The result of apathy

tom hill

So the primary election is over and in the 11th Congressional District of North Carolina,  I fear we made a big mistake.

We gave the nod to Tom Hill, who knows little or nothing about politics. He spent much of his campaign against Cecil Bothwell two years ago with his foot in his mouth. He calls himself a moderate, but he hates all Muslims. He is anti-marriage equality.

From his Facebook page, in response to a John Boyle column:

The article is neither “beautiful” nor “well said”. It completely misses the point that society as a whole defines the forms of marriage it will approve, irrespective of what the Old Testament may say on the subject. Our society does have a strong undercurrent of Christian teachings, but our culture would not approve of polygamy or incest, for example, regardless of its religious bent. The same is true in non Christian countries such as Japan. There are no such entities as “gay rights”. There are only human rights, and in this country all gays have the same human rights that the rest of us have. What the homosexuals want is a special right to marry a person of the same sex and to procreate jointly, which is a physical impossibility. No other person in this state has the right to marry a person of the same sex, and we are not going to make a dispensation for gays and lesbians, many of whom have voluntarily selected that lifestyle. Just ask the actress Cynthia Nixon. I am not “ashamed” of my state’s common sense response to Amendment One, and I would like to contribute a dollar to the “Send John Boyle To A Gay/ Lesbian Marriage-Approving State” movement.”

And we chose this man to oppose Mark Meadows. So, we get another two years of Meadows. I plan to write in a name, perhaps Keith Ruehl or Cecil Bothwell.

I can’t vote for someone who thinks marriage equality isn’t about equal rights. When he says that many have “voluntarily selected” that “lifestyle,” it makes me cringe.

But he won the primary because too many people didn’t do their homework, and voter turnout was a mere 14 percent.

I suppose we get what we deserve as a nation, but what about those of us who do care and do vote?

It doesn’t take very much time to learn about the candidates, and it’s an important part of living in a Democracy.

I spent a good part of Saturday canvassing for Brian Turner, a local business owner who is getting into politics because he sees the damage being caused to our state by extremists in Raleigh.

Brian is running against Tim Moffitt for NC House, and I am going to do all I can to see that Brian wins. He is for the expansion of Medicaid, for restoring funding to schools and our higher education system, for Asheville retaining its ownership of our water supply, against the voter suppression law, against the new tax law that lowered taxes on the wealthy and increased the burden on working people … In other words, he is the polar opposite of Tim Moffitt.

Most of the people I spoke to on Saturday didn’t know Brian Turner, but after hearing he’s pretty much the opposite of Moffitt, they all wanted to vote for him.

This is why I work for candidates. It takes great courage to run for office nowadays. Brian knows that the machine behind Moffitt likely will assault his integrity — Tim told him so.

The message here is that we must vote and we MUST learn a little about the candidates before we go to the polls.

 

 

7 comments

  1. Tom Hill says:

    “WE” did not make a mistake by choosing Tom Hill in the 2014 primary. You and other one issue people did all that you could to defeat my open and honest campaign based on closing off-shore tax shelters, ending the Mid-East wars, reforming immigration with a pathway to citizenship, protecting Social Security and Medicare, supporting women’s and veterans’ rights. cleaning up the environmental messes, rebuilding the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, and other meritorious Democratic goals. And you did so by supporting a candidate who never once stated his position on any of these issues. But what really frosts me is your intolerance for people whose values may disagree with your own. Whether or not my district endures another two years or more of Mark Meadows will depend in part on whether one issue people like yourself are able to demonstrate some maturity. BTW, you have the option of running for office yourself rather than sitting on your butt and finding fault with those who do. I do not see your personal identifier anywhere.

    TOM HILL

    • leslie boyd says:

      Tom, my sister was a lesbian who endured the hatred of people who didn’t know her. She and her spouse deserved the same rights my husband and I enjoy. As for one-issue, I am NOT. If you knew me at all, you would know my biggest issue is health care. But I have a great deal of trouble voting for anyone who would deny basic human rights to people based on a religious prejudice.

  2. Tom Hill says:

    Leslie,

    Despite your denial, your response proves that you are a one-issue blogger. You deny the truth, just like the Obama haters deny that they are racists. You did not address a single matter that I raised, and I will not trade quips with you on the only issue that truly concerns you. BTW, we all have gays in our families. Some of us just have different opinions about the meaning of marriage, irrespective of religion.

    Tom

    • leslie boyd says:

      My son died because he was denied care. A birth defect — a pre-existing condition — prevented him from getting insurance and he was denied care and died. To call me a single-issue blogger again proves that you are responding with a knee-jerk reaction — another bad quality for a politician. Did you look at previous posts on this blog? I am a multi-issue voter, and basic civil rights is important to me. You have shown yourself to be a religious bigot. You have shown yourself to be overly sensitive to people who disagree with your bigotry against an entire class of people. I agree with most of your stands on the issues, but you do not have the personal traits necessary to hold high office and I am deeply offended by your insistence that I only care about one issue, even when I have shown myself to be a mullti-issue voter, You look no deeper than the surface, see what you want to see and let your bias run wild. You will not get my vote. Oh, and these comments are public.

      • Tom Hill says:

        Leslie,
        In case you haven’t noticed, I am just overflowing with “bad qualities for a politician”. That’s why I am running. I do not say words that you and many others want to hear, but rather those that I honestly feel. People like you protest that you want “an honest politician”, but you cannot handle the result. You flavor your intolerance with anecdotes designed to elicit sympathy and rationalize the fact that some thinking person disagrees with you by slamming his religion or insulting him in some other way. Definitely a Tea party characteristic. I have never mentioned my religion in these matters, and I am often at odds with church doctrine, as well as political party dictates. If you were genuinely interested in healthcare reform, your number one concern would be to defeat the Congressman who led the effort to shut down the federal government in order to defund the ACA. Instead, you picked up on a social issue over which a Congressman no longer has any influence and made a cause celeb of it. I would also remind you that it was you who blasted me with criticism, and not the other way around. This will end my communications with you. I am glad, however, that you came out of the closet identity-wise.
        Tom

  3. leslie boyd says:

    Tom, I understand what you are saying, but I believe my vote is a sacred right and I can’t give it to someone who would deny an entire class of people basic civil rights. You can call that biased if you want, but it is how I feel. I do agree with many of your stands, but I seriously doubt I will be able to vote for you.

    • Tom Hill says:

      Leslie,

      Okay, I understand your position. I have Democratic friends who feel the same way that you do. I tell them two things: (1) a congressman will no longer have any effect on this issue; it is a matter for the courts, and (2) you can be assured that Mark Meadows will not support any of the remaining issues that I support. It’s 80 percent of your agenda or zero percent.

Leave a Reply

a world of progress site | woven by WEBterranean