make WWAY your homepage  Become a fan on facebook  Follow us on twitter  Receive RSS Newsfeeds  MEMBERS: Register | Login

McIntyre files to run for ninth term in Congress

READ MORE:
mike_mcintyre.jpg

WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) -- Rep. Mike McIntyre has filed to run for re-election in North Carolina's 7th District seat in the US House.

"We live in the greatest nation in the world, and I am committed to sustaining the values that have made America great and increasing the opportunities that will help us blaze a path forward," McIntyre said in a statement.

McIntyre, a Democrat, is running for the seat he's held since winning election in 1996 despite no longer living in the district. State lawmakers redrew the lines for the 7th District to exclude McIntyre's Lumberton home.

"My focus has been and always will be on what is best for the citizens and communities of eastern North Carolina," McIntyre said. "That means working for and supporting policies and ideas that make a positive difference in people's lives, and that's the kind of representation that I want to continue to give. Working together, we can achieve great things."

So far McIntyre is the only Democrat to file for the seat. There are three Republicans vying for the GOP nomination: Randy Crow, Ilario Pantano and David Rouzer.

Candidate filing ends Wednesday.

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

»

Term Limits

Whatever happened to that promise McIntyre made when he was first elected about term limits??

Again facts escape liberals.

Again facts escape liberals. 2 know terrorist slime bags leaving a known terrorist hang out are treated like poor innocent victims. How easy it is to lounge around in you mom’s house soaking up welfare slamming the people who fight for this great Nation.

PantaNONONO

Acquited of Murder? I don't care. At least the other candidates were not charged. I'd rather go on the side of caution and pick someone who didn't need to be defended against double homicide - regardless of the outcome. Sorry, put me in front of two doors, one with Pantano and one with someone who had not been charged with murder and I am choosing the other guy.

Sure he was found not guilty, but it took the military about 30 plus years to decide DADT was a bad idea; from time to time they get it wrong.

You have no idea what you are talking about

Pantano was never charged with murder, he was never found not guilty of murder. He never went to trial.

We was the subject of an Article 32 **INVESTIGATION**. That is similar in scope to a District Attorney's investigation and decision to present his case to a grand jury, to see if they will return a true bill of indictment.

The investigating officer presents his case to the conveneing authority, the flag officer who makes the same decision as a grand jury - indict or not, only the general decides court martial or not.

In Panatno's case the investigating officer presented his findings to the convening authority with a recommendation of OME MINOR CHARGE, "conduct unbecoming an officer."

However, the "grand jury" did not return a "true bill." The general agreed with the investigating officer regarding the lack of evidence to proceed with a murder charge, and decided to dismiss the one minor charge that was recommended.

Questions?

Pantano

Just because he wasn't "charged" doesn't mean he didn't shoot the guys 60 times after he took off the handcuffs. He said he did it, himself.
What is this unnatural attraction you have for Pantano? Or is it jusat any man in uniform?

I am only "attracted" to the truth

The statement was made that he was charged and acquitted. That is factually incorrect. He was never charged, so he could not be acquitted.

Now, I understand that facts and the truth mean nothing to you liberals, but as a retired Marine who actually DOES know something about the Uniform Code of Military Justice, who actually HAS used the Manual for Courts Martial many times, I feel it's important to point out the lies you people spread about this man.

What amazes me is that I can't figure out why. Panatano poses little threat to McIntyre (who will be re-elected) because no one has anything to use against McIntyre. His voting record makes the charge that "He has a D behind his name" rather inconsequential.

So why the over the top attacks on Pantano?

He blew away two bad guys? Big deal!

Our greatest failure in every single war we have fought since 1945 is that we didn't kill enough of them!

Another great failure is accusing a man of a crime he didn't commit.

I'm sorry - there are too many questions

This has nothing to do with conservative or liberal. I'm not voting for someone who was a SUSPECT in a potential Court Martialed Double Homicide. That is just too much for me to overlook. I read both accounts of what happened and in the civilian world, he would have been charged. Plain and simple.

He owes debt from the last campaign, he tried to pitch himself as a Sheriff's deputy more than once, I don't think he even attended BLET...

There are a few different websites that have been generated against him with a lot of information, I'm not sure whats true and whats not but to be honest I dont trust anything he might say at this point.

We have enough issues in this part of the state with questionable people in public office (Berger, Warren etc...) we don't need another guy/gal with the potential to ruin anything else.

Have you seen me defend him...

...on any other issue beside the shooting?

No, you haven't. I don't vote for him. I'm not even particularly fond of the guy.

However, let me explain what you and all the other experts are really saying regarding the shooting. It really isn't about Pantano, after all. You're saying that you know more about the incident than LtCol Winn, the investigating officer who found no cause for a charge of murder. You are more qualified to make a finding of fact than General Huck, who supported the findings of the IO and did not send the case to a court-martial.

Without benefit of having been there, you know more than any of them? You are more qualified in the administration of military justice than men who have spent their lives in the military?

Meanwhile, in every other case in Iraq, SWG sailors, soldiers and Marines were getting nailed for the slightest infraction. Two Navy SEALs who punched an Iraqi insurgent while he was resisting capture were court martialed. They're STILL prosecuting the Marines from the Haditha incident. About a dozen Army officers, several who had nothing to do with Abu Ghraib, saw their careers end.

But Panatno, a mediocre 2nd Lieutenant with a mediocre record somehow walked? Why? Why was HE the golden boy? Perhaps because he was truly innocent of murder?

I also note that NOT ONE of the anti-Pantano gang has even tried to answer that question. It's like I haven't asked it five times before, right?

Pantano

Why won't you acknowledge that what he did was not honorable or correct? What lie did I tell? He took off the handcuffs before he shot them 60 times. Where is the lie? You are so full of yourself, you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you.

What he did was waste ammo....

....and leaving that note was a monumental event in the idiocy of young Lieutenants that is actually used as a teaching aid at Quantico now.

Accusations were made, he was investigated, no charges were filed. Those are the only FACTS that anyone knows. Unlike all you experts, I would never second guess the man who had to make that split-second decision to squeeze the trigger, because I've been in his boots.

I have to wonder if you and Pantano have some kind of personal issue. What did he ever do to you?

Ammo

What he did to me was besmirch the name of the US military in which I proudly served for 7 years. You still won't admit he is a dishonorable person, which leads me to believe that you are no better than he is and thus your opinion means squat.

Seven whole years?

Jeez, I think Pantano served longer than that....and he went to war...TWICE!

Seven

Sanctimonious idiot.

Why they won't admit....

You know why he won't admit what he did was dishonorable is that he is within the mentality that veterans can do no wrong. You know who else was a veteran? Timothy McVeigh.

I have the utmost respect for the Military, their service, hell, even Pantano's service. However, if he did do what the allegations say. I have no use for him from this point forward. There are many other able bodied, educated and people out there who could fill the seat.

He can't get a job - so he's trying to run for Congress. He's anti-government intervention, but he sure wants that tax payer funded salary.

Let me ask both of you something.....

How much "honor" did either of you find in close quarter combat?

PantaNONONO

"Challengetheworld" evidently had nothing to say but said it anyway. His/her elevator doesn't go all the way to the top.

Hi John

Did you want me to just sit around waiting for someone to comment....I have a job, I have things to do. There are other priorities above wway.com and posting about how we have to endure another season of Pantano's cries.

Go away.

Anyone but Pantano

Is it fair to say anyone but Pantano, including that seemingly off-balanced Randy Crow?! Frankly, none of the GOP threesome has a chance at beating McIntyre anyway.

Anyone

As a registered Liberterian I am almost to the point of saying anyone but a Republican for any office.