Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Kevin Hamilton's Letter on Proposition 8 and the Mormon Church

Dear Friends,

In the aftermath of the recent election, we may find ourselves oddly
on the defensive regarding our support for the Yes on Proposition 8
cause. Our young people have been especially subject to mean-spirited
comments by high school friends and teachers. We have nothing to be
ashamed of. We did nothing wrong. In fact, we did everything that a
civic-minded American can and should do. I have put together a few
facts that help me to appreciate our position better. For example:

1. Mormons make up less than 2 percent of the population of
California. There are approximately 800,000 LDS out of a total total
population of approximately 34 million.Mormon voters were less than 5
percent of the yes vote.

2. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest
being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6 percent of the yes vote
and 2.4 percent of the total Proposition 8 vote.

3. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) donated
no money to the Yes on 8 campaign. Individual members of the church
were encouraged to support the Yes on 8 efforts and, exercising their
constitutional right to free speech, donated whatever they felt like
donating.

4. The No on 8 campaign raised more money than the Yes on 8 campaign.
Unofficial estimates put No on 8 at $38 million and Yes on 8 at $32
million, making it the most expensive non-presidential election in the
country.

5. Advertising messages for the Yes on 8 campaign are based on case
law and real-life situations. The No on 8 supporters have insisted
that the Yes on 8 messaging is based on lies. Every Yes on 8 claim is
supported.

6. The majority of our friends and neighbors voted Yes on 8. Los
Angeles County voted in favor of Yes on 8. Ventura County voted in
favor of Yes on 8.

7. African-Americans overwhelmingly supported Yes on 8. Exit polls
show that 70 percent of black voters chose Yes on 8. This was
interesting because the majority of these voters voted for
President-elect Obama. No on 8 supporters had assumed that Obama
voters would vote No on 8.

8. The majority of Latino voters voted Yes on 8. Exit polls show that
the majority of Latinos supported Yes on 8 and cited religious beliefs
(assumed to be primarily Catholic).

9. The Yes on 8 coalition was a broad spectrum of religious
organizations. Catholics, evangelicals, Protestants, Orthodox Jews,
Muslims -- all supported Yes on 8. It is estimated that there are 10
million Catholics and 10 million Protestants in California. Mormons
were a tiny fraction of the population represented by Yes on 8
coalition members.

10. Not all Mormons voted in favor of Proposition 8. Our faith accords
that each person be allowed to choose for him or herself. Church
leaders have asked members to treat other members with "civility,
respect and love," despite their differing views.

11. The church did not violate the principle of separation of church
and state. This principle is derived from the First Amendment to the
United States' Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof?" The phrase "separation of church and state", which
does not appear in the Constitution itself, is generally traced to an
1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, although it has since been quoted in
several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court in
recent years. The LDS Church is under no obligation to refrain from
participating in the political process to the extent permitted by law.
U.S. election law is very clear that churches may not endorse
candidates, but may support issues. The church has always been very
careful on this matter and occasionally (not often) chooses to support
causes that it feels to be of a moral nature.

12. Supporters of Proposition 8 did exactly what the Constitution
provides for all citizens: they exercised their First Amendment rights
to speak out on an issue that concerned them, make contributions to a
cause that they support and then vote in the regular electoral
process. For the most part, this seems to have been done in an open,
fair and civil way. Opponents of 8 have accused supporters of being
bigots, liars and worse. The fact is, we simply did what Americans do
-- we spoke up, we campaigned and we voted....

These are my personal opinions and thoughts; any errors are mine and
in no way reflect official church policy or doctrine.

Thanks,
Kevin Hamilton


MormonTimes.com is produced by the Deseret News in Salt Lake City, Utah.
It is not an official publication of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

What can Missouri do?

In Missouri each time someone buys a a fishing license the state gets
back $11 in federal aid. If a person buys a hunting license, it's
$17. Apparently the federal aid comes from federal excise taxes on
firearms, ammunition, archery equipment, fishing gear, and motorboat
fuel.

Firstly, why do we pay federal excise taxes on these things? Control
of these items is not within the Constitutional powers of the federal
government. (See Amendment 9 and 10 at
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rights1.asp#9)

And then secondly, why is the state on the federal dole? The lesson I
have learned from working for government and government agencies is
that whenever government gives something they want something in
return. For now it may only be reporting the number of licenses
purchased. Tomorrow it will be something else. We lose our
self-determination and independence whenever we take from government.

So what can Missouri do (and other states as well)? Opt out of
receiving federal aid and stop sending the federal government
information or being involved in federal programs. I'm sure this like
No Child Left Behind is just the tip of the federal ice berg.

This section from the Missouri Department of Conservation website is
very interesting. Read more at
http://www.mdc.mo.gov/regs/permitfaq.htm

3. Q. What can Missouri do to maximize the amount of federal aid we receive?

A. Every time anyone purchases (anywhere in the U.S.) a firearm,
ammunition, archery equipment, fishing gear, or motorboat fuel that
person pays a federal excise tax on that purchase.

An elaborate formula—based in part on hunting and fishing permit
sales—is used to determine how much each state gets back. When hunters
or anglers are exempt from purchasing permits, they are not counted in
the formula.

These funds accumulate in two programs: the Wildlife Restoration
Program (Pittman-Robertson Act) and the Sport Fish Restoration Program
(Dingell-Johnson / Wallop-Breau Act).

Every person who purchases a Missouri hunting or fishing permit is
counted as a paid permit holder, and we report the total number to the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The FWS then calculates how much of the
federal tax can be returned to Missouri, which is then used for
habitat restoration, wildlife management, boat ramp construction, and
other good works. In 2007, for each person who purchased a fishing
permit, Missouri received $11 in federal aid. For each person who
purchased a hunting permit, $17 in federal aid was returned to
Missouri.

Consequently, the more paid license holders Missouri can report, the
greater our potential return of federal funds. Landowners, lessees,
people over age 65 and others who receive no-cost permits or are
exempt cannot be counted.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

In Flanders Fields

By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army

IN FLANDERS FIELDS the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

McCrae's "In Flanders Fields" remains to this day one of the most
memorable war poems ever written. It is a lasting legacy of the
terrible battle in the Ypres salient in the spring of 1915. Here is
the story of the making of that poem as described by an author at
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/flanders.htm:

Although he had been a doctor for years and had served in the South
African War, it was impossible to get used to the suffering, the
screams, and the blood here, and Major John McCrae had seen and heard
enough in his dressing station to last him a lifetime.

As a surgeon attached to the 1st Field Artillery Brigade, Major
McCrae, who had joined the McGill faculty in 1900 after graduating
from the University of Toronto, had spent seventeen days treating
injured men -- Canadians, British, Indians, French, and Germans -- in
the Ypres salient.

It had been an ordeal that he had hardly thought possible. McCrae
later wrote of it:

"I wish I could embody on paper some of the varied sensations of that
seventeen days... Seventeen days of Hades! At the end of the first day
if anyone had told us we had to spend seventeen days there, we would
have folded our hands and said it could not have been done."

One death particularly affected McCrae. A young friend and former
student, Lieut. Alexis Helmer of Ottawa, had been killed by a shell
burst on 2 May 1915. Lieutenant Helmer was buried later that day in
the little cemetery outside McCrae's dressing station, and McCrae had
performed the funeral ceremony in the absence of the chaplain.

The next day, sitting on the back of an ambulance parked near the
dressing station beside the Canal de l'Yser, just a few hundred yards
north of Ypres, McCrae vented his anguish by composing a poem. The
major was no stranger to writing, having authored several medical
texts besides dabbling in poetry.

In the nearby cemetery, McCrae could see the wild poppies that sprang
up in the ditches in that part of Europe, and he spent twenty minutes
of precious rest time scribbling fifteen lines of verse in a notebook.

A young soldier watched him write it. Cyril Allinson, a twenty-two
year old sergeant-major, was delivering mail that day when he spotted
McCrae. The major looked up as Allinson approached, then went on
writing while the sergeant-major stood there quietly. "His face was
very tired but calm as we wrote," Allinson recalled. "He looked around
from time to time, his eyes straying to Helmer's grave."

When McCrae finished five minutes later, he took his mail from
Allinson and, without saying a word, handed his pad to the young NCO.
Allinson was moved by what he read:

"The poem was exactly an exact description of the scene in front of us
both. He used the word blow in that line because the poppies actually
were being blown that morning by a gentle east wind. It never occurred
to me at that time that it would ever be published. It seemed to me
just an exact description of the scene."

In fact, it was very nearly not published. Dissatisfied with it,
McCrae tossed the poem away, but a fellow officer retrieved it and
sent it to newspapers in England. The Spectator, in London, rejected
it, but Punch published it on 8 December 1915.

Monday, November 03, 2008

Free market versus centrally planned economy

"The free market works so much better than a centrally planned
economy," writes Congressman Ron Paul. "With central planning,
everything shifts from one's own judgment about safety, wisdom and
relative benefits of a behavior, to the discretion of government
bureaucrats. The question then becomes 'what can I get away with,'
and there will always be advantages for those who can afford lawyers
to find the loopholes. The result then is that bad behavior, that
would quickly fail under the free market, is propped up, protected and
perpetuated, and sometimes good behavior is actually discouraged."

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Joe and the Media

Let's See-----

A Guy named Joe, who happens to be a plumber with ambitions for a
bigger business, questioned and challenged a Guy named Barack, who
happens to be running for President of the US/Leader of the Free
World.

And within 24 hours the Media has given us more information about
Joe's life than they've give n us about Barack's life in the past 18
months.

Thanks to a diligent press corps, we now know about Joe's professional
licensing status, his income tax situation, his employment history,
his domestic squabbles, his voting record, everything associated with
his personal identity; his education. It's probably been reported
somewhere whether he wears boxers or briefs.

Thanks to a lazy press corps. We still don't know what grades Obama
made in college; how he got into Harvard; when he met Bill the bomber
Ayers; when he stopped doing illegal drugs; his medical history ;
whether he still smokes cigarettes; the extent of his affiliation with
socialist/communist organizations; why he's no longer a licensed
attorney; whether he lied on his Bar application;

Whether he qualify for a security clearance if he were just an average
Joe; what passport he used to travel to Pakistan in 1981; who his
ex-girlfriends are; whether he was or still is an Indonesian citizen;
why his Kenyan grandmother insists he was born there; whether he was
ever legally named Barry Soetoro or anything else besides Barack
Hussein Obama;

Why he needed the help of a crook to purchase his family home; where
he was on Nov. 6 and 7, 1 999; what the long-version of his birth
certificate says; why he helped an anti-American, pro-Islamic
candidate for Kenyan President against US interests; why he listened
to Rev. Wright's sermons for 20 years; how many times he took his kids
to a Rev. Wright sermon; what he actually did as chair of the
Annenberg Challenge; the depth of his relationship with ACORN.

Well, you get the idea.

But, really, I am SO relieved that the Mainstream Media has done its
job vetting Joe The Plumber, who is NOT running for public office, but
who had the AUDACITY to challenge Barack Hussein Obama, who wants my
vote for President of the United States of America."

-- author unknown

And now this from the Washington Post:

Joe the Plumber is not exactly a plumber, he's "not even close" to making the kind of money that would result in higher taxes from Democrat Barack Obama's proposals and has such an aversion to taxes that a lien was filed against him by the state of Ohio.

Such is the whirlwind of information that has come out about Joe Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio, since Republican John McCain made him famous in last night's debate. McCain mentioned him more than 20 times to use him as a symbol of hard-working Americans who would be hurt by Obama's tax policies. Obama and Wurzelbacher met earlier in the week in Toledo, where Wurzelbacher said Obama's plans to raise taxes on those making $250,000 a year or more would penalize him in his plans to buy the plumbing business for which he works.

Wurzelbacher since then has been on Fox News, interviewed by CBS's Katie Couric and appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America."


Monday, October 27, 2008

Warren Buffett's buying American

Warren Buffett is buying American and so should we. Buffett is putting
all his stock in American equities. However, for those of us who
can't afford today's good buys in stocks, we can still invest in
American goods and services. Each time we buy foreign goods at
WalMart or wherever we tip the balance of trade scale just a little
further in the direction of foreign countries and increase our debt to
them. We owe China and Saudi Arabia because we can't kick the habit
of cheap goods and foreign petroleum. Buying American would give our
economy a boost and save American jobs.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

From Independent Weekly: B.J. Lawson, the hybrid candidate

This article from the Independent Weekly web site was sent to you by fisherhouse.nonpartisan@blogger.com.

Comment from fisherhouse.nonpartisan@blogger.com:

B.J.Lawson supports the Constitution, small government, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. His homepage is http://www.lawsonforcongress.com/


http://localhost/gyrobase/Content?oid=266929

Posted on OCTOBER 15, 2008:

B.J. LAWSON, THE HYBRID CANDIDATE
Republican newcomer aims for disenfranchised David Price voters

By Lisa Sorg

[image-2]Ray McKinnon is the type of voter assumed to be a solid North Carolina Democrat: African-American, a youth pastor, Hillary Clinton-turned-Barack Obama supporter and lifelong party member. He lives in Orange County, which, with Durham and parts of Wake and Chatham counties, forms the Fourth Congressional District, the most progressive political jurisdiction in the state, and maybe south of the Mason-Dixon line.

In 2006, McKinnon voted for U.S. Rep. David Price, the longtime Democratic incumbent, and likely would have again this fall had he not met B.J. Lawson.

McKinnon was campaigning for Clinton earlier this year in Hillsborough when he met Lawson. The Republican challenger handed McKinnon a pocket-sized copy of the U.S. Constitution and shortly afterward, Lawson had a convert.

"I probably would not have considered a Republican, because I don't think Republicans are friends to civil liberties," said McKinnon, who now runs the blog demsforlawson.com and is a Lawson campaign field organizer.

In 2001, Price, like most of Congress, voted for the USA PATRIOT Act, which gave the Bush administration the green light to mow over fundamental constitutional protections, including those prohibiting illegal search and seizure and guaranteeing freedom of speech and assembly. Although four years later Price opposed reauthorizing existing provisions in the act, for McKinnon, Price's original vote was a deal-breaker.

Press play to begin Listen to the complete Lawson-Price debate (1:04, recorded at UNC-CH Oct. 14) "B.J. and I don't agree on everything, but I agree with him more than Price," said McKinnon, who until recently was unaware of Price's stance on the legislation. "I'm going to vote my principles. And B.J. is the only Republican I'm voting for."

In an election year largely unfavorable to Republicans, Lawson is running an ambitious campaign to unseat an entrenched veteran congressman who, despite voting for many progressive causes in his 20 years on Capitol Hill, has been criticized by some Democrats for representing Washington over his constituents.

An odd amalgam of progressive stances and Libertarianism, Lawson has hammered his opponent on his support for controversial anti-civil liberties legislation, his tacit approval of Homeland Security's proposed National Agro and Bio-Defense Facility and, by extension, his campaign largesse partially padded by defense contractors.

Among Republicans, Lawson is somewhat of an outlier. He opposes the death penalty, a constitutional amendment on same-sex marriage and the "unrelenting globalism driven by corporate interests." His viewpoints may appeal to disillusioned Republicans, but they risk alienating the old guard, so much so that in the primary, many party insiders actively supported Lawson's opponent, the far-right candidate Augustus Cho.

Yet Lawson has raised nearly a half-million dollars in campaign contributions, even without major support from the party establishment. Last week, Ron Paul gave him props in an e-mail to his supporters, generating $170,000 in online contributions for Lawson in one day—and in total, $230,000.

Money, charisma and a resonating message: The 34-year-old Lawson is the first GOP candidate to run a viable campaign against Price since Fred Heineman narrowly defeated the Democrat during the Republican Revolution of 1994. (Price reclaimed his seat two years later.)

With less than three weeks until the election, Lawson may not have enough time to get his message across to win. Jack Sanders, chairman of the Orange County Democratic Party, said that while sometimes Price is "more centrist than some Democrats may prefer," the party faithful will vote for the congressman.

But by peeling off disenfranchised members of both parties, plus courting a few protest votes, Lawson could receive more than 37 percent of the vote, the most ballots cast for a GOP candidate since 2000. With those numbers, even a loss would be an enormous achievement for a Republican in the Fourth District.

"B.J.'s on the right side of history," said McKinnon. "I think people are underestimating him."

At the Cary VFW Hall last month, Lawson hosted a Freedom Barbecue and fundraiser. In the parking lot, cars were emblazoned with Ron Paul bumper stickers—and a few McCains—while inside, Lawson supporters wore T-shirts that read "Every Day is Constitution Day."

After a prayer and group sing of "God Bless America," Lawson took the stage. Dressed neatly in a pine-green polo shirt and khaki pants, his hair cut short above the ears, he outlined what he sees as America's greatest challenges—while criticizing mainstream political discourse. "We've been at war since my kids were born. We're $9.6 trillion in debt. We're bailing out Freddie and Fannie and Lehman [Brothers]. And all we can think about is dresses and shoes and lipstick on pigs."

"We have a document," he went on, pulling a copy of the U.S. Constitution out of his pocket, "that tells Congress how to behave. We need to hold our representatives accountable. It's not about putting partisan labels on folks."

The Republican label, especially this year, can be detrimental in the Fourth District. Lawson, while a lifelong member of the GOP, has distanced himself from the party mainstream.

"The biggest problem is the R next to his name," said Marc Conaghan, a Lawson campaign volunteer (a Scottish citizen, he can't vote). "People are judging by party affiliation instead of looking at his principles."

In one breath, his principles echo the free-market right: the elimination of federal income tax and "onerous" regulations, and the establishment of health care savings accounts instead of universal health insurance. Yet, at times, Lawson sounds like a true blue progressive, opposing the war in Iraq—and the war on drugs—and calling for local, sustainable communities.

Former Democrat Donald Van Beveren of Chapel Hill is supporting Lawson and attended his fundraiser. "He has strong stands on the war, the monetary system, civil liberties," said Van Beveren, who is registered as unaffiliated.

[image-3]

Several elected Republicans attended Lawson's shindig—Cary Town Councilman Don Franz, Holly Springs Mayor Dick Sears and state Rep. Marilyn Avila—but it's well known that many traditional party operatives have withheld their support.

Martha Jenkins, Fourth District Congressional chairwoman for the Republican Party, declined to be interviewed for this story. According to Lawson, she told him not to run for office. In Durham, Melodie Parrish resigned as GOP chair after Cho lost the primary.

"I have a lot of hostility toward the misguided ideas and people who are pushing the Republican party off the cliff," Lawson said. "But I look at this pragmatically. I'm a Republican. I want to make a difference, and we're in a two-party system. I want to reform from within. "

Some Republicans are taking note. Wake County GOP Chairman David Robinson said his group endorsed Lawson unanimously. "B.J. has new ideas and his message has matured over time. His focus is very much on limiting the federal government. He's energized a younger crowd, and that's good for us."

David Smudski, who replaced Parrish as Durham County GOP chair, offered guarded praise. "He's not traditional, but he is different than what a Democrat would offer."

Lawson grew up in Lakeland, Fla., one of two children. His family is solid Republican, and Lawson phone-banked for the elder George Bush in the late 1980s. In 1992, Lawson enrolled at Duke University, in part to be closer to his high school sweetheart, JoLynn—now his wife—who was attending Furman in South Carolina. After receiving his bachelor's degree in biomedical and electrical engineering, he was accepted into Duke medical school. During his training, Lawson became frustrated with the difficulty of getting timely and accurate patient data, and six months into his neurosurgery residency, he left. On New Year's Eve 2000, Lawson handed over his patient cards to the chief resident at Durham Regional Hospital and went on to co-found a hospital software company, MercuryMD. The software delivers patient information to a doctor's or nurse's PDA or other handheld device.

"He left the security of residency for the freedom of what he wanted to do," said Galen Wagner, an associate professor of medicine at Duke. "He went from engineering to medicine to politics. It takes courage to say, 'I'm going to take the risk for the freedom to follow my own interests.'"

Lawson and fellow ex-resident Alan Ying sold MercuryMD to Thomson, a Canadian company, in 2006. The next summer, Lawson and his wife traveled to China, where he re-read the U.S. Constitution on the Internet from his Shanghai hotel.

Lawson had already experienced a political epiphany by watching a YouTube video of Ron Paul in the South Carolina debate, but in rereading the Constitution "in the context of being in China and as a thinking adult," Lawson said, he realized how far America had strayed from its founding documents.

Back in Raleigh, he joined other Paul supporters in compiling "Liberty Packs"—copies of the Constitution, Paul DVDs and printouts of position statements—and distributing them at the state fair. "It was so amazing to see how easy it was to give someone a copy of the Constitution. People are hungry for an honest discussion."

Last fall, Lawson decided to run for office and chose Price as his target. "He gets 65 percent of the vote without trying, and the Republicans never mount a challenge," he said. "But I began to realize Price is not serving the people."

Mark Granville, who left SAS to join MercuryMD and still works for the parent company, said Lawson "isn't a typical politician, and that's frightening to people if it's not their style." A lifelong Republican, Granville is disillusioned with the GOP, and this year, his votes will show it: "B.J.'s the only Republican I'll vote for this time."

A line tailed outside the room at the Museum of Life and Science in Durham, where Price was hosting a Town Hall meeting with his constituents. But on this summer evening, the crowd was angry. They called for Price to lead the legislative charge to end the war in Iraq—he had voted against it—and to impeach Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. They wanted an explanation of Price's stance on the NBAF and his vote on civil liberties legislation, including HR 1955, the cumbersomely named Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.

Its intent is ostensibly to establish both a 10-member commission to "examine and report upon the facts of ... homegrown terrorism" and a Center for Excellence at a U.S. university to study the roots of terrorism and to "conduct a survey" of foreign countries' methods of terrorism prevention. However, the bill's language is nebulous, leaving open what qualifies as an extremist belief system, and implying that the Internet is a dangerous pipeline for terrorist-related propaganda, raising concerns about censorship and surveillance. U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, also known to carry the Constitution in his pocket, calls it the "thought crimes bill" because it focuses on what people might do, rather than what they have done.

Lawson approached the mic. "I'm your Republican opponent. Do you read these pieces of legislation before signing them?"

"This is not a political event," Price replied sharply. "Of course I've read the bills. And I've voted for amendments on some and against others."

[image-4]

Civil liberties have become a litmus test issue for voters. Margaret Misch, a member of the Orange County Bill of Rights Defense Committee and a prominent civil liberties watchdog, has met several times with Price about such legislation. And most of the time she's been disappointed. "I'm holding my nose and voting for David Price," she said. "He's not the worst one, but he's not always been where we needed him to be."

After voting for the PATRIOT Act, in 2005, Price opposed extending several of its provisions, which were due to expire. He opposed retroactive immunity for telecom companies that, with Bush's blessing, helped spy on Americans.

However, Price voted for HR 1955, which would cost an estimated $24 million through 2012 to implement. Civil liberties protections are included in the bill, but are subject to internal review, not independent oversight.

Campaign spokesman Phil Feagan said the bill merely sets up a commission and "is not setting forth law."

Misch is unconvinced. "He defended his vote and dismissed our concerns about the First and Fourth Amendments." She read from a letter Price wrote her. "He justified it as simply attempting to 'foster our understanding of the process by which individuals in the U.S. are or might be led down the terrorist path.'"

Price's centrist stances may stem from his need to cater to conservative and moderate Democrats in western Wake County, where Lawson lives.

"Price is extremely cautious," Misch added. "He will not be out front where it's conspicuous to take a stand."

Yet even in Wake County, many people oppose the bio lab proposed in Butner—including U.S. Rep. Brad Miller, who reversed himself after public outcry about the project. Dozens of people turned out at Price's town hall meeting to complain about his support for Homeland Security's proposal. A month earlier, the department had issued a 1,000-page environmental analysis of the proposed sites, a document rife with missing data. NBAF opponents pummeled Price with questions, and in return, he gave mushy answers: "I'm going to ask very tough questions about NBAF. But I'm not going to develop a firm opinion about it until the facts are in."

David Krabbe, who lives near Rougemont, has fought the NBAF for more than a year. "I'm furious with David Price over his support for this facility. He's clueless," Krabbe said, adding that last month Price erroneously stated in a town hall meeting the number and type of diseases that would be studied at the facility. "Homeland Security doesn't have a monopoly on information. I will vote for B.J."

Price has a powerful position holding the purse strings as the chairman of the House Appropriations Subcomittee on Homeland Security. He's used his leverage to lure a $15 million Homeland Security grant to UNC to study natural disasters in coastal areas, but his coziness with the department and at least $59,000 in campaign contributions this election cycle (as of June 30) from the defense industry have prompted some constituents to wonder about insiders' influence.

Feagan justified Price's stance by saying he "has to walk a fine line and reserve judgment" as the subcommittee chairman. "He takes his role as chairman very seriously, and it's not for him to advocate or oppose any specific site."

Price's conflict only feeds criticism that he favors Washington—in this case, the subcommittee and its interests—over those who elected him.

"He's taken honorable positions in the past, but he's siding with big business," Krabbe said. "He has taken his base and district for granted."

Krabbe is so disgruntled with Price that he is voting for Lawson despite their differences on abortion; Krabbe is pro-choice. Lawson is not and, like many Republicans, supports overturning Roe v. Wade. He has said abortion rights should be a state issue, not a federal one.

"I disagree with B.J. about abortion," said Krabbe. "I'm disappointed with that. But he's really intelligent and I have a lot of respect for him."

"Abortion is the most effective splinter issue we have," Lawson said. "Because I might believe life begins at conception, that doesn't mean I want helpless women dying from back-alley abortions.

"What I object to is that the Supreme Court exceeded its constitutional authority to set a blanket ruling over a very personal issue. But as a physician, my goal is not to have the government in every exam room."

However, critics point out not only that the court's decision has held for 35 years, but there are logistical and civil rights issues facing women living in states where abortion would be illegal.

It is on a few key progressive issues on which Price has been strong—abortion, health care and federal funding of social services—where Lawson risks losing voters he would need to beat him.

"I disagree with B.J. in that I believe it's very important not to think that the free market can handle anything," said McKinnon, the Orange County Democrat and Obama supporter.

But as a pro-life Democrat, he often votes for candidates who hold opposite views on abortion; he's not a single-issue voter. "I'm not going to give my vote just to pro-life candidates. I'm for a candidate who is going to represent me, who is accessible. I think David Price is a great guy, but it's time to move on."

Editor's Note: A debate between B.J. Lawson and David Price was happening at press time. Check our Elections section for debate coverage, candidate questionnaires and updates on campaign finance reports.