AAC Blog
Wilmington - North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr and Democratic challenger Elaine Marshall quickly diverged from each other Saturday on how the government should handle the nation's economy and debt.
In a joint appearance coming just days after Marshall won her party's nomination, Burr repeatedly highlighted the nation's $13 trillion debt that's expected to continue growing. He warned that the United States could soon be compared to countries like Greece that are buckling under the weight of their obligations.
"The answer is: Let's stop spending," Burr said. He acknowledged after the event that Republicans have been part of the problem. He voted several times for Bush administration budgets that drastically increased the debt.
Marshall, however, said cuts alone wouldn't save the country's economy.
"We've got to make appropriate investments - the same thing you would do to make your business more profitable," Marshall said. "You can't cut your way into huge profitability."
Greensboro News & Record
The most telling exchange of the debate, I thought, came on a question about the federal deficit and whether Congress should be reining in spending or helping the states.
Marshall: "Right now is not the time to be cutting back,” Marshall said, adding that lax federal regulation had caused some of the states’ budget problems, so it was right that the states should chip in. She used the occasion to attack Burr for voting against the extension of unemployment insurance, citing examples of teachers and police officers going on unemployment. (My inner political consultant says: Classic Democratic position, bonus points for talking about public-sector employees people might care if they get laid off, bonus points for slagging opponent with a fact-based criticism.)
Burr: “I voted three times to pay for unemployment insurance,” he said, re-characterizing his vote as one that didn’t necessarily block the program but merely wanted to see it paid for as we go. “We're $13.3 trillion in debt -- the answer is to stop spending." Burr also quantified the debt per each American child under 18 years old at somewhere north of $100,000. (My inner political consultant says: Burr gets credit for some verbal judo, saying that he’s not against a bill that he voted against and not totally tripping the BS meter. The idea for paying for stuff we need as we go sounds good. And talking about our kids’ future debt load gives an emotional counter to Marshall’s teachers and cops thing.)
Bottom line: Throughout the debate, Marshall looked the most fired up of the three. She really had to convince the Democratic base she has a shot at unseating Burr, and it would seem to me she might have given supporters something to smile about. Burr brought some gravitas to his appearance although didn’t look all that energetic. He was able to counter the “Republicans as obstructionists” storyline Marshall was selling. Beitler might have earned a look from some of the Tea Party folks who were never going to vote for Marshall and were dissatisfied with Burr.
The Independent
By Bob Geary
I just watched a TV re-run of yesterday's U.S. Senate debate at the N.C. Bar Association meeting in Wilmington. In true, objective news reporting style, the N&O's headline — "Burr, Marshall rip Washington" — gave no indication whatsoever that one candidate might've dominated or that the other could've stayed home for all he said. (Oops. Did I just give my punchline away?) The newspaper's article, too, quite judiciously avoided any conclusions as to the Burr-Marshall outcome, and in fact gave more than equal time to the observations of the third candidate on stage, Libertarian Mike Beitler, who maintained — incorrectly — that the choice of Burr or Marshall was no choice at all.
So who won? Elaine Marshall did, convincingly, and I have to believe that even Richard Burr's staffers told him afterward that he can't get through an entire Senate campaign saying absolutely nothing about every issue.
Charlotte Observer
News Briefing for June 23, 2010 – June 29, 2010
By Jim Morrill
WILMINGTON North Carolina's three U.S. Senate candidates agreed on one thing Saturday - Washington is broken.
But in their first debate, Republican incumbent Richard Burr, Democrat Elaine Marshall and Libertarian Michael Beitler clashed over who to blame and how to fix it.
The hour-long debate before the N.C. Bar Association highlighted sharp differences over federal spending and regulations in a race that analysts say will have national implications.
"This Senate race is important for not only how it unfolds, but it's going to help set the table for the presidential race in 2012," said CNN political analyst David Gergen, a Durham native who also spoke to the bar.
In a year when voters across the country are frustrated with government, Burr set the tone early.
"Washington has to change," said the 16-year veteran of the House and Senate. Congress, he added, "is not held in high regard .... We don't deserve to be."
Marshall, North Carolina's Secretary of State, said she could help fix that.
"(Americans) see one side saying 'no' and the other side running scared," she said. "If we keep sending back the same people who got us into this mess, we're not going to change anything."
By Eliot Spitzer
Eliot Spitzer is the former governor of the state of New York.
How long is four score and seven years? Just what are unalienable rights? This translation makes important historical documents meaningful. Each book translates the work of a primary source into a language you can understand. Abraham Lincoln
The Gettysburg Address
Picturefrom the battlefield
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met here on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But in a larger sense we can not dedicate - we can not consecrate - we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled, here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but can never forget what they did here.
It is for us, the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they have, thus far, so nobly carried on. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom; and that this government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
GENESIS OF THE GETTYSBURG ADDRESS. The theme of the Gettysburg Address was not entirely new. President Lincoln was aware of Daniel Webster's statement in 1830 that the origin of our government and the source of its power is "the people's constitution, the people's government; made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people." Lincoln had read Supreme Court Justice John Marshall's opinion, which states: "The government of the Union . . . is emphatically and truly a government of the people. . . . Its powers are granted by them and are to be exercised directly on them, and for their benefit." In a ringing anti-slavery address in Boston in 1858, Rev. Theodore Parker, the noted minister, defined democracy as "a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people." On a copy of this address in Lincoln's papers, this passage is encircled with pencil marks. But Lincoln did not merely repeat this theme; he transformed it into America's greatest patriotic utterance. With the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln gave meaning to the sacrifice of the dead—he gave inspiration to the living.
Rather than accept the address as a few brief notes hastily prepared on the route to Gettysburg (an assumption which has long gained much public acceptance), it should be regarded as a pronouncement of the high purpose dominant in Lincoln's thinking throughout the war. Habitually cautious of words in public address, spoken or written, it is not likely that the President, on such an occasion, failed to give careful thought to the words which he would speak. After receiving the belated invitation on November 2, he yet had ample time to prepare for the occasion, and the well-known correspondent Noah Brooks stated that several days before the dedication Lincoln told him in Washington that his address would be "short, short, short" and that it was "written, but not finished."
Commentary by MAML
All those Republicans such as "W", Cheney, Rove, Limbaugh, O"Reilly, DeMint, Burr, Romney and many, many more who have never stood post when their country really needed them and are the first to send our sons and daughters off to war while hiding behind God and the Flag. I would like them to explain what President Lincoln meant when he said, "the people's constitution, the people's government; made for the people, made by the people, and answerable to the people."
How the votes for Senate went in May:
US SENATE - DEM (Vote For 1) Vote Type Summary Contest Detail Map
100 of 100 Counties Reporting
Percent Votes:
Marcus W. Williams (DEM) 8.46% 35,984
Ann Worthy (DEM) 3.92% 16,655
Elaine Marshall (DEM) 36.35% 154,605
Ken Lewis (DEM) 17.05% 72,510
Susan Harris (DEM) 6.99% 29,738
Cal Cunningham (DEM) 27.24% 115,851
Total 425,343
The National Federation of Democratic Women announced Saturday that Secretary of State and U.S. Senate candidate Elaine Marshall has been selected as the ‘Outstanding Democratic Woman Elected Official’ for 2010.
“I think this award is a little premature—I’d rather it come at the conclusion of my first term in the U.S. Senate!“ said Elaine Marshall. “I’m grateful for this recognition of the work we’ve done. I’m honored to have had the opportunity to serve the people of North Carolina, and I hope to continue to serve this state well.”
The national award is given annually to one female elected official as commendation for exemplary public service. Past winners include Governor Anne Richards of Texas, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas, and U.S. Senator Jean Carnahan of Missouri.
Elaine Marshall for US Senate
News Briefing for May 21, 2010
Winston-Salem Journal ....................
Lewis said he was particularly impressed with the conviction and courage shown by Marshall, North Carolina's secretary of state, even as Democratic officials in Washington put their support behind the other remaining candidate, Cal Cunningham. He praised Marshall for her ability to organize grass-roots support and to appeal to a broad range of voters
Key Constituency for Two Hopefuls
MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) - In a sign of his increasing prominence in the so-called Tea Party movement, a new poll shows Kentucky senatorial candidate Rand Paul topping former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin among voters who describe themselves as morons.
In the poll, conducted by the University of Minnesota’s Opinion Research Institute, 42% preferred Paul, 36% preferred Palin, and the remaining 22% were unsure what the word “prefer” meant.
According to Davis Logsdon, who supervised the poll for the University of Minnesota, Paul’s surging popularity among morons is bad news for Palin, who previously had a lock on that important constituency.
“I never thought I’d say this, but if Palin is going to stay competitive with Paul, she’s going to have to start dumbing down her message.” More here.
