Who We Like – SC 4th Congressional

Back in the summer of 2008, I began looking intently to June 8th 2010. I was tired of Inglis’ politics and wanted change.

I began doing the research to see what it would take to mount a serious campaign against Inglis. This is no secret to the congressman, I had been one of his most vocal critics since 2007.  Needless to say, during this research, I soon realized I didn’t have the resources at my disposal.

I was approached by members of Jeffrey’s (not Christina or family) camp in November 2008 and was asked to consider not running and backing her. I responded with a quick no.  It was nothing personal against Jeffrey, I had many conversations with her and felt like she was a great person, but my gut said no.

During early months of 2009, I was able to interview most of the candidates and developed my personal opinions on who I liked in the race.

I decided that Andrew Smart was the way to go in April. He was young, intelligent, energetic and I liked his positions on the issues. Unfortunately, that didn’t work out quite like I had hoped.

So here’s my personal thoughts on each of the candidates.

Bob Inglis

The incumbent. My disagreement over policy has long been an issue. Unfortunatley, I began to discover that leadership was not a strong quality of Mr. Inglis either.

I say this because he spent tax payer money to research immigration, and develop his 5 points on immigration that he still talks about, but has never stepped up to he plate to introduce a bill. During many of his Let’s Talk forums, he gave the impression he supported amnesty, but was spared voting on it when it died in the Senate.

He claimed he was going to introduce an alternative health care bill, but never did.  But he did introduce a “Repeal It” bill.

Inglis’ votes to limit the freedoms of individuals (He voted to extend the Patriot Act and warrantless wire tapping), unfunded mandates like the Real ID that was embedded into the Tsunami Aid Bill, TARP, and his energy policies which have created many questions in itself.

Again, it is nothing personal against Inglis, it is about his positions.  I hope he and his team understand this.

Trey Gowdy

I was honestly surprised to see Gowdy jump in this race, probably just as much as Inglis was.  Most of our sources and rumors indicated that Gowdy would be making a run for Attorney General.  Gowdy would have made an excellent AG and I probably would have supported him 100%.

Gowdy was one of the candidates we were never able to settle down on an interview.  And it wasn’t his fault.  I had consulted with the campaign and discussed opportunities, but I was never able to work it into my work schedule.  My apologies to Gowdy up front and my readers.

All along, one of my concerns, drawbacks on Gowdy was his support of McCain in the 2008 primaries.  I understand and respect Gowdy’s reasoning, but it was of concern.  Gowdy is a prosecutor and I’m not sure how effective that will translate into working for votes in Congress.

Christina Jeffrey

Christina Jeffrey talks all the right points to attract a Tea Party activist or even a Ron Paul supporter.  What bugged me through the election cycle is her mannerisms and the several lies she was caught in.  The biggest of which was who she supported for President in 2008.  In a debate, she said she voted for Duncan Hunter, and when questioned on it later, she stated she voted for Huckabee and even worked for Rudy Giuliani.  A wild stretch considering her “most conservative” candidate monicker.

Jeffrey claims she not the political establishment and she’s different because she’s a constitutional scholar.  She’s also been a community organizer by her own accounts, working on multiple campaigns with Get out the Vote efforts and working in the county party.  Lastly, according to her profile, she’s never been in a position of authority.  All of her experience is in the classroom teaching constitutional theory.  She has not managed budgets or personnel.  All of this sounds to much like our current president, Barack Obama, and most of us agree all of these supposed great attributes have failed horribly.

Dave Thomas

With all due respect to Sen. David Thomas, when he announced, I choked.  His claims to be the conservative choice and a jobs congressman were all laughable.  He then goes on to say that when elected, he will establish a commission with leaders across multiple states to determine a solution to the nations financial problems.  I’m really rolling on the floor now, Why?

In the spring of 2009, Thomas and 4 other leaders held a press conference in Spartanburg telling people they were going to roll up their sleeves and fight the stimulus.  Unfortunately, Thomas didn’t keep he sleeves up long, as he rolled over and voted to take all of it.  Sources tell us he was even instrumental in getting votes to take the money.

And in regards to fixing the nations problems, what has he done to reduce the size of SC’s $21 billion dollar budget and not raise fees and taxes on its citizens?

Jim Lee

When speaking with each of the candidate, Lee came across as the most candid.  He also spent the most time with us, 3 hours in our interview, and he didn’t beat around the bush when answering questions.  Jim has been very humble and appreciative of the support he has received and he doesn’t belittle his opponents or critics.

Jim is a supporter of the enumerated powers act and also provides a solution for the social security crisis.   Jim supports the enforcing of our existing immigration laws to solve the illegal immigration crisis  and believes the private sector can solve the health care crisis, developing a patient centered patient led system.

Jim has the experience of managing projects and budgets and has a history of working with teams to find the best solution.  He can be influential too, which is also a great quality.

Jim is the only veteran, so he understands the needs of our servicemen, and he has the real world experience some of the others do not.

My Vote

I voted absentee today, casting my vote for Jim Lee.  I encourage you to do the same, voting for a candidate who will listen to his constituents and will not talk down to you. Voting for a candidate who has ran a clean campaign on the smallest budget.  A campaign for “We the People”.  A candidate who is candid and will fight for you in D.C.