Open letter to BJ Lawson

BJ, when you first started running against David Price, George W Bush was still president of our country and the leader of your party. You seemed different, a breath of fresh air - you talked about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and seemed to have some idea of the dangers of powerful government.

As a civil libertarian, I wanted to find out more about you, so I contacted you and we had a wonderful three-hour breakfast meeting where we seemed to agree on a lot of principles and issues. After that we met once, perhaps twice, for more pleasant and stimulating conversations. I even invited you to a liberal political group, where you impressed other liberals with your apparent earnestness and even with some of your ideas.

At one point I asked you why you belonged to the Republican Party. You replied that the party was broken, ripe for takeover. That sounded reasonable, given the ways that a Republican President and Congress had tossed away a budget surplus and gone to war against a country that hadn't attacked us. That Republican Party is dangerous, I said, and you seemed to agree.

But now I'm feeling angry when I think about you. When I feel as angry towards someone as I do toward you, it kind of shocks me. I have to ask myself, "What is bothering me? Why am I angry?"

I believed that you represented a better Republican Party, something that our country desperately needs. As I told you, I will never vote for a Republican - I won't go into my reasons here - but our country would be far better off with the the party of Eisenhower than with the party of Rupert Murdock.

What have you become as you try once again to be elected to Congress?

  • Your belief in the Bill of Rights seemed genuine and principled. And then you finally admitted to me that you'd use the power of government to stop a woman from having an abortion. So much for principle: you see the Constitution you want, the same way Glenn Beck does.
  • When we talked, you seemed to understand that our true problem is not big government but government owned by corporations, government over which we have no control. If you don't believe that this is a fight to wrest control from corporations, why are you running for Congress? Do you now actually believe that "socialists" and not corporations control our government? That's quite a switch in your thinking and one that shocks me. If you still believe that corporate control of government is the problem, why are you so afraid to say so?
  • You call David Price, elected to Congress in 1987, a "career politician" and then fawn at the feet of Ron Paul, elected in 1976.
  • You imply that David Price is a "socialist". Yes, you really use that word even through you know it's untrue. ("Socialism comes with a Price" is your name for a recent fundraiser).
  • You say that "...David Price votes with Nancy Pelosi more than any other congressman - and that principled Americans need to stand up and say NO." So I’m “unprincipled” because I support Price and Pelosi? Please tell me that to my face, BJ.
  • In the new Lawson-speak, your supporters are "patriots". People like me must be traitors, right?

So, yes I'm angry now. I'm tired of politicians like you, who claim to be pure, patriotic, trustworthy, different, special while spouting the same vitriol and economic magical thinking that got us into this mess in the first place.

To my surprise I'm finding myself questioning your motivations, where I didn't two years ago. I've gotten to know David Price fairly well over the years, and while I do not always agree with his positions, I've learned never to doubt his motivations: he truly wants to do good for all Americans. I can no longer tell what you stand for, BJ. Unfortunately it's become all to easy to see who you're standing with.

Comments

BJ is an opportunist, pure and simple

Two years ago, he would have run as a Libertarian if he thought he could win that way. Today's he's running as a tea bagger, hoping to capitalize on the crazies coming out of the woodwork.

It saddens me too, George, to see BJ turn out to be just another political whore.

Solving big problems

I watched the accompanying video where he denounces "comprehensive immigration reform" as just other words for "amnesty"

I can't imagine someone who is anti-gay marriage, will make getting rid of a bad law like DOMA a priority.

What about things like the EPA or CDC? The environment isn't limited to one state, its interconnected, the spread of disease isn't either, and neither are oil spills. These are just a few areas where taking libertarianism too far defeats our country's ability to tackle big problems... like comprehensive immigration reform.

Lawson's tilt to the right

is a sad, sad thing. What's even sadder is what it must feel like for him to look in the mirror every morning.

More concerns

As with many congressmen who have districts than span multiple cities, he has an office in each to meet with constituents so at any given time he is necessarily not at more than one of them which makes me find this video a bit disingenuous:

And I think someone who is anti-federal funding for research/education makes a poor representative to the research triangle.

Debate coming up - Oct 8

Just got an e-mail about it. Click here for more info.

Event is open to the public

On Friday, October 8 at 6:30 p.m. Rep. David Price (D-NC) will debate Republican challenger B.J. Lawson at the Durham Station Transit Center. The debate is sponsored by BullCityRising.com and the Independent Weekly newspaper.

What: North Carolina Fourth Congressional District Candidate Debate

When: Friday, October 8, 2010
6:30 PM – 8:00 PM

Where: 515 W. Pettigrew Street
Durham, NC

Should be an exciting day in Democratic politics. The Price-Lawson debate, and the Marshall Bomb of course.

No Change

I have yet to hear a change in a position, only in the talking points. That's called politics. Disappointing, but that's the way things work (courtesy of a dumbass electorate).

As for the Nancy Pelosi deal...if you like her, then you're one of few who actually does. Newest NBC/WSJ poll shows her to be as popular as BP. I'm sorry, but I can't stop cracking up at that. That's just how terrible she is.

Also, I suspect that none of you will vote for David Price and then continue to complain that we're fighting endless wars in the middle east, right? Or complain about corporations ruining politics? Or that our "War on Drugs" is wasting money that could be used for other programs/debts? Ok. Just checking.

But seriously...vote for whoever you want to, just don't come and bitch about what you voted for afterward. That pisses me off more than anything.

But seriously...vote for

But seriously...vote for whoever you want to, just don't come and bitch about what you voted for afterward. That pisses me off more than anything.

Lord knows, worrying about whether you're pissed off or not is truly the most important consideration I have when voting. Way more important than the catastrophe that would come with "Speaker Boner" in the US House.

Republicans started our trillion dollar shitstorm of wars. And you want to give them the keys to the car again? That's one fucked up way to think about things.

I agree that Speaker Boehner

is a real concern.

He cosponsored H.J. Res 47 to ban flag burning, voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, he cosponsored efforts on allowing roving warrant-less wiretapping of Americans, voted against the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, voted against shareholder approval of corporate political ads, wants less oil drilling regulation, voted against repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, is anti-choice, and is pro-teaching intelligent design.

Here is a gem on his scare tactics:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/30/gop.ad/index.html
"House Minority Leader Boehner releases Web ad attacking Obama on security"

An image of the Pentagon on fire during the 9/11 attacks is used in a new GOP Web video attacking the president.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/02/AR2006020202571_pf.html

But Boehner has had his share of taint. He handed out checks from tobacco lobbyists on the House floor in 1995 while lawmakers were weighing tobacco subsidies. In 2004, he allowed Sallie Mae to throw him a fundraiser while the student lending outfit was lobbying his committee. And he is a frequent flier on trips paid for by special interests.

Burr + Foxx

I think trump Pelosi.

http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/posts/bj-lawson-endorsed-by-senator-richard-burr

B.J. Lawson is a strong Republican, defender of constitutional and conservative values, and will be a great advocate for the 4th District. North Carolina would do well to help our country, and our state, by electing Dr. B.J. Lawson this November.

I thought he was running on not being such a strong republican? I also saw he won Virginia Foxx's endorsement, a champion of social conservatism.

Wow. Are you 7?

Both your boner joke and lack of ability to think logically would point to the conclusion that you were something other than an old man. But alas, things can be deceiving.

I never meant that you should consider what I think before voting. My point was that I KNOW you are going to vote for the guy who has voted for every all but one war since taking office, the man who still is crusading for the war on drugs, the man who voted to repeal Glass-Steagall, the man who voted to cap liability payouts for oil companies, and the man who has had the proverbial keys to the car for the last two decades. You know all that, yet you will vote for him anyways, because he is your friend, and he has a D next to his name. You've already admitted you're a "liberal hack", so there is really no need to expand on this further. You love party over ideology, and you miraculously find voting for the lesser of two evils...not evil?

Furthermore, as I already pointed out, David Price had the car keys for the 4th district the last 22 years...no one else. He has had the chance to vote against the PATRIOT Act, against the repeal of Glass-Steagall. He's had the chance to not take $3.5 million from PACs. He's had his shot at balancing the budget. It's laughable to say that because BJ is a Republican, and Republicans were in control for several years in the past couple of decades, that there is somehow a connection to their voting record. That has to be one of (if not the) oldest logical fallacies in the book. One can't say that he "fawn[s] at the feet of Ron Paul", and then say that he would have a voting record closer to a neocon if elected (because we have already seen hints of that here, and we all know it was coming sooner or later). It makes you all look stupid to throw out an argument, and then pick and choose when to apply it.

EDIT: And related to the name of the topic - should I start calling her Nazi Pelosi, drawing mustaches on Obama? Or would that just be childish?

I would find it rather satisfying that you lower yourself in nearly every argument you have with someone of opposing ideologies if it weren't for the fact that you don't care, because you are, as previously discussed, a political hack.

More than a

More than a "D next to his name"

The following are positive progressive actions taken by Congressman Price during the 111th Congress:

Amendment 35 to H.R. 2647

In June of 2009, Congressman Rush Holt introduced Amendment 35 to H.R. 2647 as a countercurrent to the current push for coverup in American military and interrogation activities. Amendment 35 requires military interrogations to be videotaped, with an exception provided at times when there may not be time to set up a camera.

The idea of required videotaping for interrogations is not an external imposition forced upon the military, but an internal recommendation of the Walsh Report in January of 2009, which states:

We endorse the use of video recording in all camps and for all interrogations. The use of video recording to confirm humane treatment could be an important enabler for detainee operations. Just as internal controls provide standardization, the use of video recordings provides the capability to monitor performance and to maintain accountability.

The Holt Amendment passed in a roll call vote by a margin of 224-193.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

H.R. 1024

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Nor shall any State deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. These are the American standards of nondiscrimination, chiseled into our legal bedrock in the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. How seriously do members of Congress take this section of the U.S. Constitution? H.R. 1024 is a test.

H.R. 1024, the Uniting American Families Act, is a bill which aims to put into closer compliance with the U.S. Constitution by removing discrimination according to the status of permanent couples. According to law, same-sex couples in permanent relationships cannot marry; only different-sex couples can. The creates two classes of couple in the United States. They are separate. Are they equal? Not currently. Under current immigration law, married immigrant spouses of citizens and permanent residents have a preferred route toward gaining permanent resident status themselves. Unmarried partners of citizens and permanent residents have this avenue closed to them. That is unequal treatment under law for immigrants under American jurisdiction, and it is an unequal abridgment of legal privilege for the citizens whose permanent partners wish to join them.

Introduced by New York Democrat Jerrold Nadler, the Uniting American Families Act would end this status discrimination by amending various the immigration laws that discriminate against same-sex couples when one member of a couple is a citizen or permanent resident and the other is seeking citizenship or residency status.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 11

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act is a decent bill that seeks to amend an injustice and provide a fair shot at equality in the workplace. It simply says that workers cannot be expected to file suit for compensation for wage discrimination before they actually find out that they�ve been discriminated against. A previous court case, decided against a worker named Lilly Ledbetter, had declared that workers must file a lawsuit within a few months of the time that wage discrimination begins, even if they are unaware of the discrimination at the time. H.R. 11 seeks to remove this preposterous restriction on workplace equality.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

H.R. 1106

H.R. 1106, The Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, is a bill passed by the House that would allow bankruptcy judges to restructure mortgages on family homes to make them more affordable. Judicial modification is already possible in bankruptcy for loans covering luxury yachts and the vacation homes of the wealthy. If the terms of those sorts of loans can be restructured during bankruptcy proceedings, then why shouldn't the mortgages on the homes they live in be similarly protected? H.R. 1106 includes a number of protections against mortgage fraud and limits coverage to those who have made good-faith efforts to stay current on their mortgage payments. This sort of policy would be beneficial to bankers as much as to homeowners, maximizing the likelihood that home loans will be repaid rather than abandoned and restoring stability to the U.S. housing market. A YES vote is cast in the direction of fairness. A NO vote preserves renegotiation for yachts and luxury villas but denies it to everyday Americans just trying to get by.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

H.R. 1310

H.R. 1310, the Clean Water Protection Act, would end the old practice in mountaintop mining of just taking all the heavy-metal-polluted rubble, calling it "fill material," and dumping it into streams from which toxins leach into water supplies and deadly, muddy floodwaters are regularly unleashed.

In 2002, the Bush administration declared that toxin-laden debris from mountaintop removal could be declared "fill material" and dumped into mountain waterways. H.R. 1310 would declare such activity, already dangerous to human health and natural ecosystems, to be illegal.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 2

The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 makes 4 million children who are currently without health insurance eligible to be added to the rolls of the the State Children Health Insurance Program. This legislation isn't some kind of entitlement to a group of people responsible for their own economic vulnerability. It is the fault of no child to be born into a poor family. Rather, this Act is a wise investment in America's future: healthy children grow up to become productive adults.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

H.R. 21

The Earth's oceans have entered an ecological crisis as massive as the seas themselves, and it threatens even those of us who live on the land. Oceans 21 is legislation that creates a comprehensive beginning for governmental intervention in this crisis. It establishes a national oceans policy, strengthens the ability of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration to deal with it, and establishes a framework for regional cooperation on issues as they arise.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 2517

Since the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990s, successive Congresses have made it clear, either loudly or meekly, that there is no intention to give same-sex couples the right to marry at the federal level. H.R. 2517, also known as the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009, would grant same-sex domestic partners of federal workers the same benefits as federal workers' different-sex spouses. For proponents of equality under law in America, this is a step forward for same-sex couples, albeit at a less ambitious scale than full-fledged same-sex marriage.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 3017

It might seem that the USA is moving beyond discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transexuals. Yet, it's still legal for people to be fired from their jobs for no other reason than that they aren't heterosexual.

H.R. 3017 would make it illegal to engage in discrimination against people on the basis of sexual orientation.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 3269

Corporations do not exist to benefit themselves. They are given existence by their charters on the condition that the behavior of corporations provides benefit to shareholders and the public. When corporate honchos authorize huge executive compensation for themselves without due opportunity for shareholder approval, they pervert the conditions those of corporate charters.

H.R. 3269, the Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act, is a piece of legislation designed to "to prevent perverse incentives in the compensation practices of financial institutions." The bill prohibits executive compensation packages that put the financial health of their companies at risk, and requires a separate shareholder vote to approve executive compensation packages.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

H.R. 35

Essential to the structure of the Constitution is the concept of the balance of powers between the three branches of government. That balance was disturbed in November of 2001, when George W. Bush issued Executive Order No. 13233. That executive order thwarted the intention of the law by declaring that sitting presidents, former presidents, and even the heirs of former presidents, would have the power to deny the release of public White House records.

Congress and the Judicial Branch cannot check the power of the White House without knowledge of the Executive apparatus that the White House has put into place. Bush executive order interfered with the system of government oversight and review the Constitution put into place. The Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2009, H.R. 35, ended this interference by specifically counteracting Executive Order No. 13233.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

H.R. 3567

If passed, the Respect for Marriage Act of 2009 (H.R. 3567) would repeal DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. Enacted in the 1990s, DOMA removed the presumption (based in the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the Constitution) that same-sex marriages carried out in one state would be recognized in other states or by the federal government. H.R. 3567 would restore cross-state and federal recognition, recognition that different-sex marriages continue to enjoy.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 591

The Military Commissions Act is one of the worst laws to be passed by Congress during the Bush years. It revoked the ancient protection of the writ of habeas corpus, enabling arbitrary and indefinite imprisonment. The law ended the right to a fair and speedy trial, setting up a system of kangaroo courts that could operate under absurdly unjust standards. The law gave retroactive immunity to the President and his aides for war crimes. It created unconstitutional exceptions to the Geneva Conventions. It made hearsay and evidence obtained under coercive interrogation admissible.

Under President Barack Obama, the Military Commissions Act is still on the books. It is true that the prisons of Guantanamo Bay and other "black sites" run by the U.S. around the world will be closed... but the laws that enabled them remain in effect. As long as the Military Commissions Act remains on the books, any closure of prisons like those at Guantanamo will be purely voluntary... and wholly reversible.

The surest way to overcome this problem is not just to rely on the trustworthiness of the President of the United States, but to enact a law that specifically contradicts and counteracts the Military Commissions Act. U.S. Representative David Price has introduced legislation to do just that. It�s H.R. 591, the Interrogation and Detention Reform Act. It does away with the unconstitutional military tribunal system. It does away with torture interrogations. It repeals the repeal of habeas corpus and returns constitutional legal protections to the American justice system. Those members of Congress who support H.R. 591 show the most fidelity to their oath of office pledge that they defend the liberties inherent in the Constitution of the United States.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 626

Claims of common ground are often a sham, covering up the results of a lopsided negotiation in which one side gets the lion�s share of the benefits. But H.R. 626, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act, is one case in which the interests of Republican and Democratic constituencies truly meet. Republicans say that they support family values. Democrats say that they support workers� rights. Both of these are provided for with H.R. 626, which if passed would give federal employees four weeks of paid parental leave. Such benefits increase employee satsifaction and loyalty, cement family bonds and give children a healthy start in that critical first month of life.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

H.R. 981

The problem with cluster bombs is threefold:

1. When used, they are distributed in large numbers across terrain;
2. They have a high failure rate, leaving many unexploded bombs;
3. They are small and typically shiny, disproportionately attracting the hands of curious children.

Cluster bombs are designed to kill people, not to damage buildings or roads. Like land mines, they continue to kill people long after the battle in which they were used. It is typical for a large number of these smaller bombs to remain undetonated, waiting to explode, after their initial deployment.

The Federation of American Scientists' report on the matter makes clear the danger of cluster munitions: "40 percent of the duds on the ground are hazardous and for each encounter with an unexploded submunition there is a 13 percent probability of detonation. Thus, even though an unexploded submunition is run over, kicked, stepped on, or otherwise disturbed, and did not detonate, it is not safe. Handling the unexploded submunition may eventually result in arming and subsequent detonation." Cluster bombs kill civilians when they are used. Our government knows this, and yet our government continues to manufacture, use and sell cluster bombs to foreign countries. The Cluster Munitions Civilian Protection Act of 2009 forbids the United States government from spending money to use, sell or transfer cluster bombs unless the following requirements are met:

* The cluster bombs are proven to have a 1 percent or lower rate of malfunction
* The cluster bombs will not be used against anything but a clearly defined military target, in an area where there are no civilians and in places where civilians do not ordinarily live
* A plan is submitted, with the costs included, for cleaning up all the undetonated explosives that come from cluster bombs, whether they are used by the US military, or by other countries to whom the United States has supplied the cluster bombs

There is a waiver in the law for the first requirement (for the malfunctioning rate of 1 percent or lower), in cases in which it is "vital" to use cluster bombs in order to protect the security of the United States. However, even in such cases, the President is required to submit a report to Congress which explains how civilians will be protected from the cluster bombs, and revealing the failure rate of the cluster bombs, as well as whether the cluster bombs are equipped with self-destruct functions. The Cluster Munitions Civilian Protection Act is not perfect, but it is a big improvement over the deadly status quo.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by cosponsoring this bill.

Mack Amendment to H.R. 1262

On March 12, 2009, the House of Representatives voted on the Mack Amendment, which if passed would have slapped aside the usual rule for federally-funded projects that construction workers be paid at least the prevailing wage of the area in compensation for their labor. That prevailing wage standard is not high to begin with, at poverty-level compensation in many places. But for 140 members of the House of Representatives, poverty-level pay for wasn�t low enough. In the middle of the worst economic recession in over a generation, those who voted for the Mack Amendment acted to slash the wages of working-class Americans. They tried to push construction workers� wages further down at the historical moment when their economic security was at its lowest.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting NO, against this regressive measure.

Motion to Concur on Patriot Act

On February 25, 2010, the House of Representatives passed an extension of Patriot Act provisions for spying on Americans without establishment of probable cause or so much as a demonstration that the person being spied upon is even tangentially connected to terrorism. This reauthorization of the most controversial of Patriot Act powers made it through the House hidden within Medicare legislations and contained no reforms whatsoever.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting NO, against this regressive measure.

Patrick Amendment to H.R. 5136

Substantively, the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy weakens the strained U.S. military by kicking people out with good service records. There is a more formal problem with DADT as well: the policy to discriminate, to kick people out of the military because of their sexual orientation, is a violation of the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Patrick Murphy's amendment to repeal the policy is an amendment not only lending substantive benefit to the military and to lesbian and gay servicemembers, but also providing strength to constitutional government.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting YES to pass this measure.

Stupak Amendment to H.R. 3962

The Stupak Amendment is an amendment to the Democrats' main health care bill. The Amendment prohibits health insurance companies from offering abortion coverage in a plan to anyone, even to citizens who pay for the coverage themselves, if just one person buys into the plan with the help of a federal subsidy. Rich women will be able to purchase an abortion with their own money, as they were able to do when abortion was fully illegal. Millions of middle-class and poor women will be stuck, unable to obtain an abortion even though it is legal because their insurance won't cover it.

Rep. Price has acted progressively by voting NO, against this regressive measure.

You're wasting your time, Jake

Minarchist is an anonymous troll whose only purpose here is to disrupt and distract. That said, I do appreciate his/her keeping this BJ thread alive.

It's one thing to read a candidate's campaign propaganda, but it's an entirely different thing to sit down with a guy and hear exactly what he stands for in his very own words ... and then discover those words don't mean squat when the rubber meets the road. I know Zabouti. He is fair and tolerant, almost to a fault. He has spent a lot of time with Lawson. I trust his take on this situation.

The last 4 years

Price has had the keys to the car for the last four years...I have to ask, are you better off now than you were 4 years ago? Is our nation? Did David Price do anything to stop the banking crisis? the housing crisis?

Lawson leaves a lot to be desired, but I'm more than happy to give someone other than David Price the keys to the car.

BTW - It would be nice if he'd come visit Cary once in a while...in a public forum. I don't think he has the balls for it.

I don't think we should be giving the keys

to someone who is anti-marriage equality, when we have the option of someone who has stood against DOMA.

And you also have to ask, if you you're doing a 4 year review, what have the GOP done for you in the last 4 years? Even supposedly moderate republican senators & retiring republican senators like Snowe or Collins or Brown or Lugar or Voinovich wouldn't cross the party line to support DADT repeal.

The GOP screwed us last time they had "the keys to the car" and I'm not ready to trust them yet when even moderate republicans act no differently than the hard liners.

And with Lawsons growing tea party association, he's losing any moderate cred he might of had.

Plus there is the whole throwing his support behind the failing policies of the new wake school board thing.

And, as GOPs, including those here in NC (like in Apex) push to make abortion harder and harder to access, even if they can't make it straight up illegal, how much of a defender will an anti-choice candidate be?

I noticed at least that 538 updated their projections of the race as of 4 days ago:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/house/north-carolina/4
Giving Price a 95.9% chance of winning.

Really?

Abortion? Gay Marriage? What a joke.

Obama is firmly against gay marriage (thus anything going through the congress is worthless), and abortion hasn't been an issue for decades (with the exception of a small blip in the health insurance bill which ended up being moot anyways). Come join the conversation in 2010.

Also, lol @ you continuing on with these logical fallacies about "well 'X' did this, which means that 'Y' is also going to also!"

Fairness is a joke?

The Pres already said he'd signed DOMA repeal. But frankly it wouldn't matter if the president had never said that. I'd still want as many pro-equality candidates in office as possible to help change things.

You want pro-benefit candidates

Because that is the only difference between Lawson and Price. Lawson doesn't want the state involved in straight or gay marriages. Price wants the government giving equal benefits to both. I don't necessarily have a problem with either (since benefits are already being given out - they must be given out equally), but I much prefer the government not having their nose in what someone does in their private life, whether it be marriage, drugs, prostitution, or anything else that is morally questionable to some.

Edit: BTW, "fairness" is a joke if you plan on being remotely objective.

It's not just the government

that has its nose into our private lives; there's also insurance companies, banks, prospective employers, etc. And then there are the (real) criminals mining our personal data for identity theft and such. My point is, even if the government were completely removed from vast areas of our lives, those "vacuums" would not remain unfilled.

And just a note: prostitution is not (always) a victimless crime. Thousands of women and girls (and some guys, too) in this country are captured, coerced, addicted and/or imprisoned in this industry every year. One man's "private" doings is another person's living hell, and frankly, the government doesn't do nearly enough to help these folks.

Price in Cary

Price's campaign office is in Cary. He's actually putting most of his campaign time into the Wake County portion of his district. It shouldn't be that hard for you to find him. Just give it a try.