I’m hoping that this post actually turns out debate from a Larry Kissell supporter, because I think I speak for everyone when I say that I’m tired of faceless people name calling and ducking questions every time they are confronted with one. So I’m going to tell you why Larry Kissell does not represent the 8th district of North Carolina, and how his victory could lead us down a reckless path.
First, and most importantly, is Mr. Kissell’s reckless Iraq strategy. He has always proposed that we be out of Iraq by the end of 2006. However, perhaps Mr. Kissell fails to realize that he has little he can do from his seat in the House of Representatives to make this a reality. With a position so strong, Mr. Kissell must know that there is one way, and only one way that the House can really end this conflict. To have his dream of bringing all American troops out of Iraq come to fruition, Kissell would have to ask the Congress to use the power of the purse, and cut off funding for our troops. Not exactly how someone would vote that states that “Supporting our troops is more than just a bumper sticker.” The House can not pass a resolution that says, “Iraqi Conflict Over, Time to Go”, and hope that the President McCain actually brings them home because of said resolution. To deliver on his promise, would Mr. Kissell be willing to turn his back on servicemen and women, and so many others in our district that have ties to them? Robin Hayes voted in favor of H.R. 2207, which funded our troops, and didn’t try to pull them out of duty before the full mission was accomplished. A Kissell election could set a dangerous precedent for the 8th district, and I don’t know anyone (in their right mind), that would stand behind a Congressman who wouldn’t fund the troops. With the House and this issue, there is only one way to end the fighting, and if Kissell is as committed as his website says he is, who knows where that vote would go.
Also, on his website, there are no policy suggestions during his rant about the economy and how Robin Hayes isn’t doing well on it. Anyone can run for office on a “That guys doing a bad job” campaign, but it takes a real leader to stand above the others and propose policies and plans of action to take care of problems. How does Mr. Kissell think we should handle the economy? Higher taxes? More government regulation? During a Congressional Sub-Committee hearing a Democratic Congressman told an Oil Executive that they couldn’t expect to make tons of money and have no one notice, and that somehow they were wrong. I’m not standing up for big oil here, and never will, but this is America, and the markets are and should always be free from regulation. I want to hear a plan. An election this costly should not be decided because one candidate can stand in front of a group of people and proclaim, “I wouldn’t do the bad things Robin does!” If I ever sought public office, you can beat I’d have a pile full of policies holding my soapbox up. I wish others would say the same, its hard to tell what some people are standing on, and what they stand for.
I’m open to rebuttal, and other people’s thoughts on these and other issues. In a week or so, I’ll come back with part 2, and we’ll look at Kissell’s other plans, or lack thereof. Please, if you’re going to say something, let’s try something new, like examining the issues. Hiding behind a fake name and responding in incoherent, explicit babble is a waste of time.
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Subscribe via E-mail
34 responses so far ↓
1 Justin Thibault // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Caleb - Thanks.
Also, I’d like to know where Kissell is getting this 62,000 jobs lost in the 8th District number he keeps touting. I can’t seem to find it anywhere except by his own assertion.
2 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
3 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
4 Caleb Seamone // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:50 pm
http://www.hayes.house.gov/IssuesLegislation.asp
Look at them for yourself, in more words than Kissell could muster. There you can read about the things Hayes has done, and what he believes. Where are all of the descriptions of legislation that Kissell would have supported, or will sponsor? Hayes has 5 times the info on that site than Kissell does on his. So there you have it, Hayes’ plans. I’m still waiting on Kissell’s. Know you’re stuck. Happy Reading.
5 Caleb Seamone // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Now*
6 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
7 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
8 barden // Jul 18, 2008 at 1:07 pm
this post is dumb.
also, not hiding behind an alias.
9 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
10 Caleb Seamone // Jul 18, 2008 at 1:15 pm
At least Robin Hayes stands for something, and shows everyone what that is. Signs to tell you’re winning an argument with a liberal: You get called young and dumb, and reduce them to cursing babble, that doesn’t touch on any issue or policy proposal. You hide behind a name because you know you have nothing else to stand on.
Refer to my argument on this in an earlier post, its impossible for a Congress to bring to the floor even 20% of the bills that are referred to committee. My party isn’t the party asking the government for a shovel. The Democratic Party believes the government should do everything for them. I refuse to live in a world where I rely on someone else to take care of me. You choose to drive your Green Car, so don’t complain when you have to drive to fill it up. As for me, I’m hopping in my gas guzzler and heading to the beach soon, before the left leaning government places some regulation on weekend travel to reduce a carbon footprint. I think I “get” more than you do, which is sad. I’m living in the real world, one where there are bad men that we have to fight, and one where a person should know his own self worth without the government remind him with a check for this and that every week. You still haven’t said anything about the policies, which just shows how little you know about them. Catch me soon, because once I hit the road, politics is off my mind for the day.
11 Justin Thibault // Jul 18, 2008 at 1:44 pm
JTaL - Last warning on the profanity.
12 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
13 Justin Thibault // Jul 18, 2008 at 2:36 pm
JTUaL -
So, you’re insisting the reelecting Hayes will help Bush even when Bush is no longer in office?
This is a 2008 Election thread.
Also, saying that Hayes=Bush will not really help your case with Cabarrus voters; because I could very easily say that Kissell=Pelosi. Kissell is no blue dog.
14 Justin Thibault // Jul 18, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Barden - Thanks for your thoughtful and insightful comment.
15 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
16 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
17 JustThrewUpaLittle // Jul 18, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Comment Deleted - see details here
18 Justin Thibault // Jul 18, 2008 at 4:03 pm
JTUaL - You had your warning about being vulgar. You’ll get your vowels back in 48 hours.
19 barden // Jul 18, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Short and concise is more like it.
And as for you changing the results of the poll, do you republicans have to rig every election?
20 Steve Smith // Jul 18, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Justin
I do have problems with the way Hayes changed his votes on the trade issues. That being said, his constituent services are excellent and he voted to overide the veto of the Medicare Bill. He has got a fight on his hands this time with Kissell. Kissell will get the big bucks this time from moveon.org and People for the American Way. The War in Iraq is not the defining issue. It is the economy this time and gas prices.
21 Sam // Jul 18, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Was overriding the Medicare veto a good thing?
22 Bob Carruth // Jul 18, 2008 at 10:47 pm
Steve hit the nail on the head.
Moveon.org has poured billions into defeating every conservative and every Republican they can find. Why? Because they have the money.
Ever do any research to find out the fat cat billionaire liberal that is funding Moveon? IF you answered George Soros, then move to the front of the line. Google him if you don’t know who he is. I am still waiting for someone to uncover how much he has hedged on petroleum futures.
23 Brad Spry // Jul 19, 2008 at 12:16 am
Kissell’s reckless Iraq strategy? What’s more reckless than sending the country to war under false pretenses?
24 Justin Thibault // Jul 19, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Sam -
Yes. Republicans haven’t gotten Health Care right.
Steve -
I don’t - as long he made the right decision in the end.
Bob -
Stop it. You’re bending too many liberal fantasies that they are fighting the man.
Barden -
That depends on who was stuffing the ballot box.
Brad -
I know you’re Unaffiliated; but I think you should run for Chairman of the Flux-Capacitor Party. That way, we can have politicians devoted to time-traveling our way out of war, etc.
I don’t think that anyone disagrees that we should extricate ourselves from combat in Iraq. The question isn’t when; but how. Do we do it because Nancy Pelosi says so…which will be the only reason that Larry Kissell does anything? Or do we do it taking into account our interests in the region and the safety of our troops (An Obama-style rapid pullout will leave our forces very vulnerable)
Voting for Kissell because, two terms ago, Hayes voted to authorize force in Iraq is a less credible reason than voting for Kissell because you like his campy, little song…which was a reason someone gave me in 2006.
25 Brad Spry // Jul 19, 2008 at 7:15 pm
We do it because the Iraqi Prime Minister has asked us to do it. Queue sound of McCain balloons deflating. I am confident President Obama will listen to U.S. Commanders on logistics. It’s going to be great having someone who is smart and self-aware for president.
26 Justin Thibault // Jul 19, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Brad - The only thing more disastrous for our standing in the world than Bush’s Third Term would be Carter’s Second.
Having foreign leaders dictate major US troop movements sounds rather Carteresque to me.
27 Brad Spry // Jul 20, 2008 at 12:40 am
Iraq has a sovereign government. They want us out in a realistic, timely fashion. It’s their country, not ours. It’s their natural resources, not ours. Their oil, their uranium, their land; it’s not ours to control and take advantage of, but it’s too late for that isn’t it? Iraq’s strategic location in the middle east is not ours. Let’s have a honest discussion.
28 Justin Thibault // Jul 20, 2008 at 11:28 am
Brad -
That’s what Caleb was trying to do. The way that the Congress is setup is that domestic policy (spending, taxation, etc.) comes from the House of Reps and foreign policy (treaties, confirmation of ambassadors, etc.) comes from the Senate. The only way that a Representative can affect Iraq policy is to pull funding for it. With the legions of troops we have on the ground now, that can endanger them. You dodged Caleb’s question by bringing up decisions that were a factor in the last two elections (20o4 and 2006). We can’t uninvade Iraq…unless the Flux-Capacitor Party meets its goal of universal time travel for everyone.
Also, I don’t think that you are trying to have an “honest” conversation when you bring up our “taking” of their resources. If we wanted to take them - we certainly had the power…but we don’t have the will. For that, I’m thankful.
The fact of the matter is that the Iraqi PM was doing what he was expected to do, politically. Of course he’s going to say that he wants American troops out ASAP; because nobody wants foreign troops in their land and this guy has elections there to win. However, he doesn’t have to answer to the families whose sons and daughters would be endangered by a hasty retreat. It’s important to complete the mission in Iraq in a way that doesn’t unnecessarily endanger our troops by rushing out to meet an artificial deadline from the staff of a Junior Senator dilettante.
29 Nick // Jul 21, 2008 at 3:50 pm
While I am not a Cabarrus County resident, I find the arguments for the Iraq war humorous that suggest the same tired Fox News Sunday talking points.
I have a suggestion to you two republicans. How about posting a real neutral post asking Democrats to defend their position for Kissell? No hidden jabs, no outlandish talking points aimed to rile people up. Otherwise real spirited debate is just confusing and outright silly to claim.
But from the liberal hippie handbook here’s my 2 pennies…
Voting against monies for the war does not mean you stop the troops supplies NOW. Duh. I would hope you all know how the fiscal budget works and how the Pentagon runs conflicts. You are not suggesting our great military minds are planning and holding their tactics at the whims of Congress’ spending habits? That would be quiet an insult. That idea was to close the running faucet on the endless conflict that was Iraq, and by doing so force military commanders to have to set a deadline, not impose one the next day.
And wouldn’t more sons and daughters, or fathers and mothers, be at risk if we kept soldiers in Iraq for McCain’s minimum 8 more years? Remind me again whats the highest mathematical rate of causalities you get from zero?
forgive the intrusion, but you all have a nice week now.
30 Brad Spry // Jul 21, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Pulling funding is not the only way a representative can affect Iraq policy. Representatives can also appropriate funding for a safe withdrawal.
If we’re not taking their resources, then why did the U.S. State Department say it provided advisers to help draft oil contracts? Also, why did the U.S. government “encourage” the Iraqi government to transfer out 500 tons of “yellowcake” uranium?
31 Justin Thibault // Jul 21, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Nick - Welcome.
Well, first it would be nice to have neutral reporting on the MSM. Everyone has a bias - Caleb was being clear about his.
First, I wrote the tag line on the blog. Caleb wrote the article.
Second, can liberals only debate when the other side is restricted and they have free reign. Example: your grousing about “Fox News talking points”. Hint, one of the two republicans you’re complaining about NPR-to-Fox consumption ratio is about 100-to-1…a little lower when sitting in airports.
Sounds nice until you get to…
This shows where you miss the point.
The greatest disadvantage we have to our enemy is that they know nearly everything about us; but they evolve quickly. If we were to publish a detailed drawdown plan - then they could react accordingly.
I’m willing to give MY FRIENDS who are getting shot at over there any element of surprise I can against the godless savages they’re fighting.
No intrusion.
Welcome.
32 Justin Thibault // Jul 21, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Brad - For your half-baked cutting funding argument - see above. We didn’t have an exit strategy for enforcing UN no-fly zones while UN leadership was profiting from the “Oil for Food” program.
Also, buying oil from the Iraqis is completely different than “taking it”.
Finally, I’ll go easy on the yellowcake argument because I make a living around people who’ve been around radioactive stuff and just leave it at if you’re moving around something like yellowcake - you don’t give out “World Tour” t-shirts.
33 Caleb Seamone // Jul 21, 2008 at 6:56 pm
On a blog such as this, where anyone can join and contribute, I don’t feel the need to post neutrally and ask for others to explain their views. They are more than welcome to sign up and post their own personal reply in what ever form they choose. I’m not a news reporter, so I don’t feel the need to hide my feelings. I’d ask Kissell to his face if he would vote to cut funding, but something tells me I won’t get that opportunity. Its not a talking point, just a fact about a house member’s capacity to really end this conflict.
34 Justin Thibault // Jul 21, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Caleb -
Which makes me superior to the NYT in the sense of inclusiveness.
Leave a Comment