Richard Burr is a very good United States Senator for North Carolina. However, a comment he made has been seized upon by left wing forces within the news media and the blogosphere to diminish him. He is up for reelection next year; and the sharks smell blood in the water after Kay Hagan's victory last fall.
Burr, to dramatize how spooked he initially was by the alarmist discussions in Washington, had made the statement that he advised his wife to withdraw money from an ATM. While this was not wise, it hardly demonstrates he is unworthy as a Senator. Indeed, the reality is quite the contrary, because he gradually developed an understanding of how wrongful the Bush/Obama approach has been. Many of us were thrown temporarily off balance by the odd series of events last fall.
Contrast this verbal episode with the awfulness of Kay Hagan's voting record thus far as a United States Senator. The media and left wing blogosphere won't highlight that reality to any major extent.
It increasingly appears Roy Cooper may be Richard Burr's opponent. While Cooper made a statement that he did not have plans to run recently, I suspect he may since Heath Shuler has dropped out of consideration.
If Richard Burr is going to beat Cooper next year, he has to be prepared to counter the forces against him on this issue, and on all the others they will throw up against him. We need to remember what happened to George Allen. In addition, Burr will need to go on the offensive against Cooper.
And the reality is that Cooper provides a rich target.
Let's consider the record.
First, we need to recall the murder of Eve Carson, the UNC student leader, by a probation violator. The News and Observer in Raleigh subsequently did a series that exposed the utter failure of the North Carolina probation system. This helps explain the revolving door system of criminal justice we have in our state.
Roy Cooper did not have direct control over the probation function within state government. However, he is the highest ranking elected official who leads our state's criminal justice system. He has had the power of a bully pulpit with his position to advocate for a stronger probation system within our state government; and he could have used his position of leadership to bring people and agencies together to maximize crime control.
But he did not do so.
The state, during his period of leadership, has had a backlog of prosecutions; and there have been delays in the handling of evidence by the state's crime lab, for which he has had responsibility.
We also need to remember how Cooper handled the investigation and prosecution of the GPD fiasco. He dragged his feet on this matter for nearly three years. This resulted in police officers like Scott Sanders and Tom Fox being put through an awful, prolonged ordeal with little justification. It turned out that they had no evidence to support any prosecution of these two men. And there has been considerable concern that Cooper may have been responding to political pressure and influence from one or more Greensboro Democrats who have influence.
Finally, we need to think back to this post I made regarding a piece John Hammer had written. I am going to reproduce it here because it is very important to understand Cooper's role in the GPD fiasco:
John Hammer had some interesting observations regarding last week's trial of Scott Sanders on the charge of searching a government computer without proper authorization. It should be noted that Sanders and Tom Fox also had been indicted on charges of conspiracy and obstruction of justice, but these charges are now being dismissed. Think about the implications of the following statement Hammer made:
According to an impeccable source, those charges were going to be dropped whether Sanders was found guilty or not guilty.
What
this means is that Tom Fox was being strung along by the state attorney
general's office for nearly eighteen months even though there was no
intention to prosecute him. Consider the ethics of that kind of
decision-making, and what the motives may have been.
Hammer continues regarding the politics surrounding the trial:
Coman is a tough prosecutor, which is precisely why
he is the top prosecutor in the Attorney General's Office and why he
was sent to handle the Duke lacrosse mess. Coman said Sanders was being
treated just like anyone else accused of a crime, but the state
doesn't, except in very special cases such as this one, send its top
prosecutor out to prosecute class H felonies.
This was all about
politics and the battle for the soul of Greensboro, and the
administration of City Manager Mitch Johnson lost and lost big...
Coman's very presence in the courtroom is proof
that this was selective prosecution. Coman is not sent around the state
to prosecute people for stealing pine straw or misbranding cattle. He
handles the cases in North Carolina that Attorney General Roy Cooper
considers the most important, and the trial of Sanders fell into that
category...
The state never intended to bring this case to
court. Sanders and Fox were supposed to roll over on someone higher up
and then hopefully they would roll over on someone even higher up until
they got something against Wray, or at least a member of his command
staff. The problem with that plan was twofold, first of all Sanders and
Fox are honorable men and secondly they didn't have anything to roll
over about. Look at all the other investigations. Assuming that the SBI
knows how to investigate, in 16 months this is all they could find.
When
the charges were filed against Sanders and Fox, then Mayor Keith
Holliday and Mitch Johnson made statements about how grievous these
charges were. But they weren't and it turned out the guys were not
guilty of any wrongdoing. It would be shocking to see Mitch Johnson apologize for what he said, but Holliday certainly should.
I suspect there is much more to learn about the political influence and manipulation that affected the state Attorney General's office and the SBI. But it appears to me from Hammer's reporting that Tom Fox, even though he was not the focus of the trial, was done a terrible disservice. There may not have been a genuine intention to bring him to trial. Hammer felt Roy Cooper was hoping to get to Wray and his command staff through Fox and Sanders.
How will these two officers be compensated for what they were put through? It is increasingly obvious that they were the objects of politically motivated investigations, indictments-- and in Sanders' case, an absurd trial.
In summary, Richard Burr needs to find a way to defend himself against the sharks, and to highlight the deficient record Roy Cooper has had as North Carolina's Attorney General, if he wants to be re-elected (and if Cooper runs). Burr's opposition in the media and the blogosphere will not be doing him any favors.
I hope "Law & Order" Roy runs. I could have some REAL fun with NCDHHS's attorney: http://drjshousecalls.blogspot.com/2008/03/silly-lawyer-dirty-tricks-are-for-kid.html
Nifong was purely and simply a sacrifice . . . to draw attention away from the fundamental failure of the N.C. State Bar to reign in dishonest/corrupt lawyers. Moreover, there's been no substantive legislative follow-up to ensure that District Attorneys act fairly and impartially . . . and to give citizens other options if they do not. I can certainly testify to that.
But hey, my situation in Asheboro . . . a criminal investigation stonewalled and in limbo for six years . . . isn't relevant to anything anywhere.
Cooper (and Easley before him) are just sorry pieces of work when it comes to enforcing the law for the common man/woman.
But Governor Sleazely can drive someone else's car forever and there's no problem at all.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | April 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Odd it's Cooper: 3:1
Posted by: Roch101 | April 17, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Sorry "Odds."
Posted by: Roch101 | April 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Watch Chuckie Schumer try to buy this seat in '10, just like the way he purchased/packaged Kay Hagan last year.
Chuckie would like nothing more than to add yet another good little Useful Dem Tool in the Senate from NC, and get the local Usual Suspect Dem tools all worked up yet again.
Posted by: bubba | April 17, 2009 at 01:07 PM
The whole ATM comment wasn't the smartest thing Sen. Burr has ever said. However, it's hardly the big deal his critics are making it out to be. After all, the money in the bank belongs to him and his wife - if they want to withdraw it, that's their business.
This flap reminds me of the letter to the N&R a week or so back where someone said Congress needs to take care of "our resources" rather than providing tax relief. But where does the government's resources come from if not the taxpayer?
Posted by: just saying | April 17, 2009 at 01:21 PM
Just,
I'm simply left failing to understand how a comment about withdrawing money from an ATM is scandalous. Perhaps, someone could enlighten me of the issue. I'm not so sure that I didn't have similar thoughts about my bank at the time.
Posted by: Stormy | April 17, 2009 at 02:04 PM
Me too, Stormy. Me too.
The whole uproar over Burr is just stupid - and largely manufactured.
My Granddaddy Johnson used to hide his money all over the house - in the curtains, in mattresses, under chair cushions. I did not understand why.
I do now.
If Roy Cooper is the man Burr will be up against, Burr has plenty of amunition - if he is smart enough to use it.
Posted by: Dr. Mary Johnson | April 17, 2009 at 02:45 PM
I would keep the ears on Easley as well for the Senate seat. Right now, a lot of conservative groups are still attacking him...and he might decide to run just to show that he can win.
Easley would be a disaster to the conservative movement, since he would split up the ticket for the normally straight ticket REP voters.
Posted by: GuilfordFella | April 18, 2009 at 01:12 PM
Mary, Just, Stormy, we need to remember that the uproar over George Allen was also largely manufactured. When the media is on their side, they can take a minor slip and transform it into a cataclysmic event.
Bubba, I agree the honorable Mr. Schumer would love to get his hands on this seat, and do whatever it takes.
And Fella, I have not seen a lot of online chatter about Easley considering a run. But I suppose it is possible.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | April 18, 2009 at 04:38 PM
I hope he takes your advice.
Bringing up Eve Carson in a political race will do wonders for the GOP.
No wonder you;re in the minority everywhere.
Posted by: drfranklives | April 18, 2009 at 06:40 PM
"Bringing up Eve Carson in a political race will do wonders for the GOP."
Yeah, he's not responsible for screw ups in the Vast NC Democrat Government Culture of Corruption and Incompetence, is he?
Especially those which occured on his watch as the chief state government law enforcement official, in the criminal justice system, right?
Nothing to talk about there at all, is there?
Keep up the great political analysis, Ace.
Posted by: bubba | April 18, 2009 at 10:34 PM
I can think of much, much worse that Burr has done - such as voting for TARP and the GIVE act. If the NC GOP thinks it can run a RINO in 2010 and win then it didn't learn anything in 2006 or 2008.
Posted by: huck | April 19, 2009 at 12:01 AM
Huck, I do not agree with every one of Burr's votes, including the two you mentioned, but I still believe he is a good United States Senator.
I checked Burr's ratings with the American Conservative Union and Americans for Democratic Action. His ADA rating is only 5% based on his 2008 voting record-- which is very good.
His American Conservative Union lifetime rating is 90%, which is also very good. There has been some slippage, however, over the last year. His 2008 ACU rating was 79%, which bears watching.
I would hesitate to call him a RINO based on his voting record.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | April 19, 2009 at 03:23 PM
Sen. Burr is a fine Senator. This whole flap is much ado about nothing and most people realize it. By the time the next election cycle rolls around, it will be a distant memory.
Posted by: just saying | April 20, 2009 at 10:22 AM
I hope you are right, Just. The liberal Democrats are juiced to pick up Burr's seat, however; and will do nearly whatever it takes to get it.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | April 20, 2009 at 12:39 PM
I'm sure Burr would've recomended his constituents take the same action. He'd get sooo slammed though for saying it, but you know he wanted to!
Posted by: brandonB | April 20, 2009 at 02:30 PM