David's Price

Can we afford the price? Check out www.davidsprice.com

Don't Give Up...Don't Ever, Ever Give Up

BJ Lawson, candidate for US House (NC-4)

Powell Endorses Obama

This is not in any way connected with BJ Lawson, but it does have to do with my pick for President, Barack Obama. I am so excited that General Colin Powell endorsed for President Barack Obama.

I was so impressed with this endorsement. I especially liked when he said that the right response to the accusation that Barack Obama is a terrorist is not to simply point out the Barack Obama is a Christian and has been his entire life. No, according the Gen. Powell is to say, "So what?" I could not agree more.

Here is the clip:

Gail Marold Responds to N&O Endorsement

Gail Marold, the Media Coordinator for BJ Lawson's Congressional Campaign submitted the following letter to the N&O Editorial Board:

Dear N&O Editorial Board:

While the Lawson for Congress campaign is not at all surprised that you have endorsed B.J. Lawson's opponent, 20-year Rep. David Price, I think the N&O readers would be interested to know that:



1.) The N&O editorial board refused to have a meeting with Dr. Lawson,



2.) You have barely written a word about Dr. Lawson, his campaign, and anything he stands for but every little event that Rep. Price shows up for gets ink,



3.) A campaign staffer expressed her concerns to Public Editor Ted Vaden about the lack of attention given to the campaign, who assured her that he would look into it and get back to her but he never did, and



4.) The first time that Dr. Lawson was granted an interview by anyone from the N&O staff was yesterday, Oct. 15th, when your very nice and professional colleague in your D.C. bureau, Barb Barrett, spoke to him. Dr. Lawson and Ms. Barrett had a great conversation.



The turmoil that has been occurring in the N&O newsroom is unfortunate, but that is no excuse for poor journalism and blatant dodging of a strong and legitimate candidate in a very important race. One of the inherent problems in our political system and the very inept Congress is that new candidates – especially those who have never previously held a public office – barely get a chance to prove themselves because of the biased media.



N&O readers would also be interested to know that Dr. Lawson has raised nearly $500,000 – more than $250,000 of that was raised in the past two weeks from people all over the state and the country. We are talking about an average donation amount of $25 as opposed to large corporate donations given to Rep. Price's campaign. You reference Rep. Price's position as head of the subcommittee responsible for homeland security spending – it is no coincidence that his second largest donor group is the defense industry.



It's clear to many voters of all political belief systems and party affiliations that Dr. Lawson's message of principled leadership based on the Constitution is resonating. This election seems to be all about change and change is definitely needed in North Carolina's Fourth Congressional District.



Sincerely,

Gail Marold

Lawson for Congress

Oh, oh, oh, N & O

Wow! That seems to be the way that I open my blogs these days when it comes to the "Editorials" from the tools of the establishment. It really is no surprise to me that the News and Observer Editorial Board endorsed, yet again, David Price.

What ticks me off most is the fact that these sheeple did not even have the decency to really be objective here. What is the criteria that is used to decide who this supposed paper chooses to endorse? I can tell you that according Gail Marold, the campaign's Media Coordinator, "...they REFUSED an editorial board meeting with B.J. and have not reached out to speak to him until yesterday and it was their DC correspondent." I think that the young Mr. Barzilai must be a student of the sheeple who comprise the N&O's Editorial Board.

It is, however, refreshing to know that Lisa Sorg, and the writers at The Independent Weekly are still a truly independent voice! I was interviewed by Lisa Sorg for an article that she has been working on for some weeks now about BJ. Her article, aptly titled, "BJ Lawson, the hybrid candidate" is a great piece of journalism. It shows BJ's diversity, positions and his challenges. This is the type of journalism that is really needed these days. I am happy to say that the staff at the Indy are certainly not sheeple. Take a bow, Indy; take note, N&O and DTH.

The Comments Say It All...

Man, oh man! The debate last night was incredible! Dr. Lawson completely and utterly pummeled Dr. Price with the fist of his tongue.

I don't think that the Congressman knew what hit him. On question after question Dr. Lawson proved that he was no hack. The Congressman could really not pin much on Dr. Lawson so he decided (or should I say that his staffer(s) decided) that the best thing to do was to incessantly make references to BJ's party. He would say things like, "My opponent's party" or "Dr. Lawson's party" has done "x" and voted in "x" manner. Never really laying anything at BJ's feet because BJ has been clear in his opposition to some of the things that his party does.

I tell you what, there was some coverage about this debate that had some errors. Ms. Putterman, the Assistant State and National Editor of the Daily Tar Heel, and I were in contact today; she was very responsive and apologized profusely for the error. The error was attributing to Dr. Lawson an error that was made by one of the debate's moderator. They said that the correction would occur on the website immediately (which, as of 8:45 pm has not occurred). She also said that the correction to the print addition would be made on Monday or Tuesday. Then there was the Editorial Piece that was reported.

My goodness! I think that Mr. Yaniv Barzilai--the Editorial Board Member for the Daily Tar Heel--was at an altogether different debate than was I and the hundreds of other who were at Carroll Hall last night. This fellow says that David Price won the debate! What an absolute joke!

I got a call this morning from one of the campaign volunteers asking me if I had read the opinion piece in the Daily Tar Heel; I had not. Once I read the opinion in the DTH I was absolutely flabbergasted. I was not believing my eyes; I remember being on cloud nine after leaving Carroll Hall last night. On the drive home from the debate I called up Bonnie Hauser, the Grassroots Coordinator for Orange County (who could not make the debate). I told her that we should be so proud to be affiliated with this campaign right now and that BJ had done so well in the debate. Then, when I got home, my wife asked me how was the debate and I could not stop talking; I told her all of the ways that BJ simply owned in the debate and I also told her about the one thing that Price seemed to fall back on; BJ is a Republican.


So, imagine my disgust when the first thing that I read was, "The doors closed, the campaign pins came out, and the night’s battle for North Carolina’s 4th District begun. But through the debate, as incumbent Democratic Representative David Price faced off against Republican B.J. Lawson, Price came out on top."! I was most annoyed because this really personifies the political bigotry that I spoke of the other day here on the blog. This young man already had made up his mind before he even entered Carroll Hall last night. He already knew that BJ was a Republican and David was a Democrat. He knew what were his presuppositions of Republicans (albeit well founded at times) so he did not even give BJ a chance. Seriously, from the start of the day that guy was all over the Congressman.

I know that this was an opinion piece, but seriously, Mr. Barzilai, you could have at least gotten the facts straight at the rare instance when you gave facts. He said, "Lawson claimed that Price voted for the initial two-page bailout that would authorize Henry Paulson to use his discretion. But Price reminded us of his actual voting record, including his vote against the initial plan....Foul ball, Dr. Lawson." Actually, buddy, that was more like a home run! The congressman voted yes for the initial plan as well as the "tweaked plan". So, buddy, get the facts straight before you start to do this for a living. There was some good that came of this, however. There were some people who wrote to comment and set the young lad straight on the DTH website. My personal favorite was written by Eddie Beasley:

Oh Yaniv, I don't even know where to begin. First, I asked myself if you were even at this event. However this notion dissipated as I recalled seeing you hanging onto Price's coattail before and after the debate. Obviously you had made your decision before you arrive last night. But I must ask, did you have the outline of this little piece as well?

As for the debate, you cleverly failed to mention the monstrous applause and standing ovation for Dr. Lawson at the debate's conclusion, not to mention numerous applauses along the way. And as for vague comments, I must direct your attention to the responses of David Price. No matter what the question, he ranted about Lawson's political affiliation. I was unable to keep count of the occasions on which Price said he was supporting Obama. No one cares, this was a debate on the issues, not who were voting for next month. It was a cheap trick to appeal to students at the UNC. I for one am offended that he would think we as students would be dumb enough to fall for such tricks.

To conclude I would like to thank Yaniv for his diligence and unbiased opinion in his work. I just hope you wiped your nose after all the pathetic brown nosing you did last night!

I think that Mr. Beasley said it best. I will finish with that.

Oh, wait, Martin Avila, the Campaign Manager did some fact checking of his own; check it out:

http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2008/10/15/fact-check/

Repost of Why We (Dems for Lawson) Support BJ Lawson

Why we support B.J. Lawson
This is a community of Democrats in and around the 4th District of North Carolina, and indeed from around the entire state and the entire country, who support the campaign of William "B.J." Lawson for House of Representatives. You may ask why we support B.J. when there is an 11-term and well-known Democratic incumbent, David Price, currently representing the 4th District. Well, for starters:

1) B.J. is a passionate advocate for protection of civil liberties, staunchly opposing measures such as the Patriot Act, the Real ID, the Military Comissions Act, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act, warrantless wiretaps, torture, and other measures fundamentally violating the Bill of Rights. He has come out in favor of the American Freedom Agenda Act, a bill that will go to great lengths to preserve the Bill of Rights and Constitutional checks and balances that has been praised by Naomi Wolff, liberal author of The End of America and champion of civil liberties.

While David Price has supported the recent FISA Bill and has spoken out against many of the transgressions of the Bush Administration, he demonstrated wholly irresponsible leadership in voting for the Patriot Act when it first came up in 2001, even though 62 of his fellow Democrats had the foresight and courage to vote against it at the time amid great awareness among the civil libertarian community of its flatly unconstitutional provisions. His vote to institute the Real ID, an alarming step toward a National ID Card and the rise of the "database state," is also shameful. Granted, the Real ID was just one item that was stuffed into a much larger emergency appropriations bill, but he nonetheless should have shown the courage to oppose the bill based on its clear violation of the freedom and privacy rights of Americans. Congressman Price also voted in favor of the scantly covered Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, a bill eerily reminiscent of the McCarthyism of the 1950s.

With the assault on our basic freedoms that the Bush Administration and others have waged this decade, we need leadership in Washington that doesn't just uphold the Bill of Rights only part of the time, or when issues related to it are in the public limelight; we need leadership that will always conduct a deeply principled, vigilant, and tireless fight to defend our liberty. B.J. Lawson will bring this leadership.

2) B.J. will oppose any attempt by the Bush Administration and Department of Homeland Security to impose the proposed National Bio-and-Agro Defense Facility (NBAF) on the 4th District of North Carolina. This facility, which will be researching over 100 diseases with no current cure (including Foot and Mouth disease), will be within 50 miles of 2.2 million people if placed in Butner, one of the proposed locations. Simply put, this lab is a disaster waiting to happen from environmental, public health, and property rights perspectives. As a poster on the Democratic blog Daily Kos described the situation:

The great minds in Bush’s Homeland Security department came up with a doozie this year: let’s move the facility where we study the most infectious and dangerous disease among livestock from the isolated island it’s now on (accessible only by ferry or helicopter) and put it where there are lots of livestock operations. Brilliant!

Can you imagine the next Foot and Mouth outbreak occuring in North Carolina on account of this facility being so close to livestock in the area? There is a reason why the current facility is currently located in the relatively isolated location of Plum Island, NY.

And what does David Price think of NBAF?

My current assessment is that the Granville County site would be a good location for the NBAF, and that our region of North Carolina would reap many economic and agricultural benefits from such a facility.

Wrong answer. This is not responsible leadership.

3) B.J. is a principled opponent of the Iraq War and supports immediate military withdrawal. He recognizes it not only as an isolated blunder, but as a typical misadventure in what has been a fundamentally misguided, arrogant, and costly foreign policy by our government of aggressive interventionism. Scores of national security analysts- including Michael Scheuer, former chief of the bin Laden Unit of the CIA- have identified American interventionism in the Muslim world as the chief motivator of al-Qaeda. Osama bin Laden himself in his 1998 declaration of war on the United States stated his three reasons for doing so as: unconditional U.S. support for Israel, the bombing of and economic sanctions placed on Iraq during the 1990s, and the stationing of U.S. troops on the Arabian Peninsula.

While David Price voted against the initial authorization for war against Iraq, he has been on the wrong side on a great many issues regarding Iraq and, more broadly, foreign policy. He voted for the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which effectively set regime change in Iraq as a policy of the United States and has been used as justification by the neoconservatives for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. He voted for the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007, which expressly gives the Bush Administration the authority to define the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, a special forces unit of the Iranian armed forces, as a terrorist organization. This is eerily reminiscent of the rhetoric and tactics that the Administration and its neoconservative supporters used to promote the invasion of Iraq, and as John Edwards said during the October MSNBC debate in Pennsylvania, "You give this president an inch, and he'll take a mile." Further facilitating the neocon saber-rattling toward Iran, David Price voted for H.Con.Res.21, which called for the trial of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to be "tried for inciting genocide" for "calling for Israel to be wiped off the map," a claim that is overly belligerent and is based on statements by him for which there is evidence of mistranslation. What is ironic is that the resolution overtly states strong support of the Israeli government, stating:

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress--

(4) reaffirms the unwavering strategic partnership and close friendship between the United States and Israel and reasserts the steadfast commitment of the United States to defend the right of Israel to exist as a free and democratic state.

So David Price is supporting the trial for "inciting genocide" of Ahmadinejad for statements that likely were mistranslated about a country whose government has a record of human rights abuses, all the while asserting our "close friendship" with this government, one of the very reasons stated by Osama bin Laden for his declaration of war against the United States. This is a perfect reflection of the blunder of US foreign policy, as we claim to uphold the values of freedom, democracy, and human rights while supporting governments that work against these principles and using our military to impose our will on other countries, while spending a lot of money to do so. If we want an effective foreign policy that promotes our national security and interests, we need one of non-interventionism that focuses on diplomacy and even-handedness with all countries, not "close friendship" with some and condemnation of others. As these stances and others throughout his career demonstrate, David Price will not work hard to advocate this change. B.J. Lawson will.

4) B.J. Lawson and his campaign, unlike the Bush Administration and most Republicans in Congress, is a principled fiscal conservative who understands that we as a nation cannot continue the fiscal course we are on or we risk financial and economic collapse. He supports a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, an important step on fiscal policy advocated by Bill Richardson during the Democratic Presidential Primaries this year. Unlike most politicians, including life-long academic and Party politician David Price, B.J. actually has the experience of starting a business from scratch, turning it into a successful enterprise, and working hard to get his family out of debt. Thus, not only does he have intellectual reasons for supporting fiscal responsibility, but he has a very personal foundation for doing so.

David Price, on the other hand, talks a good game on fiscal issues, but he's not the steadiest walker. This year, he voted for a Concurrent Budget Resolution that planned the budget for the next five years, with planned spending amounting to nearly $16 trillion and planned tax revenues amounting to $14 trillion. So effectively, David Price voted for a document that plans for the government to create $2 trillion more in new debt over the next five years. And what does he have to say about his vote?

This budget is a clear reflection of our priorities to build a stronger economy, keep our communities safe, and to do both in a fiscally responsible way,” Price said. “After President Bush and the Republican Congress turned projected surpluses into record deficits, this Congress is committed to reversing the damage.

Fiscally responsible? In what universe is the creation of nearly $2 trillion of new debt, which amounts to an average of almost $400 billion in federal deficits over the next five years and even more raiding of the Social Security trust fund, "fiscally responsible?" This isn't just the mark of someone who doesn't understand the necessity of taking strong action now to eliminate the deficit; it's the mark of someone who is so entrenched in the Washington establishment that he's out of touch with reality. Partisan finger-pointing is not going to be enough to resolving the fiscal problems of this country. We need strong leadership on both sides of the aisle, and B.J. Lawson will provide this leadership from the right.

5) B.J. Lawson has made eloquent and strong stands of opposition to corporate welfare, an issue that absolutely must be dealt with. As he notes in a blog post on his website, our current system is not a free market system, it is a corporatist system where the government actively favors selected firms. He has also brought a very important issue to light that is not often discussed, which is the fundamental flaws of our monetary and banking system, one of which being the level to which it favors large banks and financial institutions at the expense of working Americans. This corporatist system is riddled with inefficiency and wasted resources, and it is facilitating and promoting many of the social problems we as progressives seek to address.

David Price is the poster child of the apparatus in Washington that favors corporate America. His donor list is full of high-roller donors and corporate PACs. It should come as no surprise, then, that he supports legislation such as the recent Farm Bill, a $300 billion giveaway to large corporate farms. He has supported "free trade" agreements such as NAFTA that favor large multinational corporations.

The bottom line is that this is a very important election at a time in our history when we face a number of very important issues that must be resolved soon. To do this, we need public servants in Congress who understand the issues, have real-world experience that serves them well in tackling them, that know the need for change, that will not let partisan bickering get in the way of progress, and that are aware of their duty to uphold and defend the Constitution. David Price has simply been in Congress for too long, and he has demonstrated throughout his career to be a member of the Washington establishment, and as such he is no longer a reliable agent for change. We do not agree with B.J. Lawson on everything, but we agree with him on some of the most important issues of the day and know him to be a a man of principle, integrity, and courage, as demonstrated by his willingness to disagree with the Republican Party line on many visible issues and to even criticize the leadership of the organization. He will be a hard-working, responsible, and diligent Congressman. It is for these reasons that we enthusiastically support B.J. Lawson for U.S. Congress from North Carolina's 4th District.

You May Vote Straight Ticket AND BJ Lawson

Exciting news! After reading the ballot a bit closer (sad that I have not seen it before now), you may do the Obama, Straight, Flip and still cast your vote for BJ Lawson. I personally have a problem with the straight ticket option because it reduces people to little initials beside their names, but some people prefer to do it this way. I was thrilled to death when I found out that it is possible to both vote straight ticket and still vote for BJ Lawson.

It is time that Rep. Price knows that he can no longer listen to the special interest over his people; the people who he was elected to represent.

This has been a very busy day for the Lawson for Congress Blog. I figure with such little time before the election that it is high time that we kicked this blog into high gear. I am convinced, now more than ever, that we need a Congressman who will stand will every other person is sitting. A good friend reminded me just yesterday that one of the main reasons why I support BJ is because he is so danged principled. You see, BJ will not pander to a crowd. If it even remotely looks like it could be misconstrued as pander, he will adjust.

BJ is real, BJ is wise and BJ is the man who we need to represent us!

So, if you decide to Obama, Straight, Flip remember to go the the House race and bubble in William BJ Lawson. Also, don't forget that you have to vote for the judges seperately. I will update on the right the judges that I have endorsed.

Rep. David Price, You're Fired!

Rep. Price,

You are a nice enough fellow and I voted for you in 2006. I even like you well enough as a man. However, it simply is time for you to go. You have forgotten that you work for me and every other voter in this district. Though I have all the respect possible for Speaker Pelosi, she is not your boss. She is not the one who sent you to Washington. She is not the one who you are there to Represent. Additionally, as much as I believe in the Democratic Party's Platform, you do not get your mandate from it, either. Sir, with all due respect, you were sent there to represent me. You were sent there to REPRESENT the views of the good folks within your district. We called you, some even tried to visit, and said to you, "No." We called and said that we do not want you to vote for this bill. But you did, Congressman. You voted twice for this bill. You voted the first time for the bill; it failed. Then you were reported to say that as we make tweaks to the bill it should pass. Sir, how is that ok? How can you, in good conscience, continue to call yourself a Representative when your constituents (Democrats and Republicans alike) said no? Mr. Price, you're fired; I am giving Dr. Lawson a shot at representing me. You have become too comfortable, too entrenched and too out of touch with your boss (the people of the fourth district)! Don't worry though, you will have a good retirement (unlike the Americans who this bailout did not bailout...).

Respectfully,

Ray McKinnon

The Next Generation

My new friend, Kurt, over at Break the Matrix sent me this link for a video that I have embedded below. It is very powerful. It puts into song the concern of countless parents, youth leaders, teachers and all concerned adults about the future. We are essentially saling out ourselves and leaving our children a country that may be unrecognizable in the years to come. Sadly, most people do not feel that they are better off than their parents. That is a sad and tragic reality; we have to do better. The bailout has added more burdens to the backs of the generations to come. We must do better! The bailout was nothing of the sort; it was a ripoff! Of course, Rep. Price did not listen to the people who he is supposed to represent. Rep. Price must go!

Triangle Residential Options for Substance Abuse

Last night was a great night. Martin and I had so much fun with BJ at the TROSA Political Forum. I have not felt so much positive, encouraging and powerful "energy" in a long time. (outside of my personal time with God) There were about three hundred people at this forum last night. The people there were just great. They were positive, upbeat and highly interested and engaged at what each candidate or his/her surrogate had to say.

Rep. Price was at the forum. I have to tell you that I he is not the worst guy in the world but man can he talk...and talk...and talk. The rules gave each candidate three minutes for opening comments and of course the Congressman went over that time limit... Overall the debate between Dr. Lawson and Rep. Price was civil and friendly. There were some areas where they disagreed, obviously, but they did so in a manner that was respectful. Dr. Lawson made very clear to the audience that he did not think that our forty year "War on Drugs" has produced any good results. He said, "Most of the people who use drugs look like me (he is white) but most of the people who are prosecuted don't look like me." The room erupted in applause. He went on to promise the room that he will do everything within his power to end the war on drugs. He even suggested that we should give the $30,000 that is costs to house one prisoner per year to programs like TROSA. I know that I am biased, but Rep. Price was a big bore. No lie, I turned to Martin a couple of times during that forum last night and said, "Dude, what the heck is he talking about?". I mean, seriously, he started talking about the story of the Good Samaritan when talking about the economy (if memory is serving me correctly). The funniest thing is when he tried to accuse BJ of not answering the questions, when clearly it was he who did not answer well the questions. Man, it was a great night. I am really looking forward to the debate tonight at UNC. I am having so much fun on this campaign I can hardly contain myself!

BJ is doing well and my confidence is way high; we are making some serious progress. Don't forget to vote for BJ Lawson. I will write futher today about some interesting news that I have found out about voting straight ticket. Alas, I have to get some lunch.

Talk About Bigotry!

As an African American, I thought I understood bigotry. That is, until I started talking to fellow Democrats about. Dr. William (B.J.) Lawson, who I am supporting for Congress in North Carolina’s 4^th District. Yes, Dr. Lawson is running as a Republican, but I find his principled stands to be highly appealing and more progressive than anything I’ve heard in a long time - from either side.

But that’s not the point. What I find frustrating is that people, intelligent people, who I believe to be progressive and open-minded, are neither. They simply assume that because of a label, “Republican,” Dr. Lawson could never represent their values or beliefs (in racial jargon – “be like them”). This political bigotry is more hardened than anything I have ever experienced on the receiving end of ugliness because those who dull out this bigotry are usually the ones protesting other forms of bigotry.

What’s most disturbing is, like separatists, Democrats and Republicans are working overtime to distort our thinking with one-sided rhetoric. For example, the Democrats have essentially co-opted our evaluation process by planning partisan forums rather than real debates between opposing candidates. Then, the Republicans make sure to play up all of those things that divide, which are hardly substantive. Of course that’s their job, but I’m just surprised people are buying it – especially these days when it seems like all our elected officials are culpable for the mess that we call our government.

I know Dr. Lawson stands on the right side of history, and I will continue to carry his message to as many Democrats and others who are willing to listen. If you open your heart and mind, you may realize that Dr. Lawson is someone with a passion for social justice, community empowerment and positive change.

Lawon's Campaign Raised Over $177,000 in 24 Hours!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, October 8, 2008

CONTACT:
Linda Williams
linda.williams@lawsonforcongress.com
919-481-1177 / 919-412-7530 cell



N.C. Congressional Candidate Lawson Raises More than $170,000 in 24 Hours

Americans fed up with Washington bailouts;
Opponent Rep. Price polling below 50%


CARY , N.C. – William (B.J.) Lawson's Congressional campaign web site has raised more than $177,000 in a 24-hour period and $237,000 since the passage of the controversial Wall Street bailout package last week. Lawson fiercely opposed the bailout legislation as a featured member of the coalition at NoCashforTrash.org and released many in-depth criticisms on his campaign site LawsonforCongress.com. In North Carolina's Fourth Congressional District, Lawson (R) is running against Rep. David Price (D), the incumbent who recently voted in favor of the bailout even as a vast majority of local constituent calls were against it.

The Lawson for Congress campaign's current fundraising total is over $460,000 and climbing. More than 3,000 individuals in North Carolina and across the United States, who believe in returning the country to its Constitutional roots, have donated to the Lawson campaign. The $177,000 raised could be the largest single-day fundraising total for Congressional campaigns in North Carolina.

"Our amazing grassroots support, fundraising success, and the overwhelming majority of people across the country against the bailouts indicate that America is indeed ready for change," Lawson said. "We've watched the Dow lose more than 1,000 points since the passage of the bailout, which was supposed to inspire confidence. The change message doesn't apply to any one party or any one man because Washington Republicans and Democrats alike are part of the problem. Rep. Price went along with the pack and the corporate elite, as he usually does. We are asking people in this district to 'Be the Change' and vote Lawson for Congress."

Lawson supporter and friend Rep. Ron Paul sent an email to supporters asking them to donate to the Lawson campaign.


"B.J. is running against an entrenched big government liberal who voted for the $700 billion taxpayer bailout of Wall Street and has a long history of voting for huge spending, raiding your social security trust fund for pet projects, and even voted for the Patriot Act…..We need B.J. Lawson in Congress to stand beside me in the fight for liberty, and against the corporate socialism that has overtaken our economy," said Paul.

In a poll conducted by the Lawson campaign, support for Rep. Price is now just under 50% -- far below his typical margin of victory in the district -- with an additional 10% of the voters undecided.

On the recent polling data, Lawson commented, "This will be a race to the finish, as voters realize that they have a principled alternative who will serve American individuals instead of corporate interests."

Dr. William (B.J) Lawson is running for Congress in North Carolina's 4th District. For more information, go to www.lawsonforcongress.com.

###
LAWSON FOR CONGRESS
Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty
206 High House Road
Suite 210
Cary, NC 27513
Phone: 919-481-1177
Fax: 919-481-6934
www.lawsonforcongress.com

Break the Matrix!

Yesterday I had the honor of meeting some awesome new friends at Break the Matrix! I was interviewed yesterday by LB at Break the Matrix and the great thing is that there were people who see that the cause of liberty is not owned by one single party!

Click on the banner above to check out Kurt's blog on yesterday.

Be the Change; Vote BJ on 11/4

It has been a profound honor and most humbling of experience to work with the Lawson for Congress campaign. Though this blog is not run nor managed by the Lawson for Congress campaign, I have had so much fun learning, growing and hoping with this campaign and the candidate. We the people know that there is a true need for change.

Mahatma Ghandi said so eloquently, "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." One of the most exciting aspects of this campaign has been watching people become the change that they wish for this wonderful nation.

I have worked alongside of Independents, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Progressives, Conservatives and this list could continue. Each have become the change that he or she wishes to see. I have seen a lifelong Democrat, in Bonnie Hauser, become a community activist and organizer; she refuses to sit by idly as UNC and other special interest groups evoke imminent domain to take away folks land for an airport that this county does not need. I have seen college students like Matt Barber, Ron White, Kacy Fortner, Matt Tucker and countless others become campus organizer; they recognize that the call for change and accountability extends into the colleges as well. I have seen people who work full time jobs give every minute of free time because we are becoming conscious voters who know that we cannot afford the price of doing nothing. We can not afford the price of partisan politics. In this election we know that we cannot afford the price of bail outs.

We, the people of the fourth congressional district of North Carolina, need change, we need leadership;we need to elect Dr. BJ Lawson to represent us in Washington!

Dr. Larry Burk Endorses Dr. Lawson

So, Dr.Larry Burk endorsed Dr. Lawson. He encourage we progressives to vote our conscience and not our party; I echo that!

Friends and former colleagues,

I went on the Triangle Farm Tour this weekend and visited the Piedmont Biofuels Coop, a sustainable farm in Moncure, NC, linked to the local biodiesel pioneers at biofuels.coop. Then today by happy synchronicity, I got an email from BJ Lawson, one of my former Duke med students who is running for Congress in the 4th District, featuring an interview he did with Lyle Estill, VP of Stuff at Piedmont Biofuels and author of Small is Possible: Life in a Local Economy.

Both Lyle and BJ emphasize the need for a vital and sustainable local economy that will provide “Hometown Security” for all of us during these times of turmoil on the national level. That would be the opposite of the National Bio and Agro Defense Facility that his opponent David Price is advocating bringing to Butner as Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee for the Department of Homeland Security.

So, progressives wake up and vote your conscience, not your party this November. Yes, it is possible to split your ticket and vote for both Obama and Lawson. I made the radical move of switching my registration from Democratic to Republican to vote for him in the NC Primary where he won 70% of the vote against a hardcore neocon opponent. BJ bases his platform strictly on the Constitution, and he is more of a peace candidate than most Democrats in Congress now.

Liberty is Priceless,
Larry

So Where Does Dr. Lawson Stand on the Issues?

So, many people have asked me where Dr. Lawson stands on many of the issues. Here is a copy of the Indy Questionnaire that Dr. Lawson answered:

23 APR 2008



Name as it appears on the ballot: William (B.J.) Lawson
Date of birth: 3/30/1974
Campaign web site: www.lawsonforcongress.com
Occupation & employer: Congressional Candidate (none)

1. What do you believe are the most important issues facing your U.S. House district, the state of North Carolina and the nation? If elected, what are your top three priorities in addressing those issues?

With our grocery bills and gas prices skyrocketing, jobs going overseas, basic services like healthcare and good education becoming less accessible, and people working two or more lower-paying jobs just to keep up, the greatest problem we face is an economy and financial system that have been hijacked by an out-of-control federal government whose interests are no longer separate from corporate and special interests.

Our reckless legislators make endless promises to get re-elected, and our bankrupt federal government prints paper dollars to pay for promises we can’t afford. Even the supposed benefits themselves don’t help – instead of helping the average American, most federal “benefits” end up helping well-connected special and corporate interests.

Washington has proven more corrupt and less effective as it has consolidated power and grown tremendously over the past several decades. It is time to transition to a federal government that focuses on the specific duties enumerated in our Constitution.

Instead of always giving more power to Washington, and always looking to Washington for “help”, it is time to keep more resources in our state and localities to address our challenges. We cannot keep sending more money and power to Washington for the pleasure of lobbyists and bureaucrats and expect better results.

My first priority is to fix our broken economy. Instead of printing more money for “stimulus” packages, we must balance our budget, stop pretending we can afford to police the world at our expense, and eliminate corporate welfare and unconstitutional spending that benefits special interests. We must eliminate the IRS and its 67,000 pages of job-killing regulations that punish productivity, entrepreneurship, saving, and investment. Instead, we should consider a uniform, progressive national sales tax such as the FairTax. We must also eliminate overreaching and counterproductive regulations such as Sarbanes Oxley that drive jobs and investment overseas. We must also provide choices in our monetary system so that American workers and savers are not trapped in a paper currency that is losing its purchasing power at an alarming rate. (It’s not that groceries are more valuable, your dollars just buy fewer groceries.)

My next priority is to reform health care by taking it back from corporate and government bureaucracies, and retuning it to patients and providers. Government subsidies and regulations have promoted the interests of big drug and insurance companies and managed care providers while increasing costs, limiting choices, and leaving far too many without coverage. Our current system is better termed “corporatecare” than healthcare, and neither patients nor doctors are happy with the results. Health care reform is also essential to revitalizing the economy, as soaring health care costs are squeezing businesses and consumers alike and reducing the competitiveness of the U.S. economy in a global market.

My final priority is to approach every issue, and every vote, with the goal of restoring a Constitutional federal government. That means restoring our recently sacrificed civil liberties, ending federal tyranny over public education, pursuing a just and sustainable legal immigration policy, and ensuring our safety and security through a rational foreign policy and strong national defense.

We need to change the definition of a “good Representative”. Our Congressman should not win praise for bringing federal dollars back to the Fourth District. Instead, our Congressman should win praise for pursuing a federal government that follows the Constitution, serves only the people’s interests, and does so with the least amount of the people’s money leaving the Fourth District in the first place.

2. What in your record as a public official or other experience demonstrates your ability to be effective in the House of Representatives? This might include career or community service; be specific about its relevance to this office.

As a physician and neurosurgery resident, I experienced firsthand the challenges of our current healthcare system. I left practice in 2001 to start a hospital software company specifically to make physicians more efficient, and patient care safer. These two experiences gave me a wealth of experience studying human nature, defining and solving problems, and working collaboratively to achieve results.

I also learned the challenges of starting and growing a business, and how our federal tax and regulatory environment favors the politically connected over the innovative businesses so important to new job creation and our future economic success.

While I certainly don’t have all the answers, I eschew divisive partisan politics and bring a broad educational and career background encompassing engineering, medicine, business, and finance. The skills from these disciplines are poorly represented in our government today.

Finally, my wife and I have structured our life so that we are debt-free, and have modest financial needs. Therefore, my loyalties are not for sale, and seek to go to Washington to represent the Fourth District as a principled advocate for a Constitutional federal government instead of a pawn of party politics.

3. How do you define yourself politically and how does your political philosophy show itself in your past achievements and present campaign platform?

I dislike labels that attempt to define one’s political philosophy. Limiting our discussion to labels like "progressive" or "conservative" prevents real discussion about the issues. While I am a Republican, the social and economic challenges we face are not specific to any political party or demographic label. They are American challenges, and demand that we come together as Americans united by the ideals of our Declaration of Independence, and return to a federal government that lives within its means and its mandate of our Constitution.

4. The Independent’s mission is to help build a just community in the Triangle and North Carolina. Please point to a specific position in your platform that would, if achieved, help further that goal.

Economically, we must eliminate the injustice of our debt-based monetary system that penalizes working Americans with rising inflation and collapsing housing bubbles while our banking industry receives multi-billion dollar bailouts. As a result of these bailouts, the poor and middle class are under tremendous pressure as our currency loses its value and prices continue to rise.

Individual liberty and local control are also important prerequisites for justice. We must be free to help ourselves, and each other, with good government that is as local and accountable as possible.

We have granted unprecedented power to a federal government that does not know when to stop growing, and as a result, we are overwhelmed by injustice. Big government is the problem -- it is not the solution. Big government gives us an unconstitutional federal “War on Drugs” that disproportionately targets the poor and disenfranchised.

Likewise, federal domination of public education through No Child Left Behind has created an educational system rife with perverse incentives and unintended consequences. For example, in an effort to meet Average Yearly Progress goals, school districts game the system with cross-county busing and dumbed-down standardized tests instead of honestly facing up to our most desperate children’s real educational needs.

A Constitutional federal government will let us keep more resources locally, and return local issues to our state and local governments. To the extent funds are required to advance justice, we must secure these funds locally from private and public sources that hold us accountable for the results.

Bureaucrats in Washington cannot magically create or enforce a just community for us in the Fourth District. Justice is our responsibility, and we need the freedom to accept it.

5. Identify a principled stand you might be willing to take if elected that you suspect might cost you some popularity points with voters.

One principled stand that has cost some popularity with voters is my unwillingness to support a Constitutional amendment defining marriage. The legal definition of marriage has always been the domain of state governments, and marriage itself as a sacred commitment and civil contract has not changed such that the federal government should have any interest in defining it.

The fact that some are advocating for such an amendment is symptomatic of the federal government being too powerful in the first place. There would be much less interest in defining marriage in the Constitution if Washington wasn’t interfering with doctor-patient relationships through HIPAA, crafting insanely complex tax codes that depend upon marital status, and taking over local education.

6. The U.S. has been fighting the war in Iraq for five years. Was the decision to invade a mistake? What should our policy in Iraq be today? Should we base substantial military forces there for the foreseeable future? Start to withdraw now, or if not now, according to a plan (i.e., on a timetable)? Which, if any, of the congressional resolutions introduced so far on Iraq do you support?

While our government may have gone into Iraq with the best intentions of deposing a tyrannical leader and eliminating weapons of mass destruction, the invasion of Iraq was a poor decision based upon poor intelligence. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and our largely unilateral effort to depose Saddam Hussein underestimated the complexities of the region and the chaos that resulted from the subsequent power vacuum.

Five years, hundreds of billions of dollars, and thousands of lives later, we are still struggling for a rational foreign policy and a strategy for engaging with the rest of the world. While we have accomplished our stated goals of deposing Saddam, protection from WMD, and installing an elected civilian government, Iraq is still a long way from a stable and self-sustaining nation.

We must recognize that we cannot look at country-based conflicts in isolation, and we must recognize that we cannot afford to police the world unilaterally at our expense. Our $9.3 trillion national debt and over $800 billion current account deficit reflect our unsustainable foreign policy, and mean that the protection we’re providing in Iraq and elsewhere is being purchased on Chinese and Saudi Arabian credit cards.

I believe we need an orderly military withdrawal from Iraq. Security for the nascent Iraqi government must come from Iraqis, or others with whom they contract, at their consent. While some argue that we occupy Iraq as a requested Multinational Force (MNF) via the UN Security Council, there is evidence that Iraqis themselves are deeply divided over our presence. In the eyes of many Iraqis, our presence on the front lines de-legitimizes the very government we’re attempting to support.

Military withdrawal does not mean abandoning that country, or the Middle East. Instead, we must change our focus from offensive war and occupation to multilateral coalition building, and substantially engage other countries in the region with to join us in fighting extremism with overwhelming diplomatic and economic force. That means acting as a force for dialog and consensual trade, instead of sanctions and occupation.

I do not believe we should colonize Iraq with a long-term military presence and bases in the country. Instead, we should honor efforts that the Iraqi parliament has made to propose a timetable for a staged withdrawal, and our military planners should work to accommodate their wishes www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unrole/2007/1105legalrenewal.htm

I am not aware of any current Congressional plans regarding Iraq that I support. I believe Iraq would benefit from a federal government that provides individual liberty across different ethnic groups and unites these groups’ interests with shared oil revenues. However, we cannot impose such a plan on Iraq. Iraq must choose one for itself.

Currently, the impasse over an Iraqi oil law and renewed violence in Basra appear related to control of the nation’s oil revenue. The national government is being challenged by factions in Basra fighting to control its oil industry, and the Kurdish north has already challenged Baghdad by opening the first new oil wells with a joint Norwegian/Chinese initiative. www.channel4.com/news/articles/world/who+controls+iraqs+oil/1838667

7. Evaluate the war in Afghanistan. What troop levels and funding should be allocated to fight that war? What is our goal there, in your view? What should our policy be? What legislation should be introduced to address those issues?

Our military goal in Afghanistan should be limited to bringing to justice to Al Qaeda. We cannot afford nation building in Afghanistan any more than we can afford it in Iraq. I do not know enough to postulate what troop levels and funding should be allocated for that war. I also do not know enough to suggest policy or legislation to address these issues in Afghanistan, other than noting that we should cease our military occupation.

8. What other major foreign policy issues do you see as needing Congress’ attention? Rate the importance of those issues and explain what you would do in Congress to address them.

In general, our government spends too much money policing the world and providing often-counterproductive foreign aid that props up corrupt regimes. Our current fiscal crisis demands that we renegotiate the terms under which we help our neighbors – our dollar is declining in value because we have spent well beyond our means, and we can no longer afford to provide security for Germany, Japan, South Korea, and others at our expense.

9. There has been an increase in unemployment, a rise in home foreclosures, a spike in food and fuel prices, a huge federal deficit, and other troubling economic indicators. What do you see as the primary sources of our current economic problems? What measures should Congress use to resolve address them? How would you begin to reduce the federal deficit? What are some of the possible negative consequences of your proposed solutions?

The primary source of our economic problems is a federal government that respects no boundaries with its promises, borrowing, and spending. The housing crisis is a direct result of the Federal Reserve’s artificially low interest rates in the early 2000s that led to historically-low mortgage rates and encouraged irresponsible borrowing that spawned a massive housing bubble. That bubble is now deflating, as did the Nasdaq bubble in 2001, with predictable consequences.

As the collapse of mortgages rippled into the broader credit markets and banking system, the Federal Reserve is now actively supporting the banking and brokerage system with bailouts and subsidized loans that are unprecedented since the Great Depression. While necessary to preserve the financial system, these interventions have painful and unjust consequences.

These massive “liquidity injections” by the Federal Reserve, coupled with ongoing irresponsible spending in Washington, are taking our dollar to new all-time lows against other major currencies. As a result of our weak currency, Americans are facing much higher food and fuel prices – if you are buying your food and gas in euros, loonies, renminbi, or gold, your prices have not gone up nearly as much.

There is hope for this dire situation, but it is not a quick Congressional “fix” as your incumbents would have you believe. A $600 “economic stimulus” check is a complete farce – why should we borrow money we don’t have from China just to give it to you to spend on a manufactured good likely made in China? You get the trinket, we pay back it back with interest. How does that help our economy?

The solution to our problems is to free us of the burdens of our big federal government, and let us get back to work. I have a five point agenda for accomplishing this goal:

The first point is fundamental tax reform. My ultimate goal is the abolition of the income tax and IRS, but there are common sense steps we can take in the short-term. I support the abolition of the capital gains, dividend, and estate taxes, which punish productivity, entrepreneurship, saving, and investment.

The second point of my agenda is spending reform. I will work to bring federal spending back to Constitutional levels. This will require a massive reduction in the size and scope of the federal government, but there are steps we can take now accomplish this. The first is the fundamental change in our foreign policy. This means ending the War in Iraq, changing our mission in Afghanistan, discontinuing foreign aid to and our military presence in countries fully capable of defending themselves. This will save hundreds of billions of dollars. We can cut hundreds of billions more in spending by ending market-distorting corporate welfare subsidies, cutting programs that are duplicative, and cutting ineffective and wasteful bureaucracies. I also support other measures to restrain the growth of spending, such as a freeze on discretionary non-defense spending and a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution.

The third point of my agenda is regulatory reform. We must eliminate onerous regulations that impose a significant cost on American businesses and undermine our competitiveness. This starts with Sarbanes-Oxley, a gross overreaction to unfortunate incidents of corporate greed that were facilitated by perverse incentives set up by our government. SOX has increased the cost of business associated with being a public company by 130%, according to a study by the law firm of Foley and Lardner, and has cost the US Economy $1.4 trillion, according to University of Rochester economist Ivy Zhang.

The fourth point is that we need a realistic plan to address the entitlement burden that has left our nation essentially bankrupt. We have over $40 trillion in off-balance-sheet liabilities for Medicare and Social Security, and it will be impossible to meet those obligations without printing a lot of paper money and further devaluing our currency. When Alan Greenspan was asked about this problem in 2005, he replied, “We can guarantee cash, but we cannot guarantee its purchasing power.” In other words, we can print the money to meet our obligations, but that paper money won’t buy very much.

The final point of my agenda is monetary reform. The Federal Reserve has complete discretionary power over the monetary unit and the money supply. Its policy of fixing interest rates in the economy and creating credit out of thin air produces inflation, malinvestment, and instability. I support allowing gold and silver to be used as legal tender, as our Constitution instructs. I will also work to bring greater transparency and accountability to the Federal Reserve.

The greatest negative consequences are continuing on our current path. We are already in a state of unprecedented instability in the currency and financial markets, and continuing to pretend that our government can live beyond its means indefinitely will exacerbate our dollar crisis and further damage our fragile economy.

10. What should be done about the growing numbers of Americans without health insurance? What system would most fairly insure all Americans—while keeping in mind the cost?

I regret to inform you that there is no free government healthcare. As a physician, I understand that providing healthcare has real costs. Many good family physicians today barely cover their expenses every month, and having nothing left to take home after paying their staff, overhead, and insurance.

Our healthcare costs began skyrocketing back in the 1940s when the federal government first coupled healthcare to employment as a “benefit” instead of wage increases. Three generations later, we are paying the price of big government in healthcare, with prices set by government bureaucrats and rationing performed by faceless bureaucracies.

Our current system of healthcare “insurance” is actually part of the problem, and must be changed if we want a real solution. In fact, healthcare insurance isn’t really insurance at all. Do you expect your car insurance to pay for oil changes? Do you expect your homeowner’s insurance to pay for new carpet, or a new roof? But we expect health “insurance” to pay for all the healthcare we need (or we’re told that we need) for a $15 co-pay.

How much would “fix-anything-no-questions-asked-for-$15” car or homeowner’s insurance cost? I know I couldn’t afford it. No wonder health insurance is ridiculously expensive. There is no way we can afford to give that type of “insurance” to all Americans, and decisions to limit care provided by “universal” solutions will further empower the medical industrial complex to the detriment of patients and providers.

Fixing health care is complicated, but we need to start by taking healthcare back from the corporate and government bureaucracies that have stolen it from the patients and providers.

First, we need to ensure that individuals and businesses both enjoy the same deductibility of healthcare expenses so that individuals are not necessarily tied to an employer for healthcare benefits.

Next, individuals should be able to save unlimited amounts of money tax-free for routine medical expenses. Before government and corporations took over healthcare, physicians treated patients and charged them a mutually agreeable fee, based upon the patient’s ability to pay. More patients paying cash for services would encourage physicians to return to that Hippocratic model.

Finally, companies need to be free to offer reasonably priced insurance for catastrophic emergencies and high-priced procedures.

These simple steps would go a long way towards restoring the doctor-patient relationship, and encourage the development of local safety nets. We cannot suddenly eliminate the current safety net of government programs, but we cannot afford to expand them or mandate an expansion of healthcare rationed by insurance companies. That’s not healthcare, that’s corporatecare.

11. On the environment, do you support a federal moratorium on new coal-fired power plants until clean coal technologies can be developed? Why or why not? And secondly, what legislation should Congress pass to help address the issue of climate change and global warming?

I do not support a federal moratorium on new coal-fired power plants. Energy firms should be free to produce energy if there is a need for it, although they should not expect taxpayers to subsidize their investment.

Preventing environmental abuse requires that we protect private property rights – both for the energy company, and the surrounding community. The energy company has no right to pollute its neighbors’ air and water, and a strong legal system that will protect the neighbors’ property rights will curb environmental abuses.

Regarding climate change and global warming, I believe a change in our foreign policy and ending the irrational subsidization of our petroleum economy will go a long way towards encouraging economically viable alternatives to fossil fuels. Eliminating energy subsidies will give consumers a strong incentive to increase their energy efficiency while encouraging development of renewable alternatives. This transition will take decades, but over the long terms we simply must become more efficient in using energy. Higher unsubsidized energy prices are the natural stimulus for increased efficiency and developing alternatives.

12. District 13 candidates only: What is your view of the National Bio and Agro Defense Facility, which could be built in Butner? What role does citizen opposition play in your decision whether to support it?

Even as a District 4 citizen and candidate, I am strongly opposed to NBAF. While some hail it as a worthwhile federal gravy train in the name of economic development, one must wonder why New York’s sitting Congressman Tim Bishop has been encouraging his constituents to reject NBAF at the current biodisease laboratory on Plum Island.

One must also question what qualifies the Department of Homeland Security to run a BSL-4 laboratory given its poor track record for transparency and accountability.

13. Where do you stand on:

1. The death penalty? I am personally opposed to the death penalty, as I believe deadly force should only be used in self-defense or defense of innocents. The criminal justice system is imperfect, and executions of innocents cannot be justified. Finally, life imprisonment without parole with an easy chair, Xbox, unlimited cigarettes, and unlimited food from McDonald’s will likely prove fatal sooner than most death sentences are carried out anyway.

2. Abortion rights? The most important purpose of government is to protect life. Scientifically, I believe life begins at conception. Therefore, I do not believe there is a “right” to elective abortion – abortion is not a victimless crime. Abortion is a difficult decision if the mother’s life is in danger, and in that situation the decision should be between the mother and her physician. Additionally, we must recognize that there is a window of time post-coitus when it is unknown if conception has occurred. Thus, emergency contraception (i.e., the “morning after pill”) should be a moral decision between a woman and her physician.

3. Affirmative action? I am opposed to federal affirmative action, since it is government-mandated reverse discrimination. I would not, however, seek to prevent private institutions or businesses from having affirmative action policies, since their hiring and admission criteria are their prerogative. Likewise, affirmative action at the state level is the business of state governments. In general, though, if you’re going to give someone a non-merit-based advantage, does it really help that person to let everyone know?

4. Gay rights? Again, our rights must not come from being members of a group – such a mentality leads to the currently toxic political environment where different interest groups complete for government favors. We need to protect the rights of the ultimate minority – the individual. Focusing on the principle of defending individual liberty will prevent all types of arbitrary discrimination.

5. Retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies that engaged in domestic surveillance without a warrant? No, thanks.

14. With the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, civil liberties—including habeas corpus and privacy rights—have been sharply curbed over the past seven years. Do you think these actions are justified? If so, please be specific in how they’ve been effective. If not, please explain how you would work in Congress to restore civil liberties, and what, if any, restrictions on them you would propose.

No, these actions were not justified and are exceedingly dangerous. I strongly support the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007, and the restoration of our lost civil liberties. Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

15. Are there any other issues on which you, as a member of Congress, will focus if elected?

We need to repeal the REAL ID, which is an unconstitutional national identification card with the capabilities to provide biometric identification (based upon a high-resolution facial photograph) of every American for use by international governments and corporations.

We need to address the problems of illegal immigration. Our open borders encourage both illegal immigration and the inhumane business of human trafficking, threatening national security and destroying lives. The burden of this federal negligence falls on the states. Mandated healthcare and education services are forcing hospitals into bankruptcy and hurting local schools.

We should not behave like a police state with raids to round people up at gunpoint. Such publicity stunts are only designed to intimidate and give the impression of enforcement, when the underlying incentives to enter illegally haven’t changed.

I will work to stop un-Constitutional federal mandates that require states provide social services to undocumented aliens, eliminate welfare-state incentives that encourage illegal immigration, physically secure the border, and enforce existing visa laws. I will not support amnesty for illegal aliens, as amnesty is a powerful incentive to enter illegally.

Let's Follow the Constitution for a Change!

Lawson for Congress at the Rally for the Republic from Lawson For Congress on Vimeo.

Not In My Name!

This election cycle has really prompted me to do some research. The thing that I have come to realize is that a lot of the people who are supposed to represent me do not. In my name the Congress and the Administration has done plenty to eviscerate the Constitution. It is past time for us to stand up and stop this! In our names both the Bush Administration and the Pelosi led House and the Reid led Senate have given us such egregious legislation as:

USA Patriot Act

MilitaryCommissions Act 2006

MilitaryCommissions Act 2006

Many others...

It is time for citizens to say that you will not do these things in our name. It is time for us to say to those who we hire by giving them our votes, "No; not in my name!" He or she needs to be true to the oath of office that he/she takes:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

They take an oath to defend the Constitution. It is worth noting here that the Commander in Chief views the Constitution as a "G-D piece of paper".

I like this "pledge" pledge:

The Pledge of Resistance

We believe that as people living
in the United States it is our
responsibility to resist the injustices
done by our government,
in our names

Not in our name
will you wage endless war
there can be no more deaths
no more transfusions
of blood for oil

Not in our name
will you invade countries
bomb civilians, kill more children
letting history take its course
over the graves of the nameless

Not in our name
will you erode the very freedoms
you have claimed to fight for

Not by our hands
will we supply weapons and funding
for the annihilation of families
on foreign soil

Not by our mouths
will we let fear silence us

Not by our hearts
will we allow whole peoples
or countries to be deemed evil

Not by our will
and Not in our name

We pledge resistance

We pledge alliance with those
who have come under attack
for voicing opposition to the war
or for their religion or ethnicity

We pledge to make common cause
with the people of the world
to bring about justice,
freedom and peace

Another world is possible
and we pledge to make it real.

This issue of civil liberties is too important for us to just sit on the sideline or to just vote based on our party.

With all due respect to Rep. Price, we need someone who is going to go to Congress and represent our views! I have a deep love for the Constitution of the United States. (With all due respect, the Constitution is far more than a G-D piece of paper; it is your job description.) Rep. Price should have never voted for the USA Patriot Act. I don't exactly agree with BJ Lawson on each stance that he takes but one thing that I trust is that he will defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and (especially) domestic! I will vote for him in November because Rep. Price should have known better than to vote for the Patriot Act; he cannot convince me that there is any good reason that he voted for it! I will give you this pledge too, if Dr. Lawson goes to Congress and votes his party's platform--over the Constitution--I will work for the person(Dem, Republic or whomever)to get him out as well; or I will run myself.

This is not about partisan politics; this is about standing up and saying that not in my name will we allow you to eviscerate the Constitution. Not in my name will we allow you to torture. Not in my name will I be forced to think that I must vote for a person simply because he or she has "D", "R", "L", or "I" behind his or her name.

Rep. Price, NBAF is a bad idea; kick it!

I really do not understand why Rep. Price stands in support of NBAF. It is an incredibly bad idea! There are so many people who are against this facility. Rep. Brad Miller (a Democratic Representative who I love) has come to his senses and pulled his support for NBAF.

I am today notifying the Department of Homeland Security that I do not support locating the National Bio Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) at the proposed Butner site. I have worked with other members of North Carolina's congressional delegation to urge the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to work closely with elected officials and citizens in Granville County to address concerns about the proposed facility. The Government Accountability Office and the House Energy and Commerce Committee, among others, have raised sober, serious concerns about the facility that DHS has not satisfied. If democracy means anything, local elected officials speak for the people of their community, and local elected officials in Granville County now oppose bringing the facility to Butner. I cannot support bringing a federal facility to a community in my district that does not welcome it.

"I continue to believe that we must do the research that would be conducted at the proposed facility to protect public health and our food supply, whether at the current location at Plum Island or elsewhere, and that wherever the research is done it must be done safely."

It is past time for us to hold Rep. Price responsible! Here is the press release from Lawson for Congress:


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, August 12, 2008

CONTACT:
Linda Williams
919-481-1177

Why Won't David Price Just Say "No" to NBAF?

RALEIGH - Today, North Carolina Congressional candidate William (B.J.) Lawson called on Congressman David Price to withdraw his support for the Department of Homeland Security's attempt to bring the National Bio-Agro Defense Facility (NABF) to the Granville/Durham county line.

"In 1948, Congress made it illegal for a facility such as NBAF to study biological contagions, like Foot and Mouth Disease, that could spread from animals to humans in the continental United States. Since then, this work has been done on Plum Island to help limit any outbreaks to the general population from accidental releases that would inevitably occur," said Lawson.

"Congressman Price spoke at a meeting in Durham on June 16, 2008, which I attended, where he said neither he nor anyone else should make rash decisions about NBAF either way," Lawson continued. "I would like to ask him why then did he vote just two days later to circumvent the 1948 law and clear the way for Homeland Security to bring the lab to North Carolina. He has also openly supported NBAF to his constituents. Plainly the only people who want this facility are special and corporate interests. The people of Granville and Durham don't want it and even the Democratic party of Orange County is against it. Also, recently his colleague Congressman Brad Miller has withdrawn his support."

"Now Price says he is neutral on NBAF, but what does that mean? Does neutral mean that he supports it, but does not want the voters in his district to know that he supports it in an election year?" says Lawson. "I am not the only one asking here, but would the real Congressman Price please stand up and tell us if he supports NBAF or not? The voters of the 4th District have a right to know where Congressman Price truly stands on this issue."

Dr. William "BJ" Lawson is running for Congress in North Carolina's 4th Congressional District.

###

That Which Sen. Obama and BJ Lawson Share

Last night I attended the Campaign Kickoff for Lawson for Congress. I can tell you that I have never been around that many Republicans in my life and to be honest with you I was a bit nervous...imagine that, me, nervous. To my great surprise I met a lot of great people who share my love for this country and for the district. I must admit that we have some very different ideas about how to solve the problems that face this country but we agree that BJ Lawson is the best person running for Congress in the fourth district to go to Washington and help it work better.

I have said all along that I am not so much against Rep. Price as I am for Dr. Lawson and his principles of good government. BJ offers fresh perspective and new ideas for a governmental system that is so desperately in need of new perspective. I have said this before and I really think this is true: "Dr. BJ Lawson is for the fourth district what Sen. Barak Obama is for our nation."

What is that which BJ shares with Obama? Refreshment. They both offer a refreshing change from the status quo. Neither Sen. Obama nor Dr. Lawson promises to give us business as usual. They each offer plans of refreshment. Whether it be Sen. Obama's blue print for change or Dr. Lawson's Principles of Good Government, each candidate promises a refreshing change from the ordinary. Ordinary, there is a great word that describes both Sen. Obama's and Dr. Lawson's opponent. Both Sen. McCain and Rep. Price are good enough fellows but they are ordinary. Webster defines ordinary as being of a kind to be expected in the normal order of events. It defines refreshing as agreeably stimulating because of freshness or newness. So, given the option between ordinary and refreshing, I choose refreshing each day and twice on Sunday! I am so proud to be a supporter of refreshing candidates. I can tell you this, come Nov. 4 I will cast a ballot for Barak Obama for President and William "BJ" Lawson for Representative of the fourth congressional district in North Carolina; I encourage you to do the same.

Below is a clip from the campaign kickoff event last night.

Come See IOUSA on the Lawson for Congress' Dime!

Call the Lawson for Congress office today at: 919-481-1177 to reserve your ticket for this one night showing of IOUSA at no charge to you!

Can we trust BJ Lawson?

Can we trust BJ Lawson to stand up for our civil liberties?

Yes.

Is BJ Lawson a xenophobe?

This is a totally ridiculous statement to make and it is ridiculously unfounded. BJ Lawson does propose to keep our borders secure and does not want to give illegal immigrants incentives to continue breaking laws. However, he is in no way xenophobic. BJ is a great guy, principled and he is the best candidate to represent the fourth district.

Is BJ Lawson more or less likely to do business as usual?

BJ Lawson will not go to Washington operating business as usual. Some of the guiding principles of his campaign are: Read the Bills Act, Write the Laws Act and the Enumerated Powers Act

Should you vote for BJ Lawson if you want someone who is status quo?

Definitely not. One of the greatest things about this guy is his principle. He will not be a Congressman who the Republicans, Democrats nor any group can manipulate. BJ is going to be bound by the Constitution of the United States not a political party nor its platform.

Does the fourth district Democrat trust Rep. Price or Dr. Lawson?

Hands down, Dr. Lawson!

War Hawks Gone Wild!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 17, 2008

RALEIGH – Today, North Carolina Congressional candidate William “BJ” Lawson condemned House Congressional Resolution 362 as lunacy masquerading as policy. HR 362 is a bipartisan bill which demands that George W. Bush impose a blockade of Iranian land borders, ports, and airways, which would effectively shut down the entire country of Iran. The enforcement of this bill is illegal and would be a declaration of war under international law.

Lawson said, “In October 2002, a piece of legislation similar to HR 362 led to the war in Iraq, and Congress, both Democrat and Republican, seem determined to make the same mistake again. In 2002, the argument could be made that the evidence as presented inferred that Saddam Hussein may have weapons of mass destruction, even though this turned out to be incorrect. This time however, all evidence is to the contrary. In December 2007, even our own intelligence agencies stated with high confidence that Iran’s program intending to transform raw material into a nuclear weapon has been shut down since 2003.” Lawson went on to say: “It is no surprise that confidence in Congress is at an all time low of 9%. Our elected officials seem more interested in pushing through legislation like this at the behest of special interest groups, lobbyists, and foreign sovereign nations such as Saudi Arabia and Israel rather than what is in the best interest of our own citizens. The proposed blockade of Iran is not in the best interests of the United States or the Middle East.”

Lawson went on to say: “Even if there was a valid reason to attack Iran, we currently have an ongoing war in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and our military are already vastly overstretched. The possibility of preemptively opening a third front, for no reason, is at best irresponsible, and at worst criminal. A blockade of Iran would also lead to an unprecedented rise in the cost of oil. The removal of Iran’s four million barrels of oil per day from the market would inevitably lead to a scramble by China to secure much needed fuel for their economy. The only people to benefit from this action would be oil companies and the people heavily invested in them. If Congress is really so blind to push through this legislation, then maybe it’s time for them to lead from the front and give our soldiers a well earned rest.”

Dr. William “BJ” Lawson is running for Congress in North Carolina’s 4th Congressional District.

###

B.J. to David: Did you read the Patriot Act?

This video would be quite humorous, if it wasn't downright sad.

As a civil libertarian, I just have to cringe when David Price excuses his vote for the Patriot Act by saying it is a "temporary measure," and that it "passed overwhelmingly." So David, if the 356 other Congressmen who voted for this legislation jumped off a bridge, would you do it with them? That is a flat out ridiculous excuse to make for voting for it. Furthermore, where in the 4th Amendment and other amendments in the Bill of Rights does it say that the government may "temporarily" violate our civil liberties? As I understand it, the government is supposed adhere to the Bill of Rights ALL the time, regardless of circumstance. That's the whole point of it.
It's also pretty sad that Price couldn't answer a simple question: "Did you vote for these Bills?" It's quite simple to answer this question: he could have answered "yes" or "no." He could have even explained his answer. But instead of answering this question, he accuses B.J. of wanting to make it a "political" event, talks about other bills, and gives unconscionable excuses for his shameful votes on these bills As Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens, Independents, and most of all Americans, we have to ask ourselves one fundamental question after seeing this video: if someone isn't able to answer a question as simple as this, why do we expect them to be able to answer questions like "How do we get out of Iraq?" or "How are we going to fix the economy?"

Anyhow, on to this rather disgraceful performance by

Upcoming Events

Here are some upcoming events:

Town Hall Grill Issues Forum: Mon. June 23, 2008, 4 PM @ Town Hall Grill in Chapel Hill

Speech at Wake County Taxpayer's Association: Thurs. June 26, 2008, 7PM

Why I Support B.J. Lawson

I had the honor of meeting B.J. Lawson just about a month ago. This man is truly a raw talent, to say the least. He represents the change that we need in Washington right at this moment. I have had several discussions with B.J. about the current policies that have allowed our government to fail. In our conversations, he sees that the policies of Washington are very corrupt and need to be altered. I have also talked to him about my support for Barack Obama. I believe that the policies of both B.J. and Barack are what we need to make our government successful. B.J. supports the promotion and preservation of prosperity, peace, and liberty. He also understands that the foreign policy of President Bush is a disaster. He also talks of the unstable monetary policy and government spending. Furthermore, I support B.J. because of his desire to protect the borders and civil liberties. Evidently, B.J. strictly adheres to the United States Constitution. The preceding policies outline the reasons why I support such a changed candidate.

Democratic blog endorsement

B.J. has the endorsement of Freedom Demcorats, a group of libertarian-leaning Democrats.

June 29 "Money Bomb"

A supporter of B.J.'s campaign has set up an online "money bomb" for June 29. This date is the 12th wedding anniversary of B.J. and his wife, JoLynn. Please visit this link to sign up for the money bomb and donate to the campaign on June 29!

Why I, a true blue Democrat, am supporting BJ Lawson over David Price

I want to be clear about one thing from the onset of this post: I have nothing against David Price on a personal level. I think that he has served the 4th District fairly well. I thank him for his service to the 4th District for the twenty-two years that he served. With that, I will explain why I am working to get Willliam "BJ" Lawson elected as the next representative for North Carolina's Fourth Congressional District.

I met BJ Lawson in May at Hillsborough's Last Friday (a monthly event sponsored by the Hillsborouh Arts Coucil. I was at the event representing the Hillary Clinton campaign and BJ was there representing the BJ Lawson campaign (big surprise, eh?). I must say that I first thought, "Ok, I am next to this Republican, great!" But, then we talked about the issues and I was really taken with how real BJ came across to me and how much I really enjoyed talking with JoLynn (his wonderful bride) and him. I talked with BJ and explained to him why I was a huge Hillary Clinton supporter. To my surprise he really listened. He listened! I am not talking about the type of listening that most politicians do. I am talking about the listening that compels you to bear it all because for once someone really is listening.

Another cool story about when I first met BJ actually happened the day after we met. I serve a local denomination as its Pastor of Youth Ministry. Ov er this same weekend I was also leading a church-wide effort named Be the Church. I invited BJ to join us in helping a neighborhood watch association beautify their park; he came and did great work. He really learned how to use a post digger in the name of being the church. BJ is a man who stands on the principles.

I like BJ on a personal level. But that is not all, I like his stance on the Iraq War; he opposes it now and has always opposed it. My all time favorite is BJ's stance against the asanine and Constitution ignoring "Patriot Act", REAL ID and the other attempts to erode civil liberties(which is anything but a Patriotic Act). He sees that this is an affront on our civil liberties and this Act must not stand.

Come back often because we plan to outline to each Democrat out there why William "BJ" Lawson is the best candidate for the 4th Congressional District of North Carolina. You are going to be surprised with whatg is found with closer scruitny of Rep. Price's voting record.

Peace,
Ray