BJ Lawson For Congress

[rebmulp]

I am posting this so you all can become familiar with Mr. Lawson.

Here is his campaign web site https://www.lawsonforcongress.com

It is refreshing to see an individual who places importance in the US Constitution and the American people over special interest and Party politics. Whether you are a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Unaffiliated voter of any mindset, we all seem to stress the importance of our Liberty and Freedoms.

He is running against a fellow Republican in the upcoming 4th District Primary. The one who is selected by the Primary voters will square off against Congressman Price.

He is a very successful businessman and not a politician. We can certainly use more of that in DC.

I think you will like what he stands for regardless of your Party or non-party preference.

If any of you really want "change", let's not forget to change Congress.

A new Congress is probably more important this year than many in the past after knowing our choices for President.

Mike


Here is a clip from his Home Page

Why I'm Running for US Congress

My name is B.J. Lawson, and I am running for Congress as a Republican to restore a Constitutional federal government. Washington must balance its budget, stop serving corporate interests, and allow us to prosper as free, entrepreneurial Americans instead of dividing us into special interest groups that fight each other for government handouts.

Big government inevitably becomes a tool for corporate and special interests instead of a guardian of individual liberty. Today, big government has given us significant problems: rising food prices, jobs going overseas, illegal immigration, porous borders, failing education, war and occupation, foreign oil addiction, unsustainable entitlement spending, and a crushing debt burden. Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems, more bureaucracy cannot solve them. Instead, we need a smaller federal government that is focused on its Constitutional responsibilities.

It's time for us to come together as free Americans and restore prosperity and liberty. While we are in a challenging position, we can change our direction by realizing our future success does not come from begging a bankrupt federal government for help. Our success as America comes from your potential as a free American to help yourself, and your fellow citizens. Freedom isn't free — it requires a lot of hard work. But liberty is priceless.

[chaboard]

I
Big government inevitably becomes a tool for corporate and special interests instead of a guardian of individual liberty. Today, big government has given us significant problems: rising food prices, jobs going overseas, illegal immigration, porous borders, failing education, war and occupation, foreign oil addiction, unsustainable entitlement spending, and a crushing debt burden. Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems, more bureaucracy cannot solve them. Instead, we need a smaller federal government that is focused on its Constitutional responsibilities.

That is one thoroughly dishonest paragraph.

[rebmulp]

Please explain what you mean.

Wait …. maybe I can figure out what you mean.

Could it be ..... "Big government inevitably becomes a tool for corporate and special interests instead of a guardian of individual liberty"

No can't be that, as that is not dishonest.

How about ....... "Today, big government has given us significant problems: rising food prices, jobs going overseas, illegal immigration, porous borders, failing education, war and occupation, foreign oil addiction, unsustainable entitlement spending, and a crushing debt burden."

No can't be that either, as it is also not dishonest.

Maybe this …. "Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems, more bureaucracy cannot solve them."

No, that certainly can't be what you mean, as that is not dishonest.


So let me try for the last time to see if I can figure out what possibly you find dishonest about his statements.

"Instead, we need a smaller federal government that is focused on its
Constitutional responsibilities."

Sorry, that is not dishonest, nor were the other comments.

Please clarify what “you” find dishonest.

Thanks

Mike

[Icorpse]

Let me take a stab --

rising food prices >> demand for oil is rising across the world. Not much Govt can do about it except take over Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. You are surely not advocating that. Are you?

jobs going overseas>> fruits of capitalism. The CEO/BODs of a company collectively have an obligation to return maximum profits to the shareholders. Simple as that. Do you advocate a socialist or communist regime?

illegal immigration>> The small businesses that Republicans champion the most are the ones that primarily employ illegals. You also need more enforcement = bigger govt.

porous borders >> See above

failing education >> Lack of parental involvement = poor education. There are other contributing factors as well (all hail WCPSS) but I do not see how a Republican (or Democrat) can help with that. We need to clean house.

war and occupation >> I am not even gonna touch that one

foreign oil addiction >> Thank God for those **** hippy liberals trying to promote alternative sources of energy

unsustainable entitlement spending >> Is your candidate advocating a communist-style re-education camp?? I think that would be a great idea.

and a crushing debt burden >> 1 billion a week in war started by GWB (a Republican).

Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems >> exactly how??

more bureaucracy cannot solve them >> agreed since it is a null hypothesis.

Instead, we need a smaller federal government that is focused on its Constitutional responsibilities >> I am just about cracking up now.

The average Republican is either so well off that he/she only cares about creation and protection of wealth at all costs, making much of what the para said a bunch of bull, or such a moron that he/she can't get past the grand BS.

Welcome to election season 2008.

I am sure Democrats are not much better! But that will be for another day.

[Icorpse]

And I am voting for PRICE again!

[DarylB]

And I am voting for PRICE again!

We were sure you'd be for Higher Price, that's a given!

[chaboard]

Please explain what you mean.

Wait …. maybe I can figure out what you mean.

Could it be ..... "Big government inevitably becomes a tool for corporate and special interests instead of a guardian of individual liberty"

No can't be that, as that is not dishonest.


Sure it is. The "inevitably" in there is demonstratably wrong.

Perhaps you don't think the big government federal intervention in Alabama and Mississippi in the early 60's (in BOTH the 1860s and 1960s) led to greater individual liberty....but then you'd be a either a moron or a racist....so we'll assume you just forgot about the positive effects of big government on individual liberty in those cases.

Or another example....I presume you're a conservative. Isn't it YOU guys that claim that throwing billions of dollars at the Pentagon - the biggest big government bureaucracry in the history of human civilization - brought down the Iron Curtain and the Soviet Union. Surely you see hat as a huge net increase in the world's supply of individual liberty? No?

Do you seriously think the small, limited federal government of, say, the 1830's could've defeated the Soviet empire?



How about ....... "Today, big government has given us significant problems: rising food prices, jobs going overseas, illegal immigration, porous borders, failing education, war and occupation, foreign oil addiction, unsustainable entitlement spending, and a crushing debt burden."

No can't be that either, as it is also not dishonest.


Of COURSE that's dishonest. Every single one of thoseproblems exists in states with smaller governments. Most have existed HERE to much greater degrees befoe FDR when we had smaller goverments.

The statement lists societal ills that exist with no correlation to size of government and blames them - with no evidence at all provided merely a bizarre unsubstantiated claim -
on that same size. That is FUNDAMENTALLY AND INTRINSICALLY dishonest.



Maybe this …. "Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems, more bureaucracy cannot solve them."

No, that certainly can't be what you mean, as that is not dishonest.


You're claiming a cause and effect relationship when you know **** well that there's not even any correlation! That is again, intrinsically and fundamentally dishonest.


Big government has more power than small government. It is certainly POSSIBLE for ythat power to be used to curtail liberty. But it is by no means "inevitable". It is just as possible for that power to be used to increase liberty. Id argue that that is exactly what happened from roughly 1935-1980, for example....government grew massively while liberty expanded greatly in the US.

A lot depends on who is wielding that power, what their motives are and how competent they are.

I will point out - in passing and admittedly tangentially - that the real problem is putting the reins of power of big government in the hands of people who claim to believe such power cannot possibly be wielded well.

[Icorpse]

And I am voting for PRICE again!

We were sure you'd be for Higher Price, that's a given!

When you are 75 and being hauled around in some $hitty third world country for cheap medical care 'cause you can no longer afford healthcare in the US, remember that you had the opportunity to support universal healthcare in your lifetime and you chose to look the other way. When your kids cannot get well paying jobs, do not blame the foreigners for seizing the opportunities given to them via the privileges of a high quality free/almost free education. Thank the small government crowd for screwing everyone over.

We need a smart government, which is not necessarily a small government. Unlike you, I see the difference and am willing to support any party/politician that promises AND DELIVERS the same.

[Icorpse]

Also for the record, if our good e-friend Joe C ever decided to run for any public office (and I hope he does someday), I'd support him 100%. I believe he is a Republican.

[DarylB]

Big government has more power than small government.

You're going to simply LOVE North Korea.....

[Caryatid]

Big government has more power than small government.

You're going to simply LOVE North Korea.....

Why is it that you simply can't process anything beyond "somebody I don't like (which seems to be almost everyone on CP) said it, therefore it must be bad"?

That statement isn't a value judgement on whether big government was BETTER than small government, it's purely a realist recognition that the bigger the government, the more power it has to effect the policies it wants.

[DarylB]

Big government has more power than small government.

You're going to simply LOVE North Korea.....

Why is it that you simply can't process anything beyond "somebody I don't like (which seems to be almost everyone on CP) said it, therefore it must be bad"?

That statement isn't a value judgement on whether big government was BETTER than small government, it's purely a realist recognition that the bigger the government, the more power it has to effect the policies it wants.
...and I guess what I'm adding is just the logical conclusion to your little treatise, that the totality of government is best experienced in North Korea, which should be quite to your liking. See, I do understand your position. Disagree with it totally, but understand.....

[Caryatid]

Jesus wept...it's like trying to reason with a Magic 8-Ball.

EDIT: And once again, let me point out that chaboard and I are in fact, two separate entities. I'm sure you think we were spawned in the same Soviet breeding tanks, but as with so, so many other things under the sun, you would be mistaken.

[rebmulp]

Why is it that Liberals trip all over issues trying to avoid facts.

Seems you all always forget that a candidate who opposes your candidate of choice is representing a different mindset. WOW .. what a shock that you would find fault with that candidate.

So what is your immediate response to a challenger?

Go automatically go into your “Reactive Liberalism” mode.

It is your right to love big government and support your Liberal candidate. And it is the right of others not to.

Do you blame Republicans and furthermore Conservatives for everything?

It is sad that in Liberal World (one of the two John Edwards Americas), Liberals and Democrats are perfect and never at fault. Is it only the “other side” that does bad things? Must be a strange place … “Your America”.

I live in OUR United States of America where it is a place of differing opinions and mindsets. A place where a candidate can express different points of views and actually attract open-minded citizens to listen, learn, and hopefully support based on what is best for the country, and not for ME ME ME.

So no matter what you all post, it is pretty much from the script and not surprising whatsoever. Seems as though local Liberals are reading the “book” as intended and doing your part on the blogs. They would be proud of you in DC knowing their “troops” are on the ground performing as brainwashed.

From my end: I am glad to know you all are actively engaged in politics. Although different than yours; I feel as passionate about my views and principles. I actually respect differing opinions, so no attacks from me.

I know you love Your America

But I love Our United States of America

And as a note: I will not be checking CP for a few days/week ..... must go make money to pay taxes to Big Government.

Have fun playing your part for the "DC machine".

[Icorpse]

Why is it that Liberals trip all over issues trying to avoid facts.


<snip>

From my end: I am glad to know you all are actively engaged in politics. Although different than yours; I feel as passionate about my views and principles. I actually respect differing opinions, so no attacks from me.


Have fun playing your part for the "DC machine".

We are doing our part here to stop idiots (Vernon Robinson types) and scumbags (Ernie Mc. Business types) from running for and winning public offices. I am sooooo...glad that you have come to appreciate our point of view. Like I have said before..."The average Republican is either so well off that he/she only cares about creation and protection of wealth at all costs, making much of what the para said a bunch of bull, or such a moron that he/she can't get past the grand BS." For the record, which one are you??

[chaboard]

Jesus wept...it's like trying to reason with a Magic 8-Ball.



Nah, the Magic 8-ball has more responses than Daryl.

[DarylB]

Jesus wept...it's like trying to reason with a Magic 8-Ball.



Nah, the Magic 8-ball has more responses than Daryl.
In all fairness, the Magic 8-ball was the creation of a staunch Republican, who had grown weary of giving the same answers to liberals over and over over again, and who still, with all the repetition, continuously failed to understand.

[FireofLiberty]

Hey, Icoprse, I'd like to address your comments...


Let me take a stab --

rising food prices >> demand for oil is rising across the world. Not much Govt can do about it except take over Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. You are surely not advocating that. Are you?

Ask yourself this question: why are food prices rising? The answer is inflation, among other factors like ethanol (which I'll get to below) when it comes to specific kinds of food. What I believe, and what BJ Lawson believes, is the solution to deal with inflation is a sound monetary policy. Right now, whenever the government needs money it either borrows or prints it. This is because we're spending way beyond our means. If you understand the law of supply and demand you know that when there's more of something the value goes down. As such, when there's more money printed there's more money in circulation and this the value of the dollar goes down. When the value of the dollar goes its purchasing power goes down and prices go up. Thus, we have inflation.

A little economics 101.

As far as oil goes, you are correct that the demand for oil is rising, but when it comes to gas prices, which is what directly concern us more than oil demand and oil prices, inflation is also the chief culprit behind them. If you look at the price of gas both 30 years ago and today in dollars it has increased, but in gold, a hard asset with stable value, prices have stayed flat.


jobs going overseas>> fruits of capitalism. The CEO/BODs of a company collectively have an obligation to return maximum profits to the shareholders. Simple as that. Do you advocate a socialist or communist regime?

Ask yourself why jobs go overseas. A lot of times it has to do with bad government policies. If there is a legitimate reason for jobs going overseas, then so be it, but if it's because the business creating those jobs was being over taxed and over regulated while they were still here than that is an avoidable problem. That's what BJ is talking about.


illegal immigration>> The small businesses that Republicans champion the most are the ones that primarily employ illegals. You also need more enforcement = bigger govt.

porous borders >> See above

I agree that small businesses employing illegal immigrants certainly encourages them to come here, but what about the other magnets that attract them here? How about the welfare state? How about the promise of free health care, free education, et al? All of those things are examples of big government and big government being the problem.


failing education >> Lack of parental involvement = poor education. There are other contributing factors as well (all hail WCPSS) but I do not see how a Republican (or Democrat) can help with that. We need to clean house.

I agree with this point here as well. Parental involvement certainly is lacking all too often these days and the government cannot force parents to be more involved with their kids education. That said, your comment that there are "other contributing factors" is putting it way too lightly. That's an understatement. There are, indeed, many other contributing factors and they are the main reason for the state of our public schools today.

The biggest contributing factor to our failing public school system is, yes, you guessed it -- the government! The federal government to be exact. The Department of Education and federal involvement in education in general is a huge burden on our public schools. This is BJ's stance as well. A bunch of bureaucrats in Washington have NO IDEA about the needs of individual schools and school systems. Every state is different, every school system is different and every school is different. "One size fits all" approaches have failed. Look at NCLB, for example. This is why our public schools should be funded and managed at state and local level, not at federal level.

As for cleaning house, yep, I agree there as well. But if you really agree that we should than David Price is a good place to start since he's been part of the problem for 22-years now ;)

By the way, out of curiosity what do you consider yourself? An independent?


war and occupation >> I am not even gonna touch that one

Okay, then I will. BJ does not fit the mold of today's Republican Party when it comes to war and foreign policy. He's in the Robert Taft/Old Right camp on these issues. In other words, what the Republican Party once stood for. He's against the war in Iraq. He's for a non-interventionist foreign policy. He rejects nation building. In short, on these issues he's no GWB.


foreign oil addiction >> Thank God for those **** hippy liberals trying to promote alternative sources of energy

Promoting alternative sources of energy is fine, so long as it's the free market, entrepreneurs and individuals doing it. Whenever the government tries to "promote alternative energy" funds are divided up for political reasons and it's often just for show to say "hey! Look at us! We're doing something!"

I'll give you the best example of how funds are divided up for political reasons: ethanol.

Ethanol is snake oil yet we spend billions on ethanol subsidies. Why? Because political from corn growing states, especially in the Midwest, use ethanol subsidies as a giant pork barrel to bring home the bacon to their constituents so they can keep getting reelected.

Meanwhile, ethanol is not economically viable or sustainable (at least not at present time), causes more smog when burned than gasoline, requires the massive cutting down of trees to grow more corn if it's ever going to put a dent in our oil dependence (and remember, trees take CO2 out of the air -- less trees, more carbon), causes prices to rise on products containing corn and diary products (especially milk), etc.

So my point is that if you let the government make these decisions and put them in charge of "promoting alternative energy" they'll spend money on stupid, unsustainable things for political reasons, and because they don't have a **** clue about energy and what's best.


unsustainable entitlement spending >> Is your candidate advocating a communist-style re-education camp?? I think that would be a great idea.

The entitlement problem is huge and yes, presently the entitlements are unsustainable and unless we do something about it we're in deep trouble. So would you rather our elected officials keep ignoring the problem or would you rather someone, like BJ Lawson, actually address it?

To understand the entitlement crisis I encourage you to watch these two videos of Comptroller General David Walker. He's our nation's top accountant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-16u9x3tfE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIgrxpp97OQ - Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXr_Ga_n0pY - Part 2

[FireofLiberty]

and a crushing debt burden >> 1 billion a week in war started by GWB (a Republican).

No disagreement here, from me or BJ. As I've said, BJ doesn't support the war and is very different than GWB on most issues.


Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems >> exactly how??

Well, considering I just did a point-by-point on how each of these problems was caused by our bloated bureaucratic government you should know now ;)


more bureaucracy cannot solve them >> agreed since it is a null hypothesis.

See above ;)


Instead, we need a smaller federal government that is focused on its Constitutional responsibilities >> I am just about cracking up now.

I wish I got the joke. I don't see what's funny about wanting to follow the Constitution? Have you ever read the Constitution? I'm gonna hope and guess so, but most American adults haven't sadly, so maybe you haven't. If you haven't (or even if you have since you may need to refresh yourself on it by the looks of things) I encourage you to do so and to pay special attention to Article I, Section 8. It contains the 22 things that the federal government can actually do. Anything that you don't see there it can't.


The average Republican is either so well off that he/she only cares about creation and protection of wealth at all costs, making much of what the para said a bunch of bull, or such a moron that he/she can't get past the grand BS.

Holy mean-spirited stereotypes Batman! ;) Well, I can tell you that I'm none of those things, and neither is BJ Lawson.


And I am voting for PRICE again!

Really!? Why!? After recognizing that we have a problem and the status quo isn't getting it done you're going to go and vote for the status quo... again? Not sure I get that logic, especially with Price being so bought and paid for by special and corporate interests:

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.asp?CID=N00002260&cycle=2008

Think he's representing you? Think again. He's representing all those lobbyists that keep him in power by donating to his campaigns. The same ones that come to his office wanting something from the big Washington grab bag.

I really do encourage you to go to BJ Lawson's website and take a closer look instead of being so quick to judge by a quick three paragraph summary on the front page of the website. You've already made some incorrect assumptions about him and it's clear you haven't taken the time to see where he's coming from and look at his positions on the issues in depth.

A great place to start is his campaign blog, where he writes his thoughts on various issues in length.

If you take the time to just look into him a little more and where he actually stands on issues and why he takes the stances he does I think you'll be surprised by what you learn and your opinion about him will change.

[chaboard]

Ask yourself this question: why are food prices rising? The answer is inflation, among other factors like ethanol (which I'll get to below) when it comes to specific kinds of food. What I believe, and what BJ Lawson believes, is the solution to deal with inflation is a sound monetary policy. Right now, whenever the government needs money it either borrows or prints it. This is because we're spending way beyond our means. If you understand the law of supply and demand you know that when there's more of something the value goes down. As such, when there's more money printed there's more money in circulation and this the value of the dollar goes down. When the value of the dollar goes its purchasing power goes down and prices go up. Thus, we have inflation.

A little economics 101.


Nice little theory, but it bears little relation to the real world. Out here in the real world it was an enormous EXPLOSION of government borrowing and government debt from 1980 through 1992 that coincided with a COLLAPSE OF INFLATION. And I'm pretty sure that if you were to graph the amount of money printed in the US vs. the inflation rate in the last 30 years you would see no correlation at all.

The problem with introductory courses like Econ 101 is that they're always too simplified to model reality....it's those grad level courses no one takes that actually start getting you there.

Besides, if the cause of inflation is excess spending and borrowing then the very last thing one should be advocating is the election of a Republican - the party that has stood for runaway borrowing (and little else) since 1980.



is also the chief culprit behind them. If you look at the price of gas both 30 years ago and today in dollars it has increased, but in gold, a hard asset with stable value, prices have stayed flat.


Here's a graph of the your "value of gold" (http://www.nma.org/enumerate/gold/gold.htm) over the last 30 years. You and I have entirely different ideas of the meaning of "stable".

Seriously, don't you gold bugs ever read History 101? When we were on the gold standard our economy was prone to much more frequent and wilder swings. We had bouts of incendiary inflation followed by long periods of crushing deflation. We sufffered through several horrendous Depressions.

[Icorpse]

and a crushing debt burden >> 1 billion a week in war started by GWB (a Republican).

No disagreement here, from me or BJ. As I've said, BJ doesn't support the war and is very different than GWB on most issues.


Since our bloated bureaucracy caused these problems >> exactly how??

Well, considering I just did a point-by-point on how each of these problems was caused by our bloated bureaucratic government you should know now ;)


more bureaucracy cannot solve them >> agreed since it is a null hypothesis.

See above ;)


Instead, we need a smaller federal government that is focused on its Constitutional responsibilities >> I am just about cracking up now.

I wish I got the joke. I don't see what's funny about wanting to follow the Constitution? Have you ever read the Constitution? I'm gonna hope and guess so, but most American adults haven't sadly, so maybe you haven't. If you haven't (or even if you have since you may need to refresh yourself on it by the looks of things) I encourage you to do so and to pay special attention to Article I, Section 8. It contains the 22 things that the federal government can actually do. Anything that you don't see there it can't.


The average Republican is either so well off that he/she only cares about creation and protection of wealth at all costs, making much of what the para said a bunch of bull, or such a moron that he/she can't get past the grand BS.

Holy mean-spirited stereotypes Batman! ;) Well, I can tell you that I'm none of those things, and neither is BJ Lawson.


And I am voting for PRICE again!

Really!? Why!? After recognizing that we have a problem and the status quo isn't getting it done you're going to go and vote for the status quo... again? Not sure I get that logic, especially with Price being so bought and paid for by special and corporate interests:

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.asp?CID=N00002260&cycle=2008

Think he's representing you? Think again. He's representing all those lobbyists that keep him in power by donating to his campaigns. The same ones that come to his office wanting something from the big Washington grab bag.

I really do encourage you to go to BJ Lawson's website and take a closer look instead of being so quick to judge by a quick three paragraph summary on the front page of the website. You've already made some incorrect assumptions about him and it's clear you haven't taken the time to see where he's coming from and look at his positions on the issues in depth.

A great place to start is his campaign blog, where he writes his thoughts on various issues in length.

If you take the time to just look into him a little more and where he actually stands on issues and why he takes the stances he does I think you'll be surprised by what you learn and your opinion about him will change.

Thank you for your response. I am an independent. I am also a progressive voter. I shall look into B.J. Lawson's candidacy seriously as you have suggested. However, based on what I have heard so far, he is no different than any other Southern Republican I have come across so far. I appreciate the fact that you actually tried to build a case for your candidate versus marginalizing. Welcome to CP and do post frequently.