Bill Shipp’s Take

Bill Shipp has an interesting take on the Lt. Gov race. On Reed he writes:

So back to the original question: Why would anybody support Reed?

The short answer: Reed is easily the best-qualified candidate ever to seek the lieutenant governor’s office.

In fact, Georgia has never had a statewide candidate with such compelling credentials. When he says the Georgia campaign is not his “first rodeo,

124 comments

  1. GAWire says:

    I didn’t read the full article, so perhaps I am missing something, but just looking at the excerpt, what a stupid comment …

    “””In fact, Georgia has never had a statewide candidate with such compelling credentials … Sure, Reed has made serious mistakes, multimillion-dollar errors in judgment”””

    Doesn’t sound too compelling and certainly doesn’t sound like someone I want to vote for.

    Let’s vote for the guy who has made serious, mulimillion dollar errors in judgement as the state’s #2 in command!

    I love it when people try to defend Ralph, because it always and inevitably comes out sounding just that rediculous.

  2. Demonbeck says:

    As I said in an earlier post:

    Let me sum up what the article states, “Aside from the law-breaking and questionable ethics, this guy is a snake oil salesman with good connections.

  3. debbie0040 says:

    [sorry Debby, copyright violation to reprint the full thing here. I had to take it down. Erick]

    You can read the Bill Shipp article here in its entirety.

  4. Rusty says:

    I read that column a day or two ago. Either Bill Shipp is being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian, or he’s going senile. Those are the only two logical explanations. And I’m still waiting on Casey Cagle’s release rebutting Reed’s facetious claims from last week to be published. Whatsamatta, chicken? You should start reporting this site as an in-kind contribution to the Reed campaign.

  5. Bill Simon says:

    How fascinating that all of a sudden, Ralph supporters are taking Left-Wing, Liberal Democrat Bill Shipp’s opinion as something to support, whereas any previous articles discussing Ralph Reed from Shipp have been dismissed as part of the “liberal media take on Ralph Reed.”

    Can’t have it both ways, folks. Stop flip-flopping on whose opinion you hug.

  6. Bill Simon says:

    So, Debbie, someone has to be arrested and chartged with a crime before you decide their character isn’t up to snuff?

    Guess that explains your allegiance to Anthony-Scott Hobbs.

  7. Demonbeck says:

    You’ll note I also added questionable ethics. While the Federal Grand Jury investigation is still going on (which is why no one has evidence – none has been released), RR’s questionable ethics are very well known.

  8. debbie0040 says:

    Reed’s records were turned over to a Senate Committee that John McCain chaired. I would think had Reed broken the law he would have been indicted and McCain would have leaked that to the press. Reed did not break the law and will not be indicted. As for the Shipp article, Shipp did make an apparent turn around concerning Reed. That is why it was worth noting. Bill, you and I will have to agree to disagree on Reed’s character.

  9. Rusty says:

    Debbie,
    “Agreeing to disagree” isn’t really good enough. I’d like to hear how you rationalize the “humping in corporate accounts” and “this guy is like a bad version of us!” quotes that came out of the Casino Jack/Scanlon e-mails. What a swell Christian boy Ralph is. Doesn’t even using the word “humping” evoke imagery that breaks with his ocular covenant, if he’s the fundamentalist he pretends to be?

    McCain probably should have excused himself from examining Reed’s records, given Reed’s role in his character assassination during the 200 campaign. What a swell bit of Christian good will that was.

  10. debbie0040 says:

    I have no problem with Reed’s lobbying activities nor the fact he made money. As far as Abramoff’s comments, you trashed Abramoff but you won’t to believe one email he wrote is true. That was his opinion. Don’t be pollyanaish with the whole idea of McCain excusing himself. It would have leaked out were Reed guilty of violating the the law.

  11. Michael C says:

    Plus the statutes of limitations have un out in TX so there is no way for Reed to be charged. Saved by the calendar. If you lay with dogs…

  12. Rusty says:

    “Making money” is a bit of an understatement. First, it was “a butt ton of money.” Second, he made that butt ton of money by using one casino’s money to push out its competitor. And he lied to his clients about it. And he has continued to lie to everyone who has asked since.

    Illegal? That’s yet to be determined. Unethical? Absolutely.

    He’s a scumbag not for his ethically-challenged (and possibly legally-challenged) lobbying activities, but for the gaping disparity between what he is and what he says he is.

  13. Bull Moose says:

    Only praise for Ralph Reed is allowed on the front page… This is a very very biased site…

  14. debbie0040 says:

    Michael, there is a group called Texans for Public Justice that has been in existence since 1997. They monitor lobbying activities and have no love lost for Reed or any Republican. If Reed had broken the law, they would have pursued charges long before the Statute of Limitations expired. They monitor all such activity. Check out their web site:
    http://www.tpg.org

  15. Silence says:

    They kicked me off the front page for talking about RR.

    As for flip flopping conservatives who believe the liberal media, what about all ya’ll fellas who began taking Jim Galloway’s word for gospel long about the time he started his witch hunt against RR?

  16. Rusty says:

    Any “Reagan’s 11th Commandment” talk works to Ralph Reed’s advantage because there’s not really any dirt on Cagle, whereas there’s no shortage of dirt on Reed. So, I consider any “conservative” (Republicans aren’t actually conservative anymore, but I’ll speak in buzzwords so most of you will understand who I’m referring to) site that wants to stay out of the LG race to be a blatantly pro-Reed site.

  17. Sara says:

    Unethical? How does NEVER excusing yourself from a single vote on regulation of the banking industry and getting on the committee right after you “become” a banker? The record that has not been examined yet is banker boy’s!

  18. Rusty says:

    Sara,
    I’d be rich if I had a nickel for every time a legislator voted on a bill that seemed to be a conflict of interest. There’s nothing extrordinary about that. Reed deeds are extrodinary (but not in the good way).

  19. debbie0040 says:

    Rusty , I disagree with you about stuff on Cagle. How about the fact he voted with the Gov. Barnes and the Democrats against the bill that would identify non citzens on Georgia Drivers License? Then there are the other bills I have mentioned in previous postings. I guess you are saying it is ok to be unethical if you are a legislator. Talk about lobbyists, maybe you should check out the financial disclosure forms of our Republican elected officials after the GOP took power. They sure did not have problems with lobbyist’s money. And wasn’t Stephens guilty of an ethics violation? What ethics violation has Reed been charged with?

  20. Rusty says:

    Debbie,
    I’m not a Republican, so the virtues (or lack of) of Casey Cagle are pretty irrelevant to me. I’ll be voting for either candidates’ opponent in the general, and I still haven’t decided which primary I’ll participate in. All I know is that when I compare the two side-by-side, Cagle is a pretty typical state Senator with some leadership credentials whom I’m practically diametrically opposed to in most areas, but who seems to be a sincere public servant.

    Reed has led a group of people (the Christian Coalition) whom I consider no better than the Islamic fundamentalists blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel (save for the actual violence, which is only absent for tactical reasons… they saw how people reacted to the abortion clinic bombings in the 90s). Few things chap my ass more than the push for theocracy among the latest batch of Republicans, and he’s at the center of it.

    Further, he has a trail of shady tactics (see: McCain in 2000) and unethical behavior (Casino Jack, etc.) behind him. He promotes himself as something (a “good Christian”) that he isn’t. Even if Cagle were equally as corrupt as Reed (which he isn’t), he’d still only have one strike against him compared to two.

  21. Bill Simon says:

    Debbie,

    The reason why Texans for Justice didn’t file anything before the statute of limitations ranout was due to the fact that they had no proof of his actual lobbying activities UNTIL the e-mails from the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs RELEASED those e-mails to the public in 2005. Do/Can you comprehend that at all?

    I thought both you and Bob Koncerak had more SENSE to understand the order of events….BUT, Bob’s more than let me down in his vaccuous understanding of anything related to right and wrong,…and, to be quite honest, Debbie, I’ve never had much confidence in your ability as it is. Vis-a-vis, once again, YOUR support of ASH and his crappola all these past 3 years tells me you don’t know right from wrong.

  22. debbie0040 says:

    Rusty, with what you just said, I am damn glad we are not supporting the same candidate or on the same team. People like you is what is wrong with the Democratic Party.

  23. Maurice Atkinson says:

    Bill Shipp’s assessment is almost verbatum a discussion I’ve had with a number of Republicans. The problem I have is that Ralph built a career of promoting Principle over Politics, but as emails have revealed via subpoena, Ralph has been the player all along.

    There’s an old proverb,,,, screw me once shame on you, screw me twice shame on me. Also, the ends do not justify the means.

    Tell that to Clint Day. Ralph had a field day trashing him….. It’s ok for Ralph to deceive and fabricate stories for political purposes as he did to both Clint Day and John McCain, but it is inappropriate to confront him with the facts, from his own words.

    It’s ok for Ralph to launder his fees so that the source would not be discovered that it was Indian casinos. Total brilliance…

  24. Rusty says:

    LOL Debbie,
    I’m a free agent and a pragmatist, not a party man. In my lifetime, I’ve watched one-party rule when it was Democrats, and I’ve watched one-party rule now when it’s been Republicans, and it’s been a disaster both times. If you people quit putting up sociopaths, maybe I’ll vote for some of them. I’m not holding my breath though.

    It’ll be funny one day when you wake up and realize that when you support theocrats you’re actually supporting a form of liberalism. How’s it feel to be a liberal?

  25. Ralph Reed Fan says:

    I can’t believe anyone would say this site is pro Ralph Reed. I have been reading it for months and cannot believe the venom that comes from many of those who post here. Thanks God the owner or editor had the balls to take Bull Moose off the front page. Everyone knows he worked for McCain and has a grudge with Reed.

    All this Reed hatred can’t be good for the party because when Reed wins, and he will, it will be your hatred, not Ralph’s history or work for the party, that will harm Republican chances in the fall.

    Many who post here deserve no leadership role in the Republican party. They only seek to destroy what so many of us have worked to build over such a long time.

    Reed is a Republican hero who deserves our thanks and support. Bill Shipp was correct today in his conclusion. There could be no more qualified candidate for LG in Georgia than Reed. Any any candidate who seeks to destroy him on the way to higher office is not worthy of that office. I hope Mr. Cagle’s supporters are not a true reflection of his character. If so and he wins, we are all in trouble.

  26. Jack S says:

    Note to Bloggers, Maurice just landed the hammer on Debbie, Sara and the rest of the morons on this site.

    Silence, go back to hiding under your rock. The Reed people are so desperate that they are now citing the AJC to attack Cagle and still trying to say don’t believe the clear truth about Ralph’s hypocrisy becuase it’s from the AJC.

    I”m embarrassed to be a Republican when I read this drivel.

  27. larry smith says:

    You know, I was going to ditch this site after Bull Moose got tossed from the front page for daring to post anything positive about Cagle.

    But, getting to watch Debbie in action is just priceless. I mean, you can’t pay for entertainment like this. The only problem is that I can feel my IQ slipping by a few points every time I read one of her posts, but I guess that’s the price of comedy.

    Please Erick, just promise you won’t ever censor her … I need the laughter in my life.

  28. larry smith says:

    And, not only are they citing the AJC, they’re now citing Bill Shipp … a guy who has built an entire career on trashing every Republican that ever won any office.

  29. debbie0040 says:

    Larry, I will match my IQ against yours any day of the week.
    Maurice, you can stop the hypocrisy about the problem you have with Ralph. You know what you mentioned is not the only reason. Be honest.
    Jack S vote Democrat then. I have a feeling you do sometimes anyway. You want someone that is weak and someone that caves in like Cagle.
    Rusty, I would imagine the real issue you have with Reed and the Christian Coalition is the fact they are against gay marriage. I have debated gay actitivists and it is funny how the same terminology is used over and over again that you used.

    What are going to do when Reed wins both the primary and the general election.

  30. debbie0040 says:

    If you are a doctor and you have a patient that will die without a blood transfusion and the only blood donor to step forward is a dubious source, are you going to let your patient die or accept the blood and let have your patient live? Ralph made a bad error of judgement. Are you guys saying that Cagle has never made a bad error in judgement

  31. debbie0040 says:

    Maurice keeps repeating the same old accusations. He was fighting a new casino being built. Now he would have been guilty of the things Maurice stated had he took money not to fight the casino. He did not.

  32. Demonbeck says:

    “Rusty, I would imagine the real issue you have with Reed and the Christian Coalition is the fact they are against gay marriage. I have debated gay actitivists and it is funny how the same terminology is used over and over again that you used.”

    I am embarassed I didn’t put it together until I read this. It fits so perfectly. The reason I dislike Ralph Reed so much is that he is a modern day Joseph McCarthy. This kind of language from one of his supporters is not uncommon. Reed and his cronies don’t defend, they attack. They don’t attack positions, they make personal attacks that are hard to refute.

    Debbie,

    Where do you get off calling someone a homosexual just by reading a post?

  33. Maurice Atkinson says:

    Debbie, that is precisely why I am not supporting Ralph. As a Darn Yankee, I moved to Georgia in 2000…. I knew of Ralph as an effective organizer. I did not know him on a personal level. I only knew of him through the Christian Coalition, which I was an effective part of in Indiana. I was a County Chairman. I had joined in 1992 and left in 1996 and never rejoined, not because I abandoned my beliefs but because I became involved in the local Party. We did work diligently at being non-partisan. We tried to influence Christians to be involved in the Party of their choice. I am a Republican and involved myself in the local Party and worked for several gubanatorial, congressional and senate campaigns.

    My problem with Ralph is precisely the things I mentioned. His trashing of Clint Day. The Day’s are wonderful people and have done much for Georgia. I do have a problem with how Ralph made certain the money was laundered through different “entities” before it arrived in his bank account. He obviously didn’t want people to know. Only through subpoena does the public now know.

    I have a huge problem with how Ralph was taking money from Sen. Shelby (to run his campaign for re-election) and waging a war against his candidate on behalf of Channel One.

    These are huge CHARACTER issues that should concern anyone.

    If I knew then what I know now, I would have never supported the man.

    The emporer has no clothes….

  34. debbie0040 says:

    Demonbeck, Rusty used the exact terms used by gay activists when referring to Christian conservatives. I will be more than happy to supply you with examples of that rhetoric posted online if you like. If I am wrong about Rusty, I apologize, but if the shoe fits.. Demonbeck, you and Cagle supporters are guilty of the same things you accuse Reed and his supporters of. Why don’t you look in the mirror and stop being a hypocrite?
    I have grave concerns about Cagle’s character and weakness. People have different priorities and issues that are important to them. You have the right to support and defend that candidate of your choice, just like I do. I did not start out insulting you for supporting Cagle. You guys do insult Reed supporters so I figured I could do the same with you guys. I respond to people the way they respond to me. When you guys attack Reed supporters then you attack people like Nancy Coverdell, Bo Callaway , Sean Hannity, Zell Miller, etal.

  35. debbie0040 says:

    Demonbeck, I did not call him a homosexual. I said he was upset about the gay marriage stand the Christian Coalition takes. How is that an attack? I was stating what I believe. I don’t believe in sugar coating anything or in being politically correct.

  36. Demonbeck says:

    I have not seen one person attack Reed for anything that he has not brought upon himself with his misdeeds as a lobbyist. I have seen no one make personal attacks on fellow posters except you. You made a personal attack on Rusty and I am calling you out on it. It was uncalled for and downright rude. Until now, I have debated you civilly on points between the two campaigns and respected your opinion in your arguments – as have many if not all of our fellow posters.

    Personally, to me, that is exactly why people should not support Ralph – because it is the exact type of character assassination that he is known for and we as a party should not condone it. His trashing of fine politicians like John McCain and Clint Day without regard for truth or consequence is appalling. I refuse to allow my party to go down that road. We need to get away from the type of name-calling and finger-wagging that is so prevalent amongst the Christian Coalition and become what our country needs – leaders. Ralph Reed is not a leader, he is a coward who hides behind a teflon sheen and false accusations.

  37. Philly says:

    Demonbeck, then you are blind. I guess, you have not read the other posts that called Reed all kind of names and degraded his supporters. How is asserting that Rusty supports gay marriage an attack? I have read similar sentiment about Christians by gay activists and by atheists. I guess you find nothing wrong with Rusty attacking the Christian Coalition. IE:”Reed has led a group of people (the Christian Coalition) whom I consider no better than the Islamic fundamentalists blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel (save for the actual violence, which is only absent for tactical reasons… they saw how people reacted to the abortion clinic bombings in the 90s).” You just get your drawers in abunch when you don’t agree with the attacks. Like Debbie said, look in the mirror.

  38. Philly says:

    Demonbeck, then you are blind. I guess. you have not read the other posts that called Reed all kind of names and degraded his supporters. How is asserting that Rusty supports gay marriage an attack? I have read similar sentiment about Christians by gay activists and by atheists. I guess you find nothing wrong with Rusty attacking the Christian Coalition. You just get your drawers in abunch when you don’t agree with the attacks. Like Debbie said, look in the mirror.

  39. Philly says:

    Demonbeck, you need to look in the mirror. Rusty compared the Christian Coalition to Islamic Terrorists and called Reed and others sociopaths. I have seen similar sentiment posted by gay activists and atheists. You did not have a problem with what Rusty said, only Debbie. That is truly hypocrisy by you. Debbie is just giving you guys a taste of your own medicine and you don’t like it one bit. Good for her!

  40. debbie0040 says:

    Demonbeck, you found nothing wrong with Rusty comparing the Christian Coalition to Islamic Terrorists or calling Ralph and other Republican leaders sociopaths. You just had a problem when I responded back in like manner and gave Rusty a taste of his own medicine. Talk about hypocrisy. You don’t have a problem with attacks, name calling and finger pointing as long as you agree with that position. I don’t believe John McCain is a fine politician and I don’t know anything about Clint Day to make an informed decision. I don’t believe Cagle is a leader, he is a follower.
    As far as respecting my opinion, maybe you need to go back and read other threads and postings and see who was attacked first. You will find out that you and you fellow posters started the attacks on me and Reed supporters. As I said, stop the hypocrisy.

  41. Demonbeck says:

    No, I found nothing wrong with Rusty providing his opinion for us to read. I had a problem when you responded back by attacking him personally. I don’t have a problem with attacking people’s opinions or positions – you received my vitriol because you attacked Rusty instead of his opinions. You, Debbie, stepped over the line, not anyone else.

    As far as Casey Cagle, John McCain and Clint Day go, they could have been the worst politicians in the history of the world, but in our Republican form of Democracy, they have a right to represent those who elect them and you have your right to your opinion of them. However, you have no right to conduct personal attacks on them or their character unless you have evidence to back that up.

    Your candidate started rumors in SC during the 2000 campaign about a black baby fathered by McCain – a lie which he knew to be untrue. Now you make false accusations about a fellow poster with no evidence whatsoever to back it up. All of this over your “Christian” candidate? Talk about hypocrisy.

  42. Rusty says:

    Debbie,
    I don’t consider it an insult to be called a homosexual. You might be disappointed to learn, however, that I am in fact hetero.

  43. True Conservative says:

    Debbie, it is funny that you say we attack others when we speak out against Reed.

    I consider my good friends with Carolyn Meadows and numerous other Reed supporters. We agree to disagree. It does not mean I attack them.

    It is great that that is all you can constantly fall back on… Ralphs endorsers. I think the Cobb GOP EB needs to look at you being removed for several things you have said against your elected State Senators. I am sure John Wiles, Judson Hill and Chip Rogers do not appreciate the party apparatus speaking out condeming them and calling them cowards. I thought the purpose of the party was to get the republican nominees elected. Not to get involved in primaries that tear up on republican candidates.

  44. debbie0040 says:

    Demonbeck, Rusty attacked the Christian Coalition which means he attacked friends I have that are part of the Christian Coalition. You find nothing wrong with Rusty calling Reed and other elected officials sociopath. You just had an issue with me responded in like form and with me providing my personal opinion. You think Rusty is entitled to express his opinion, but i am not entitled to express mine. You are hypocritical when it comes to attacks. I suggest you go back and read other threads and postings and you will see attacks on me, Reed supporters and Reed. Have not seen you get your drawers in a wad over those. Want me to provide them for you?

    I will give examples written by pro gay marriage posters on other blogs and you can see why I made that statement about gay marriage:
    “With an itch to make the whole world suffer the way the “normal” Cult Christian American does. They’re up on their crosses, suffering the losses of humanity and human dignity on a daily basis. They want the rest of the world up on a cross too; bleeding, being raped, being tortured, and then murdered at the moment their will is broken down enough to admit some imaginary crime the U.S. torturers have made up for them to confess to.
    Christians are the terrorists of the world. ”

    “Bush’s sicko non-christ following Fake Cult Christians are the real terrorists of the world. Bin Laden is nobody and nothing compared to what that ugly version of Cult Christianity is doing around world. Raping and murdering young children, raping and murdering pregnant women, old men, old women, innocent men. ”
    “Christians are the real terrorists of our world. They use the U.S. racist mercenaries in American uniforms to terrorize the whole middle east”

    Larry, you must have missed yours.

  45. Bill Simon says:

    Larry,

    Yes, she has had a position in the Cobb GOP ever since the sleazy chairman by the name of Anthony-Scott Hobbs (aka “ASH”) has been in charge. She is a STRONG supporter of ASH.

    And, I have been making personal attacks on Debbie because of her association with ASH and how directly it relates to her support of Ralph Reed.

    She likes sleazy liars in her choice of leaders to follow and admire.

    SO, Rusty, if you are hetero AND either sleazy, or a liar, or (gasp!) BOTH, Debbie will be looking to reconcile her differences with you.

  46. larry smith says:

    So, since the Cobb GOP has Debbie as one of its leaders, do they also have a human cannonball, a weightlifting midget and a lion act?

    If so, I’m going to cut my entertainment budget in half and just start going to see the free show at their meetings.

  47. debbie0040 says:

    True conservative/Brian Laurens, What did the State Senators say about Reed? They did act cowardly in trying to get Reed to step down and not be a candidate for elective office. By your logic, I guess all Reed supporters should be upset with them. I have made it clear I always support the nominee of the party. I have not said I am with the Cobb GOP. You insinuated that because you think you know it all. I agree to disagree with Cagle supporters but if I am attacked because I support Reed or if Reed supporters are attacked then I will retaliate in like manner.
    As far as you trying to cause trouble for a local county party, you need to research the rules. You can support whom you want to in your personal capacity, not your party capacity. I am sure the local party will be thrilled with the fact you are trying to cause problems. You are upset because you support Stephens and Cagle in the primary and I don’t. From what I have heard about you, you are not one to throw stones at anyone.

  48. debbie0040 says:

    Bill, You must think Handel and Black are liars with your remarks because I am supporting them. We see things differently on some issues and on some we things the same.
    Rusty, I never called you a homosexual; I inferred you supported gay marriage because your comments were similar to remarks made about Christians by gay activists. I was giving you a taste of your own medicine. But, how do you feel aobut gay marriage?

  49. Rusty says:

    LOL Debbie,
    “A taste of my own medicine,” that’s rich. What medicine would that be?

    My views on gay marriage aren’t relevant to this particular discussion, which is about Ralph Reed’s fitness to stand for office.

    I don’t know how your voice is, but if it’s decent you should look into a career in talk radio. Your strawman-argument-to-word ratio is pretty phenomenal.

  50. debbie0040 says:

    You made far reaching insults by comparing the Christian Coalition to terrorists and Reed and other GOP Leaders were called sociopaths. What rationale are you using to jump to that conclusion?

  51. Demonbeck says:

    I never said you weren’t entitled to express your opinion, you just aren’t entitled to besmirch the character of your fellow posters and they should not be allowed to do the same to you. Bill Simon and Larry Smith should be called out as well in this regard.

  52. Bill Simon says:

    Debbie,

    Even a broken clock is right twice per day. Meaning, the random intersection of you and I supporting the same candidate (i.e., Handel) does not invalidate my previous assertion.

    Let’s just say you PREFER being associated with candidates who are sleazy liars. If you had had an opportunity to hang around Bill Stephens more, I suspect you would have glommed onto his campaign instead of Karen’s.

  53. debbie0040 says:

    I have been around Bill Stephens and prefer Handel. I like Stephens but I don’t let personal feeling influence my decisions.
    I prefer candidates I think will win and do a good job and that will stand strong. The GOP needs Handel on the ticket to attract women. Look at others supporting Reed. To be honest, Sue Everhart had a lot of influence in my decision to support Reed. Does she like those types of candidates? I have a GREAT deal of respect for her, so expect me to defend her with the same zeal as I defend others I support if you attack her.

  54. debbie0040 says:

    True Conservative, you attacked me first, do you recall that? Go back and read other threads and posting and see who started the attacks. Do you think I am not going to respond?

  55. larry smith says:

    Demonbeck,

    I would note that Debbie’s first appearance on this site was to call me a liar, for which she has not apologized despite being shown proof she was wrong.

    I would further note that her posts are incoherent, rambling, and devoid of almost any logical thought. In short, she is wasting not only her time, but also ours.

    Ergo, I am not going to lose a lot of sleep over “besmirchment.”

  56. debbie0040 says:

    Larry, that was not my first appearance and you know it. Get your facts straight. Want me to prove it? You made is sound like Reed had committed a crime and was the target of an investigation. You still have not provided proof of criminal wrong doing or that Reed was the target of a Senate Committee Investigation

  57. debbie0040 says:

    All I ask Demonbeck is for you to be consistent and thank you . Please go back and read other threads and you will see I did not begin the personal attacks. You and I are in complete agreement on the immigration issue. I believe just because you disagree on one issue or candidate does not mean you can’t work together on other issues or candidates. In the end, I will always bust my tail for the GOP Nominee.

  58. larry smith says:

    Yes, Debbie, please waste more of our time and send us an itemized list of every post you have ever made on this site so that we will all be enlightened.

  59. Rusty says:

    Debbie,
    Besides Reed, who did I call a sociopath? Reed projects a false image of himself to gain the support of a group of people, only to manipulate those same people into unknowingly doing the work of another group of people. He spreads lies about competitors. That’s sociopathic behavior.

    As for the Christian Coalition, it was founded by Pat Robertson, who consistently displays sociopathic behavior that follows the same pattern as the theocrats who ran the Taliban, whose supporters are currently blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel. For example, he recently called for the assassination of a democratically-elected foreign leader (Chavez) on national television. He has called for the “godly fumigation” of non-Christians. He has called for the overthrow of the U.S. government. I call him a Talibangelist.

  60. Bill Simon says:

    Debbie,

    Now THAT’S funny (in a sick sort of fashion).

    Perhaps you’ve had a lobotomy over the past year and you’ve forgotten how you once felt about my good friend Sue Everhart and how it was ME who was doing all the support pieces for Sue and attacks on you and your crowd of ASH, Michael Altman, and Frank “The Molestor” Molesky.

    Sue Everhart is a good person and a good friend. Do not sully her reputation by trying to claim you are just like her in every way because you and she happen to support the same candidate.

  61. debbie0040 says:

    I have not claimed to be like Sue. I could not hold a candle to Sue. I got to know Sue and realized the attacks were wrong, but I personally did not attack her. I pushed to put all past issues aside and work together.

  62. Bill Simon says:

    Okay…but, you have still refused to address all of my previous comments with regards to ASH. Have you figured out yet that he and his gang were ALL wrong on many issues and methods, or, are you still an apologist for him?

  63. Jack S says:

    I’m embarrassed to be a Republican after reading all of Debbie’s ridiculous rants. I guess there is a downside to this site. The world sees how truly pathetic Ralph’s supporters and some GOP activists truly are.

  64. debbie0040 says:

    As a Republican Jack, I am embarassed by your postings as well. Works both ways. I tell you what, point out my ridiulous rants and I will point out yours.

  65. Demonbeck says:

    Debbie,

    You began the personal attacks on this thread. I am fairly new to these threads and don’t know everyone’s history so I am just calling it like I see it.

    You are the biggest RR apologist on these boards and it seems like 90% of the posts on this entire blog are devoted towards makign you realize that RR is not the Golden Calf he likes to portray himself as. Are you so naive to think that he is not a target of a criminal investigation?

  66. debbie0040 says:

    Where are the indictments? Demonbeck, you need to read the other threads and you will find I did not start the attacks. I think he was investigated as part of the Indian Tribe/Abramoff thing but it is a stretch to say he is the TARGET of a criminal investigation. Using your analogy you could say that Cheney and W are targets of a criminal investigation. I honestly and truly believe Reed did nothing illegal nor nothing different than other politicians have done in their careers. I have never said I thought Reed was perfect, I think he made a bad decision or error in judgement but I refuse to condemn him for that bad decision. He who is without sin cast the first stone. Yea, True conservative looks like we all do or we are just devoted political junkies that eat, sleep and dream politics.

  67. Rusty says:

    Where are the indictments?

    That line of reasoning reminds me of a Chris Rock bit:

    N******s always want credit for some s*** they’re supposed to do. They’ll brag about stuff a normal man just does. They’ll say something like, “Yeah, well I take care of my kids.

  68. debbie0040 says:

    Rusty, when you assert over and over that someone has committed a crime asking where are the indictments is a perfectedly normal question to ask. I appreciate you sharing that sentiment with me, it shows where your head is.

  69. Rusty says:

    LOL Debbie, if I get more time I’m going to count your strawman arguments in this thread.

    The closest I ever came to saying whether what Reed has done is or isn’t a crime was this:

    Illegal? That’s yet to be determined. Unethical? Absolutely.

    In fact, I think the only person talking about Ralph Reed committing crimes is you.

  70. debbie0040 says:

    I did not say you asserted it Rusty, Larry and othes did assert that. Go back and read other threads.

  71. Rusty says:

    I guess I was mistaken to think that this sentence was addressing me:

    Rusty, when you assert over and over that someone has committed a crime…

    It would have been clearer there if you’d written “Rusty, when someone asserts…”

  72. Demonbeck says:

    Debbie,

    I never said that he was the target of an investigation I said he was a target of an investigation, big difference.

    And YOU were the one to start personal attacks on THIS thread.

  73. larry smith says:

    I never said I had evidence that Ralph had commited a crime. I did say he was being investigated by several entities in Washington whose job it is to examine the eivdence and determine if a crime has been committed. I also said he’d hired a major criminal defense attorney.

    Both of those facts are true, not that I’m expecting Debbie to own up to reality any time soon. I have no idea if Ralph will go to jail or not, but he is the only person who knows all the details, and he’s concerned enough to spend $500 an hour on a criminal defense attorney who used to work for Clinton and prosecuted Reagan in Iran-Contra.

  74. tobin smith says:

    Some of you guys need to get a life. But here is a question:

    Is there any Republican on this thread who will say publically that they will not support the Republican nominee, be it Cagle or Reed? That is a question that is worth asking given the strong opinions expressed here.

    I am for Reed, but I will support Cagle if he wins. What about the rest of you?

  75. Eddie T says:

    Debbie says “He who is without sin cast the first stone.”

    And you’re supporting the Christian Coalition/Ralph Reed?

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  76. True Conservative says:

    Message Message Message.

    What a campaign boils down to. And when one candidate can do nothing but respond, be it to allegations, or an apology, they are not on message. The goal of an opponent is to keep you off message.

    What message has Debbie, a surogate of the Reed team, been sending? Has she been on message at all? Or is it “in that post, in this post, in another thread?”

  77. Jimbo says:

    Tobin, Debbie asked that question on a previous thread and stated she would always support the GOP nominee. I don’t believe she got any response so don’t expect any of these turkeys to agree to support the nominee of the party.

    Here are the postings that alluded to the fact Ralph had committed illegal activity:

    1. larry smith said,
    April 4, 2006 @ 11:40 am
    Ok, this will be a shocker to you, Debbie, so get ready …
    Presidents typically don’t campaign for guys who are the targets of federal criminal investigations.
    Stunning, I know, but true.
    1. larry smith said,
    April 4, 2006 @ 12:45 pm
    Debbie,
    Did you know that Ralph has hired Bill Clinton’s former counsel who is now one of the top white collar criminal defense lawyers in the United States to represent him?
    Are you aware that Ralph has been subpoenaed by a federal criminal probe?
    Are you aware that Ralph is also a target of investigations by two Republican-led U.S. Senate committees?
    Did you know that Ralph’s own campaign is paying his legal bills with funds contributed by donors?
    Now, let me ask you, are these the actions of an innocent man?
    1. nfire said,
    March 29, 2006 @ 3:19 pm
    Shep-
    He’s not going to jail yet, though, so he can stay out and keep talking to the feds about congressional corruption. These sessions of Abramoff talking to the feds are the main reason why Ralph has soiled his underwear so much (as noted by Demon above).
    1. HowardDawg said,
    April 4, 2006 @ 10:22 pm
    I’m sure the boys in cell block D will think Ralph is the prom queen when he shows up.

  78. Jimbo says:

    True Conservative, Debbie has never claimed to be a surrogate of the Reed team and I think she is very much on message. She challenges your accusations. Go back on your meds True Conservative, your posting makes no sense.

  79. True Conservative says:

    By Golly, Debbies called in reinforcments. She must have sent out a welppp!

    So which one is Jared?

  80. SOUTHERNCOMFORT says:

    Debbie I suggest youbook yourself a nice long stay somewhere in Arizona spa in late July. It is going to be the only presciption that may save you from yourself, and by the way if you don’t get to vote for Cagle in the general don’t fret we’ll be carrying the water and our grand old party will be just fine!

  81. jackson says:

    Jimbo –

    Not to get into semantics, but by the very nature that Debbie is a member of the Reed team, and is on all these blogs making posts, she is acting as a surrogate. That is what one does when they are a surrogate.

    Regarldess, its funny how you are upset that larry may or may not be alluding to illegal activity, but you wont answer the questions posed.

    Where there is smoke, there is fire. And with all the smoke around Ralph Reed, you can hardly chalk that up to “the media is out to get me” with a straight face. Bottom line: Ralph Reed engaged in activity, that at best, is unethical and unbecoming of someone of his background and standing. That is not the type of person Republicans should elect, in my opinion.

  82. Bill Simon says:

    Tobin,

    To your question I will answer truthfully: If Ralph Reed wins the primary nomination, there is NO WAY I will support him or vote for him.

    I have a life outside of politics and that guides me to the point where I do not and will not support anyone who is as dishonest a broker as Ralph Reed is, regardless of the party affiliation.

    Does that mean I will campaign for the Dem LG nominee winner? No. But I am not going to support anyone who is so blatant a crook as Ralph Reed is.

  83. Michael C says:

    Debbie, may I suggest you “turn the other cheek” if someone attacks you in this thread or any other thread. Kill them with kindness. If you feel someone has attacked you resist your urge to attack back. It gets you and your candidate no good.

    The fact remains that Reed has chosen to surround himself with shady characters. He has also orchestrated some of the most vicious campaigns in recent history. That alone is enough for me to not support him. And that fact that Cagle is a leader with a proven record (despite your talking points) seals the deal for me.

  84. debbie0040 says:

    I am not acting as a surrogate for the Reed Team and never have. I guess by your logic, you all are surrogates for the Cagle Team. Guys, I have a news flash for you, I am not going to stop posting , I just love to irritate you Cagle supporters. You can’t stand the fact I stand up to you. I disgree with Bill, but at least he admits it and is honest about, he did not shy away from an answer.
    Reed will be the GOP nominee for LT. Governor, face it and get over it. Southern Comfort, on July 18th I plan on attending Reed’s victory celebration and will be here. You might want to be somewhere else, though. Like maybe Greenland and you won’t have to watch the news reporting on Reed’s victory.
    Brian, I have not called in re-enforcements. It kills me you criticizing the endorsements Reed has, you were at the Hannity-Miller Rally were you not or was that your clone I saw? You must have been impressed enough to crash a Reed function.

  85. Jimbo says:

    You Cagle supporters are disgusting and act like Democrats. You get pissed because someone doesn’t see things your way and you start the insults to try to discourage them from posting. I am not Jared Brian, but trust me you know me and I know you. If you bother to read other threads you will see I have posted previously. Michael, one can turn the other cheek so many times and I respect Deb for fighting back and doing so with so much spirit and zeal..You will not push her around.
    Jackson, I never said Reed made bad choices but haven’t we all? You all give Cagle a pass on his votes and his memory lapse/lie on why he missed the eminent domain vote and he has NEVER explained why he voted with Dems on that drivers license bill. But we all know why he did, either he did not care if non-citizens received government services or he caved in to Gov. Barnes.
    Reed can do more for Georgia than Cagle ever thought about doing and Reed does not waiver in his beliefs.

  86. Jimbo says:

    Michael, I could not help but notice you urged Debbie not to strike back at insults but say nothing to admonish your fellow Cagle supporters about the attacks. Maybe you should go back and read them. Says a lot about you. It is rather naive to say it does your candidate no good. Like we all have not made up our minds.

  87. JulieSMI says:

    Reed is a liar, a hypocrite, and he’ll do anything for anyone if the price is right. The proof is in his very own emails. he’s getting what he deserves.

  88. Fuzzyslippers says:

    Wow. How did I miss this enlightening thread?

    BTW, I’m going to steal that Talibangilist line. Just letting you know.

  89. jackson says:

    –“Jackson, I never said Reed made bad choices but haven’t we all? “– Bad choices? Sure, we all make them. But a pattern of continual bad decisions, many of which were made while no one was looking, only to lie when caught, then continue to lie, that’s a different story.

    –“You all give Cagle a pass on his votes and his memory lapse/lie on why he missed the eminent domain vote…”– I thought he explained why he missed it. Why is it a memory lapse?

    –“he has NEVER explained why he voted with Dems on that drivers license bill. But we all know why he did, either he did not care if non-citizens received government services or he caved in to Gov. Barnes.”– Say what you want about Casey Cagle, I hardly think that line of attack is going to work. They guy is a highly rated conservative republican. You are talking about 2 votes. And the most important point: Whether you agree with his decisions or not, it was not a character issue, like it is with Ralph. Acting like Democrats? Its funny. We made an issue of Character when we ran against Clinton, Gore, and Kerry. NOw character doesnt matter? Give me a break.

    –“Reed can do more for Georgia than Cagle ever thought about doing”– then why hasnt he been doing it instead of hiding the fact that he made millions from casinos in other states?

    –…” Reed does not waiver in his beliefs.”– I guess that is in the eye of the beholder. He sure didnt have a problem: lying; knowingly working for casinos (even though he told teh christian coalition he wasnt); starting a christian front group working for big corporations for MFN for China, even though christians where being tortured/killed in china AND RALPH REED OPPOSED IT THE PREVIOUS YEAR; working to stop HIGHER standards in Cable television but for Channel One in childrens classrooms; and working for Mitch Skandalakis of all people. Compromise? Waiver? If you dont have any beliefs, I guess its easy not to waiver from them. (Oh, and before you start going off JIMBO, the above issues where mention in CHRISTIAN and CONSERVATIVE magazines as a critcism of Ralph Reed.)

  90. JP says:

    Georgia does NOT need the ridicule that electing Reed would bring it. Already we have stickers on science books in Cobb and now lawsuits in favor of intolerance to answer for.

  91. JP says:

    We already have stickers on science books and a lawsuit asking for the right to be intolerant, I don’t think Georgia can take much more ridicule. Plus, I’d hate to shame the legacy of Jimmy Carter with a hyper-conservative hack like Reed.

  92. debbie0040 says:

    Cagle is weak and that is a character trait. You ask most activists what they think of Cagle and they will say he is someone that doesn’t like to make waves and he avoids controversy. That is a weakness. Ralph gives 110% in any job he is doing. He does what it takes to get the job done and be successful. That is what I want in a Lt. Governor. Reed has not been in an elective position to help Georgia. The Cagle problem is more than one or two votes. He does have a pattern of caving in. It is easy to lead and stand by your principles when your side is in power, it is far different when your side is not-like under the Barnes Regime. I want someone I can depend on to stand up no matter who is in charge. He did not knowingly lie. He depended on a friend to make sure the money did not come from the casino revenue of the Indian Tribes.

  93. debbie0040 says:

    Jackson, Cagle either told several lies about why he missed that eminent domain vote or he had a memory lapse. Check the record, he changed his story several times as to why he did not vote.

  94. Michael C says:

    Jimbo, the focus of most of the cooments on this post are about Debbie and her penchant for attacking those who disagree with her. Your attempt to deflect from that was futile. You and Debbie appear to be verry much alike. As supporters of Reed you have shown the same cut throat attitude as your candidate. This is to the detriment of you and your candidate.

  95. Maurice Atkinson says:

    Debbie, I’m not hurling stones at you. And ain’t know one going to convince you or you convince them to change their support. But as you have said that my criticism is the same old, it is the same old criticism.

    You say Casey is weak. I beg to differ, and quite the contrary. He has shown leadership that is effective not devisive.

    The same argument you use against Casey is being applied to Ralph. They are:

    1. Ralph encouraged the laundering of money so that the public would not see who was waging the campaign against Senator Shelby.

    2. Ralph encouraged the laundering of money so that the public would not see who was waging the campaign against a RIVAL casino, to protect marketshare.

    3. Ralph used unscrupulous tactics to trash Senator Clint Day on behalf of Mitch Skandalakus (who ultimately spent time in jail). Clint is an honorable man and an effective Christian. The Days have contributed as much or more to the State of Georgia than most any other family. This was low. By the way has Ralph apologized for this.

    4. Ralph orchestrated a rumor campaign among Christians in South Carolina with false claims that Senator McCain fathered an illigitimate baby. He used race in these false claims to fuel the fire. That was a low moment. By the way has Ralph apologized for this?

    These are certain CHARACTER flaws on a large scale that should be strongly considered and demand answers. As of yet Ralph has refused to answer, address or even apologize for these lies.

  96. Philly says:

    Michael, you are wrong Debbie did not start the attacks. She did not start the attacks in this thread. You are being very hypocritical. You do not consider it an attack unless you disagree with the position. As for the cut throat attitude, yea I for one have one. That is what wins campaigns. You Cagle supporters can’t say you don’t do the same thing. You attack Reed supporters constantly and you guys started the attacks. How is that not personal?

    Let me refresh your memory on the attacks:There were so many personal attacks on Reed I won’t even list them. I will list the personal attacks on Debbie or Reed supporters. You will see the attacks took place before Debbie attacked. Talk about hypocrisy Michael.

    1. Bill Simon said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 1:24 pm
    So, Debbie, someone has to be arrested and chartged with a crime before you decide their character isn’t up to snuff?
    Guess that explains your allegiance to Anthony-Scott Hobbs.

    1. Rusty said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 4:22 pm
    1. Reed has led a group of people (the Christian Coalition) whom I consider no better than the Islamic fundamentalists blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel (save for the actual violence, which is only absent for tactical reasons… they saw how people reacted to the abortion clinic bombings in the 90s). Few things chap my ass more than the push for theocracy among the latest batch of Republicans, and he’s at the center of it.
    2. Bill Simon said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 5:35 pm
    Debbie,
    The reason why Texans for Justice didn’t file anything before the statute of limitations ranout was due to the fact that they had no proof of his actual lobbying activities UNTIL the e-mails from the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs RELEASED those e-mails to the public in 2005. Do/Can you comprehend that at all?
    I thought both you and Bob Koncerak had more SENSE to understand the order of events….BUT, Bob’s more than let me down in his vaccuous understanding of anything related to right and wrong,…and, to be quite honest, Debbie, I’ve never had much confidence in your ability as it is. Vis-a-vis, once again, YOUR support of ASH and his crappola all these past 3 years tells me you don’t know right from wrong.
    1. Jack S said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 8:33 pm
    Note to Bloggers, Maurice just landed the hammer on Debbie, Sara and the rest of the morons on this site.
    Silence, go back to hiding under your rock. The Reed people are so desperate that they are now citing the AJC to attack Cagle and still trying to say don’t believe the clear truth about Ralph’s hypocrisy becuase it’s from the AJC.
    I

  97. Philly says:

    Maurice, You debate the right way with dignity and class without personal attacks. That is the way it should be. Too bad all Cagle supporters don’t take a clue from you.

  98. debbie0040 says:

    Maurice, I have a lot of respect for you and the way you debate issues. This is one point you and I will disagree on. Ralph gives 110% to any job he has to get the job done successfully. People will disagree with his methods, but he is successful. The King Rat ads run by the Perdue campaign caused the Barnes Regime to cry foul , but it got people’s attention and it worked. Ralph will do what is necessary to be successful. Had I been in his shoes with things you menitoned, I probably would have done things similar. I am sure he has amibitions other than Lt. Governor. That is an asset . He will give his all in his capacity as Lt. Governor because he has a lot to prove. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind he will do an great job and succeed. He will not bow down to pressure as I believe Cagle will. Ralph and Casey are two different people with different styles. I prefer Ralph’s gungho style over Casey’s concillatory , “not make any waves” style.

  99. Michael C says:

    Philly,

    Debbie was first to make personal attacks. That is what I am talking about. What Cagle supporters and other Reed supporters are doing is not personal but a healthy debate. Hey that is why we are here.

    Debbie and many Reed supporters have stated that Reed “does what it takes to get the job done”. That includes lying, stealing, and cheating. Everything a Christian should work at avoiding. That is hypocricy and is what gives Christians a bad name. Now, Reed has not done all of these things, but he did lie about McCain and Clint Day. I will not support a candidate who will try to win at all costs while sacrificing what is moraly right.

    Conservatives have to take the moral highroad.

  100. Philly says:

    Michael , when you guys attack it is called healthy debate when the Reed group fights back it is called attacks. You don’t call this personal attacks? I have a major problem with Rusty comparing the Christian Coalition to terrorists. That is a personal attack on me and anyone associated with it. Stop being a hypocrite.

    This is not a personal attack? They ARE personal attacks. How on earth can you not consider these attacks but yet when it is inferred someone supports gay marriage an attack? Rusty never did deny he supports gay marriage now did he?

    1. Bill Simon said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 1:24 pm
    So, Debbie, someone has to be arrested and chartged with a crime before you decide their character isn’t up to snuff?
    Guess that explains your allegiance to Anthony-Scott Hobbs.

    1. Rusty said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 4:22 pm
    1. Reed has led a group of people (the Christian Coalition) whom I consider no better than the Islamic fundamentalists blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel (save for the actual violence, which is only absent for tactical reasons… they saw how people reacted to the abortion clinic bombings in the 90s). Few things chap my ass more than the push for theocracy among the latest batch of Republicans, and he’s at the center of it.
    2. Bill Simon said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 5:35 pm
    Debbie,
    The reason why Texans for Justice didn’t file anything before the statute of limitations ranout was due to the fact that they had no proof of his actual lobbying activities UNTIL the e-mails from the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs RELEASED those e-mails to the public in 2005. Do/Can you comprehend that at all?
    I thought both you and Bob Koncerak had more SENSE to understand the order of events….BUT, Bob’s more than let me down in his vaccuous understanding of anything related to right and wrong,…and, to be quite honest, Debbie, I’ve never had much confidence in your ability as it is. Vis-a-vis, once again, YOUR support of ASH and his crappola all these past 3 years tells me you don’t know right from wrong.
    1. Jack S said,
    April 10, 2006 @ 8:33 pm
    Note to Bloggers, Maurice just landed the hammer on Debbie, Sara and the rest of the morons on this site.
    Silence, go back to hiding under your rock. The Reed people are so desperate that they are now citing the AJC to attack Cagle and still trying to say don’t believe the clear truth about Ralph’s hypocrisy becuase it’s from the AJC.
    I

  101. Philly says:

    Reed, Debbie and his supporters have been consistently and personally attacked in this thread and others. Get a grip on reality. Want me to start siting other examples?

  102. Philly says:

    If you even bother to read the time and date stamps you will find the attacks I mentioned in the previous post occurred first. You don’t need to be a math major to figure that one out. You can tell time can’t you?

  103. Bill Simon says:

    Philly,

    To be quite frank, I don’t think YOU know the difference between being “personally attacked” and being challenged on a viewpoint.

    For point of refernce, my first statement in this post was not a “personal attack” on you.

    A “personal attack” is something on the order of “You smell like —-“, “You’re a stupid bitch”, “You’re ugly”, “You’re fat”, and the like.

  104. Michael C says:

    Philly, excusing Rusty’s comment because I do not feel it is worthy to respond to, I am confused by what you are trying to say. You want me to condemn what you deem as personal attacks by Cagle Supporters (I see them as debate) but you fail to condemn those made by Debbie. So please, explain this hypocrisy thing to me again.

    Please feel free to respond but I will not continue to partake in this drivel. Its pointless.

  105. Rusty says:

    Philly,
    Given Pat Robertson’s comments about assassinating sovereign leaders elected in free elections and his comments calling for the extermination of non-Christians, it’s not at all unfair to compare the organization to the degenerates blowing themselves up in Iraq and Israel. Ideologically, there’s little difference between the two other than which prophet they say has a monopoly on God’s word. Both want theocratic rule and both want to eliminate anyone who doesn’t adhere to their beliefs. Those are the facts as I see them, not name-calling.

  106. Brian from Ellijay says:

    You, Tobin, obvioiusly have not gotten to know Sen Cagle or members of the Senate. Are they all puppets?

  107. Demonbeck says:

    You wanna talk puppets? Ralphie’s best friend and business partner Jack Abramoff is a dead ringer for Fozzie the Bear. Wocka Wocka!

  108. Rusty says:

    Michael,
    As its founder, Robertson does speak for the Christian Coalition. As such, it’s not unfair to compare the Christian Coalition to Islamists since both he and Islamists exhibit similar sociopathic behavior and have similar goals. I never said he spoke for all Christians, nor did I compare all Christians to Islamists.

Comments are closed.