raleigh that’s about equally matched between Democrats and Republicans had 600 voters by lunchtime, as opposed to a more typical 1,200. How much of that is low turnout versus early voting? We will see. Just make sure your vote is counted!

Also, I was informed that a supporter has created a grassroots Web site, with a fantastic introductory video:

… see you tonight at the Chop House Grille!

Why is fundraising so important? So we can take our message to the voters, win the primary election, and prepare for a great campaign and victory in November.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve discovered that taking the message to the voters via radio and television gets pretty expensive. But I think you’ll be pleased with the results.

First, here is the radio advertisement (lo-fi version for download) featuring Col. Steve Acuff’s endorsement that we’ll be running into the primary.

Next, here are three 30-second clips that we produced — we’re going to air the final one, entitled “Local Control”:

Following Its Own Rules

Means and Mandate

Local Control

What do you think? It was a challenge to film the second and third videos, as it was in the thirties that morning in D.C. and my face was just about frozen. Should have brought a coat!

We’re going with the third commercial since it actually has the “ask” for election day. Also, please help us leverage this media investment as much as possible — forward these links to your friends and family in the Fourth District, and remind them to vote on or before May 6th!

Finally, we really do need your financial support. Please make a donation today so we can air this message to as many voters as possible, and be well positioned for the next step in this battle to reclaim our government.

I joined Bill LuMaye yesterday afternoon at 5:30, and despite my best efforts to get from northern Durham to north Raleigh in time, traffic just didn’t cooperate. So I did the first half of the show via cell phone (yes, wearing a headset), and found some kind souls in the parking lot who let me into the building and showed me to the studio during the break.

All in all, it was an enjoyable experience with a great host. A friend captured the audio file here. Enjoy!

As we head into the home stretch towards the primary, my opponent’s attacks have become more direct, more personal, and more frequent. Clearly, negative campaigning is an useful tactic among those who lack a clear vision for the future or foundation for leadership. The ultimate question, however, is simple: How will the voters respond?

For me, that’s the question that matters. If voters buy into distortions and ignorant personal attacks, then they are not ready for the critical thinking and individual responsibility that is required for a limited, Constitutional federal government. I can’t help those voters, other than to continue educating about the problems staring us in the face.

I won’t pretend that turning the other cheek is pleasant and easy. It’s not. It’s tempting to hit back, and amplify the tough questions that others have been asking about my opponent’s transparency and truthfulness. But this race is not about him, or about me. It’s about what happens to a country when we fail to realize that the very foundation of our economy, our United States dollar, is being driven off a cliff by a government that does not know when to stop growing.

Folks, gas will not stop at $3.50. It will not stop at $4.00. Your grocery bill is not done going up. It’s not that the gas and food are that much more valuable, it’s that your dollars buy a lot less gas and food. Our government is borrowing and printing so much money that the green stuff in your pocket doesn’t buy as much on global markets. Maybe your standard of living isn’t affected yet — great, that’s fantastic for you. But get your concealed carry permit, and prepare to absorb the cost of increased police protection when increasingly desperate members of society turn to crime to satisfy basic needs.

That’s a tough message, and one most candidates are not ready to address. But we must begin discussing the consequences of big government — because once we understand that a big federal government is causing the problem, we’ll realize that even bigger federal government is not the solution. We cannot create wealth by printing more paper or electronic money. Such a path leads only to dependency, depravity and tyranny.

So back to negative campaigning. Here I am, a lifelong Republican, trying to unseat a 22-year Democratic incumbent who personifies big government and the status quo. I’m being hit by negative attacks from my primary opponent and leaders within the Republican party who apparently don’t appreciate federalism and the unique value of our United States Constitution. I’m fine absorbing those attacks, because this contest is about a vision for leadership and philosophy of government within the party. May the best ideas win, right?

But then attention turns to the North Carolina GOP itself. Someone decided it would be a good idea to produce an advertisement, ostensibly to help the Republican gubernatorial candidates, that attempts to link the Democratic gubernatorial candidates to the controversial Reverend Wright via their endorsements of Barack Obama. The advertisement takes a soundbite from Rev. Wright, overlays pictures of the parties involved, and paints the Democratic gubernatorial candidates as extremists by association:

When you’re trying to build a coalition of voters across parties who know we need change, does this advertisement help?

I finally saw the ad this evening after receiving a number of comments and complaints from people I respect, both inside and outside the Republican party. When I watched it, I just had to groan. This is how the NC GOP spends its money? Does the party really think a shallow “guilt by association” attack ad rehashing (very) old news will help its candidates?

Folks, we have tough issues in this state. Our roads are bad, our schools are worse, and the corruption and corporate welfare in Raleigh are draining our wallets and filling our prisons (yes, with our elected officials). If the party wants to help its gubernatorial candidates, who truly are the agents of change in North Carolina, why doesn’t the GOP show how we can solve the problems resulting from decades of single-party rule?

From a practical perspective, we have zero chance of electing a Republican governor without building a broad coalition of voters who want real change. Tonight, the State Board of Elections shows that North Carolina has 2,617,610 Democrat, 1,934,131 Republican, and 1,240,599 Unaffiliated voters. So what is to be gained with a negative attack ad that causes people to roll their eyes, shrug their shoulders, and dismiss Republicans for engaging in “politics as usual”?

Here’s to elevating the dialog this year, and engaging on the issues.

Now with video, and pictures from the Freedom Rally. The High Definition video provided by Vimeo is truly amazing.

Finally, we thought this sign at the Potbelly Sandwich Works was oddly appropriate, given the current problems with food inflation:

Today I had the pleasure of meeting with most of our North Carolina Republican Congressional delegation, and additionally was welcomed to give a speech on the West lawn of the Capitol during a tax day Constitution and freedom rally.

The agenda included Sen. Elizabeth Dole, Rep. Robin Hayes, and Rep. Ron Paul (all fellow Duke alumni), Rep. Virginia Foxx, Rep. Walter Jones, Rep. Howard Coble, and Rep. Sue Myrick. My meeting with Rep. Myrick was interrupted by a House vote and a subsequent Minority Whip meeting, but we had an excellent time discussing healthcare with her assistant Sarah Hale. I also had a great discussion on taxation and monetary policy with Brandon Renz, Legislative Director for Rep. Foxx. He’s a strong FairTax supporter, and we both look forward to the day when April 15th is just another beautiful spring day across the country!

Tomorrow I’ll try to reconnect with Reps. Myrick and McHenry, and also look forward to meeting another physician legislator, Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia. Rep. Broun is another conservative Republican committed to upholding the ideals of our Constitution, and I had a great time meeting his staff this afternoon.

It was a packed day, with lots of great conversations. I’ve included a few pictures below. They are indeed worth a thousand words:

So what did I think of Washington? Honestly, it’s a big, crowded place. While it was enjoyable to meet so many people, I was blown away by the sheer number of folks waiting in line to lobby our elected representatives. As shown by the picture below, we must change this dynamic. We simply can’t afford Washington as a place where people go to request funds and influence in areas where the Constitution never intended the federal government to operate: