I can’t speak for Ms. Dyer or her campaign, but I can give you my opinion.

First, I do not believe Ms. Dyer is ashamed of being a Democrat. Not putting a party affiliation prominently on a campaign website is VERY common. In fact, Congressman Barrett’s own website (http://greshambarrett.com/) does not state that he is a Republican prominently on his front page. (a couple more examples are http://www.massaforcongress.com and http://www.lawsonforcongress.com). If you don’t vote for parties, then why does it matter what party Ms. Dyer belongs to? I can’t speak for her, but I think that was her point. Her website should be about the issues and her beliefs, not about a party affiliation. You can, however, take a look at the events page and see all of the events she’s done with the Democratic Party.

It’s not about being ashamed of anything. It’s about the state of politics in South Carolina and the rest of the country. People tend to look at a political party or affiliation first before looking at the issues. Some people see the word “Democrat” and immediately disregard a candidate. What they’ll miss, if they do that, is the opportunity to see that Ms. Dyer is a moderate Democrat seeking to represent the citizens of the 3rd district on issues that matter to them - jobs, the economy, and energy independence.

On the statement you quoted from the debate, I took that to mean something very different. To me, she was countering Mr. Barrett’s implication that government can’t work and that government screws everything up. As part of that government, I would think part of his job is to work to make sure government does work effectively and efficiently, not to just accept that its “bad” and can’t do anything right. She was saying “you are that government” – meaning that he is part of the entity that he thinks can’t do anything right. Everyone knows that the government screwed up with Katrina. I don’t think Ms. Dyer was saying that it would have been totally different had she been there. That wasn’t her point. Her point was that Barrett talks about government that doesn’t work, yet he is part of that government. What does that say about him? Government can work, government has worked, and we need someone up there who knows that and will fight to make the government as effective and efficient as possible.

And when you say her “faux-pas”, as you would characterize it, is a centerpiece of her website, what do you mean? It happens to be on the front page because it’s the latest blog post; the latest always shows up first. That’s the only place the debate is listed, though. There are lots of other pages, including events, issues, bio, etc. that say nothing about the debate or this specific response.

Not having seen the actual bill, I can’t give you a 100% answer, but I would definitely not have allowed our country to spiral into a depression. The thing that bothers me most is that we ever got into this situation. I don’t know if you are aware that GB is on the Congressional Financial Services Committee. His responsibility was oversight and regulation of the financial institutions of our country. We must make sure that we dig ourselves out of this mess and that it never happens again.

Anyway, I just got your flyer in the mail and noticed that it gave not even the slightest hint as to your party affiliation. My theory was, “this means she’s a Democrat and is ashamed of it.” So, I went to your website and found that I’m a rather accomplished soothsayer. My plan has always been to “never join a group you’re ashamed of.”

As to your “firing back” concerning the Katrina disaster: The implication of, “Sir, you ARE that government” is that the whole Katrina affair would’ve gone right if only you had been in your opponent’s seat instead of him. That’s either naive of you, or extraordinarily arrogant. Neither is befitting a 26-year professional pilot.

My wife and I are former Air Force and, in my mind, your pilot status and military record weighed heavily in your favor. That is, ’til I got to your above reply. My conclusion?

Either you have feet of clay, or the wrong people are working on your election campaign. I’m sorry, but I cannot vote for you based on the lack of integrity shown by your reply to your opponent. Perhaps a makeover is in order.

Doubly-telling is your decision to make this gross faux pas of logic the centerpiece of your website. Either your campaign’s ideology is screwed-up, or your assumption of my ignorance is a slap to my face.

I suggest you back up and take another look at things. It seems to me you are defeating yourself by running away people like my wife and me.

Still, I wish you the best, but I was very disappointed.

jrc

PS: I knew nothing of Barrett before this, so I’m no shill.