newsobserver.com projects - Dellinger's 'Real Change' ad - Comments

Re: Response from Hampton Dellinger to comment below

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 02 May 2008 17:06:59 -0400

Incidentally, the above comment is also from Smathers.

— RTB

Re: Response from Hampton Dellinger to comment below

shm9496 — Fri, 02 May 2008 17:04:27 -0400

Hampton, this proves to be a flirtatious legal argument, but does not stand up to reality. The Governors were successful in maintaining control of their National Guard units for “domestic disturbances” as required by the Constitution including natural disasters such as Katrina. However, Iraq is a foreign conflict. It is just plain wrong for you to flirt with the truth to gain votes by providing false hope. Our veterans and their families have already been misled enough by the Bush Administration. I encourage you to live up to our state motto: Esse Quam Videri. To be rather than to seem.

Re: Dellinger's 'Real Change' ad

JohnBurns — Fri, 02 May 2008 16:10:21 -0400

It is worth pointing out, I think, that there is nothing in the NC Constitution or Statutes which empowers the Lt. Governor to stop the federal government from closing military bases in our state, but our current Lt. Governor makes no small amount of hay over her pivotal role in influencing the BRAC process.

If the next Lt. Governor sits in that house on Blount Street and does only what is strictly within the bounds of the Costitutional description of the job, I hope he has a nice deck of cards available, and lots of variations on solitaire. The Nintendo Wii is a nice diversion, too. Super Mario Galaxy takes weeks to finish.

The kind of thinking that Dellinger lays out above is exactly why the Observer said his ideas were "bold, but rooted in our state's traditions." Like the Independent said, what Hampton is running on may have little to do with the official responsibilities of the office, but they have EVERYTHING to do with being a state-level Democratic leader.

Response from Hampton Dellinger to comment below

dellingerforlg — Fri, 02 May 2008 15:59:06 -0400

Pat, I appreciate your concern and I hope that together we can draw more attention to the role of state government in bringing the National Guard home. And I am very grateful for your service in the National Guard. But I believe you are wrong when you say that neither the Governor nor the Lt. Governor has a say in how and when the Guard is deployed. Politics is known as the art of the possible, and strong statewide leadership most definitely can help bring our National Guard back home where it belongs.

Although responsibility for the war ultimately rests in Washington, the war won’t end until the people who have the loudest voices use them to speak up, and I firmly believe that North Carolina’s #2 elected official—who serves a state with a military tradition like no other—can speak with a booming voice if necessary. Rather than just wringing my hands in frustration and saying that nothing can be done, I’d use the power of the office to point out some things that you left out of your post. First, the President can only send the National Guard to Iraq when he has authorization, and I just don’t think he has it anymore. The 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force gave the President power to use the Armed Forces to defend the country against the continuing threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and to enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. Saddam is dead and there are no Security Council resolutions left to be implemented in Iraq. In the absence of any authority to keep the Guard in Federal service abroad, that authority over them should revert back to the states.

Recognizing the absence of authorization for the war, legislators in lots of other states, including Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin are considering legislation, referenda, or other ways of bringing their Guardsmen home. As Lt. Governor, I would work with the Governor and the state legislature to put North Carolina among that group. Putting pressure on Washington is the very least we can do.

And here’s the most important thing: political pressure from state leaders is already working . As part of the 2006 defense appropriations act, Congress effectively gave the President almost unfettered control over the National Guard, despite the unanimous objection of all 50 governors. In January of this year, the Governors were able to get that law repealed, restoring their control over the militia during times of domestic emergency. The repeal of the 2006 law shows that coordinated efforts from state leaders can shape the laws that govern the Guard. http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/01/gns_guardcontrol_080130/

As Lt. Governor, I also plan to use the office to fight for veterans—including the Guard—in every way I can, starting with bringing them home.

I agree with you that candidates should speak honestly and forthrightly, and I think that for the most part everyone in this race has done so. That’s why it is disappointing to me that you to continue to wrongly challenge me with faulty facts. Earlier this week, you said, “there’s been no teachers organization that’s endorsed raising the dropout age.” http://yesweeklyblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/candidates-for-lieutenant-governor-spar.html

In fact, one of the items on the legislative agenda for the North Carolina Association of Educators, the teachers’ union with some 70,000 educators, is “Change compulsory attendance to 5-18.” http://ncae.org/gr/legagenda/agenda0708.pdf I think we’re all in agreement that raising the dropout age will not be a magic bullet that solves our dropout problem, but it’s clear that teachers around the state believe that it is an important step to take.

The Charlotte and Raleigh newspapers have looked at two television ads so far in our race. They found my first ad to be “accurate” http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/claims_dept_dellinger_ready_to_fight and that Walter Dalton’s 30-second ad was “a 30-second exaggeration.” http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/1050587.html I invite them to look at my latest ad as well.

You and others have often said that the office of Lt. Governor is what you make of it. Personally, I think that being North Carolina’s #2 elected official gives the Lt. Governor not just the right but the responsibility to speak out for the North Carolinians who are currently fighting overseas in a needless war. Promising to use the power of the office to fight for the things that matter most is what strong progressive leadership is all about.

Hampton Dellinger, Democrat for Lt. Governor

www.HD08.com

Re: Dellinger's 'Real Change' ad

FFC1304 — Fri, 02 May 2008 13:11:44 -0400

He's a democrackkk loiwyer!!! WHAT kind of CHANGE do you THINK he will bring??? NO MORE democrackkk LOIWYERS in state government!!!

MORE CORRUPTION WITHOUT INTERRUPTION in NC!!!

STRIVE to be SMARTER than a democrackkk!!!

Re: Dellinger's 'Real Change' ad

shm9496 — Fri, 02 May 2008 12:35:24 -0400

I have just watched Hampton's latest video, and find his claim that he will bring our National Guard troops home nothing short of outrageous. As a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard, I know the lieutenant governor has no power to deliver on that promise -- Even the governor can't bring our troops home. This sort of misleading rhetoric makes a mockery of our democratic system.

This ad is another illustration of why we need someone with elected experience and a military background in the lieutenant governor's office. At best, Hampton's claim represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the position. At worst, it's pure pandering. In either case, we can do better.

I look forward to a thorough analysis of this ad's claims.

With best wishes, I am sincerely,

Pat Smathers

Dellinger's 'Real Change' ad

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 02 May 2008 11:33:44 -0400

A TV ad for Hampton Dellinger, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor.