Roy Blunt vs.
Marc Perkel

What this election is all about

Here in the 7th District of Missouri incumbent Republican congressman Roy Blunt is being challenged by Democratic candidate Marc Perkel and Libertarian candidate Mike Harmon. On this page I'm going to compare and contrast my views with Roy Blunt. As to Mike Harmon, most of my social view are very Libertarian and Mike and I agree on more things than we disagree on. We are both strongly in favor of personal freedom issues. Where we disagree is on social spending issues and that I'm a Clinton fan, he's not. However, the big race is against the incumbent so I want to outline here the way I see the kind of Congressman I will be compared to Congressman Roy Blunt.

Congressman Roy Blunt can post his comparison if he want's to. I would encourage it. Except the Roy Blunt campaign doesn't even have a web site. My web site is the biggest web site of any candidate in the history of America. I have more detailed opinions about more issues than anyone else. Marc Perkel believes in the web!

Referendum on Clinton

One of the main issues in this election is President Clinton. Do we keep him or do we impeach him? Are we going to have two more years of investigations or do the nations business. If you elect Marc Perkel, I will vote against impeachment and any further investigations. If you vote for Roy Blunt, he will vote with the rest of the Republican party to focus and investigations and eventually hound Clinton out of office. If you want Clinton to stay, vote Perkel. If you want Clinton to go, vote Blunt.

If you want to keep Clinton, vote for Marc Perkel. If you want to get rid of Clinton, vote for Roy Blunt.

I believe President Clinton is doing a good job and we should keep him. He's cut the deficit by 400 billion dollars a year and got us a budget surplus. And it was Clinton, not the Republican Congress, not the Democratic Congress, who fixed the economy. Clinton made the tough choices and dragged the Congress kicking and screaming into economic prosperity. Clinton is a great leader and America is in his debt. I look forward to working with him. I'm not proud of him for cheating on his wife, but no one's perfect. If we're going to throw people out for that then let's toss Henry Hyde, Dan Burton, and Helen Chenoweth ant the other 200 members of Congress who haven't yet been caught.

If Roy Blunt is going to judge Clinton's morals, he should certify that he is clean himself. What's good for the Goose is good for the Gander.

My opponent Roy Blunt voted against Clinton on the impeachment issue. I therefore challenge Roy Blunt to sign an affidavit under oath swearing he never cheated on his wife. I personally don't think this is anyone's business and is a personal matter. However, if Roy Blunt thinks President Clinton should be tossed for lying about sex then he should be subject to the same rules as he imposes on President Clinton. The people of the 7th district believe that Roy Blunt is monogamous. I have no reason to believe that isn't true. But if he's going to judge Clinton he should show the voters he isn't doing the same thing Clinton did. Roy Blunt should sign a sworn statement, because of his vote against Clinton, that he has been sexually faithful to his wife. Or, in the alternative, Roy Blunt should admit that Clinton's affair is no one's business but his. What's good for the Goose is good for the Gander.

Homebreaker Hyde is going to judge President Clinton. Is this some kind of a joke? What a world, what a world!

The Republican head of the House Judiciary Committee, Henry Homebreaker Hyde, had an affair himself. His affair started when he was 41 and lasted 9 years resulting in breaking up a family and separating a father from his 3 little girls. Henry Hyde lied to the public and the voters by concealing this affair until he was caught this year. I call that lying to the public. President Clinton didn't even have intercourse with Monica Lewinsky and she was single. No divorce, no broken homes, no little girls growing up without a father. And Homebreaker Hyde is going to judge Clinton? Surely I'm not the only one who has a problem with this. If you elect Marc Perkel to Congress, I'll put an end to this insanity.

Doing the People's Business

The 105th Congress was a do nothing congress. They should be ashamed to ask for their paychecks. Major issues like tobacco legislation, health care reform, protecting social security, campaign finance reform, education, patient's bill of rights, these issues died on the vine. All we got out of this congress is partisan investigations instead of doing the work of the people. The budget is supposed to be done by law in April. Here it is October and the Republican Congress hasn't even put their first draft in from of President Clinton to sign. President Clinton had his budget to Congress back in February, on time. Now if Clinton can get his work done on time, why can't Roy Blunt?

If you want Congress to do the People's business and deal with the issues, vote for Marc Perkel. If you want another do nothing Congress and endless investigations, vote for Roy Blunt.

If you vote for Marc Perkel and give me a Democratic Congress to work with, I'll get the work done on time. Vote for Roy Blunt and all you'll get is two more years of Investigate, Investigate, Investigate. If you're tired of Congress publishing the sexual habits of President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky and you want it to end, vote for me. If you want two more years of testimony about how Monica Lewinski gives head, vote for Roy Blunt. This election is about doing the peoples business vs. sex scandals.

Same vs. Different

There are 535 members of Congress who are just like Roy Blunt. There's no one up there like Marc Perkel. I'm different. Roy Blunt has been a politician all his life, and he's been very successful at it, except when he lost the primary race for Missouri Governor to a felon. I actually don't have a problem with the idea of a person dedicating their life to public service. But Roy is a party man. He doesn't rock the boat. He's not an inspiring leader nor does he put new and original ideas on the table. Roy Blunt is boring.

There's 500 congressmen just like Roy Blunt. There's no one in Congress like Marc Perkel. Marc Perkel is different.

Marc Perkel is a different breed of cat. Marc Perkel is not afraid to speak his mind or embrace controversial positions because they aren't politically correct. I say what I think and I have the personal freedom to tell it like it is. I am a very interesting person who has thought deeply about issues and written extensively about hundreds of subjects. I am a thinker, an innovator, a leader. I'm the kind of guy who comes up with the new solutions, thinks things through, and has the courage to stand up for what I believe in. Even if my own party doesn't like it.

Marc Perkel doesn't owe anyone anything. Marc Perkel is free and independent. Marc Perkel isn't afraid of anyone or anything. Marc Perkel says what he thinks.

I don't owe anyone anything. I don't have to pay anyone back for over a million dollars in donations. I don't even owe the Democratic Party anything. I'm a free man. There is not a single member of Congress who is as free and independent as I am. Don't you think that out of 535 members of Congress that there should be at least one free thinker there to represent the views of someone who didn't have to sell out to the system to get where he is? As you can see from my published views, Marc Perkel is not afraid of anything or anybody. Surely there should be one person in congress who fearlessly represents free thinking people.

Freedom vs. Government Control

I strongly support personal freedom. I believe that the government should stay out of anything having to do with personal choice unless the government has a compelling reason to get involved. I believe that the reason that America leads the world is that we have a society that allows people of diverse interests to flourish. We are not all alike and we all have to live together. But the only way I can protect my freedom to ensure that the freedoms of others are protected, even if it's freedoms of people that I don't particularly like.

For example, I am an avid non-smoker. I think it's disgusting. And as a non-smoker, I feel my rights are violated every time I smell a cigarette. However, I have to defend the rights of smokers to smoke outside and in ventilated places. I have to oppose taxes on tobacco and other "sin" taxes that go beyond the cost of smoking to society. I don't like these people, but they have rights and if I can't stand up for their rights, who will stand for mine?

If you want to make your own choices, vote for Marc Perkel. If you want the government to make your choices for you, vote for Roy Blunt.

The way I view abortion is, who gets to make that choice? The mother, or the Government? I believe it's the mothers choice. Roy Blunt thinks it's the government's choice. If you oppose abortion then don't get one. If you want to stop abortions there's plenty of things you can do about it. If you want to stop abortions then lets fund the kind of social and welfare programs to encourage women to choose to have babies. Let's give them free prenatal care, infant nutrition programs, let's expand adoption programs for kids who are hard to adopt. End race based adoption barriers, tax credits for adopting sick and disabled kids. Free contraceptives and sex education to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. We could cut abortion by 80%! Lets do it! But ultimately, I believe abortion is a choice that the government should stay out of.

I support a person right to die. To have medical assistance at the end of one's life. That is also personal choice. Everyone dies. But who chooses the form of one's death, you or the government. If you vote for Marc Perkel, you choose. If you vote for Roy Blunt, he chooses for you. So if you have ALS and you want to die a dignified death of your own choosing, I will give you the means to end your life when you feel it is time to go. If you want the government to force you to die through suffocating by choking to death on your own spit, vote for Roy Blunt.

It's about Freedom of Religion

Roy Blunt is a Christian. I am not. However, I have a stronger belief in freedom of religion and protecting those freedoms from government intrusion than my opponent Roy Blunt does. I have a deeper understanding of why the separation of church and state in necessary to protect freedom of religion in America. And I understand why it is important to oppose school led prayer in order to protect freedom of religion.

America is a religiously diverse nation. We are different in that respect than countries like Iran where religion is the law and controls the government. We are also different than Ireland where Protestants and Catholics have been at war for 300 years. Here we can go to (or not go to) the church of our choosing because we leave each other alone. Our freedom of religion is based on our willingness to allow others to practice their religion, even if we think they are going to burn in Hell forever. Because any government who can shut down their religion can shut down your religion.

If you want religous freedom, vote for Marc Perkel. If you want government religion, vote for Roy Blunt.

There are hundreds of Christian religions in America. Many of these Christian religions are opposed to other Christian religions. The Baptists are trying to save the Mormons and the Catholics. The Jehovah's Witnesses think they are the chosen 144,000. The Moonies think Sun Myung Moon is the incarnation of God on Earth. Many Christian religions have a mandate to try to convert the entire world not only to Christianity, but their particular form of Christianity. Even among Christians there is a virtual mandate for war.

The separation of church and state isn't there to keep the will of God out of government. It's not there to oppress Christians. It's there to protect and preserve the freedom to be Christian. If government let down that wall, think about what would happen. Which church would influence the government the most? What form of religion would government adopt?

Unless everyone has freedom of religion, then no one has freedom of religion. We preserve our rights by preserving the rights of others.

If the government adopted your religion, that would be great. But what if the government adopted the way and customs of a religion that opposes your religion? Then the government would be infringing on your rights to practice your religion. As you can see that any religion the government chooses infringes on all other religions, the only way to preserve and protect religious freedom is that the government has to be religiously neutral so that religion is preserved and protected for the people.

The same thing applies to prayer in schools. Who's prayer do you pray? Do you take turns? I think not. Prayer is a private matter shared between those who want to participate and not imposed on those who don't. By prohibiting government led prayer, prayer is preserved and protected for the people. When you think this through, you know I'm right.

Marc Perkel thinks things through to find real solutions to real problems. Marc Perkel understands the Constitution and how important it is to preserve and protect the freedoms and fundamental rights that defines us as a people this great country as a nation.

This is the difference between Roy Blunt and Marc Perkel. It's easy for Roy Blunt to coddle and cave in to the easy sounding solution and take the narrow view that being against prayer in schools is being against God. That's the easy way out. Marc Perkel thinks things through to find real solutions so that we don't do the wrong thing and lose our religious freedoms over a slogan. That's why it is important to elect people like Marc Perkel who understands the Constitution and will protect your right to worship in the manner you choose without the interference of government or opposing religions.


IwantU Select Clubs

Copyright Terms

People before Lawyers

A project of the People's legal Front