Out to Get Hunstein

Everyone has been wondering what data Carol Hunstein had to cause her to go negative with seemingly no need to do so.

Well, I think a tipster just gave us the answer. The group supporting Wiggins has $1.5 million to throw at Hunstein.

Oh, and as the tipster reminds me, let’s not forget the million plus that the GOP is spending to help Wiggins versus a Democrat party that has bigger fish to fry than Wiggins.

13 comments

  1. dogface says:

    ‘course, the media will spin it as Republicans and big biz teaming up to try to “buy the election.”

    Don’t they understand that the trial lawyers and Democrats are trying to do the same thing? Trial lawyers have “owned” the judiciary since the beginning of time.

    Now that others want to participate in the election of judges, somehow the media seems to believe the plaintiffs’ bar is pure and noble and defending an “independent judiciary.” Everyone else’s motives, they seem to think, are suspect and base.

  2. RuralDem says:

    dogface,

    You are right. Those darn Democratic trial lawyers like Mike Bowers, Wendall Willard, Gray Conger, Daniel Craig, Pat Head, Stephen Kelley, Kermit McManus…. oh wait what’s that? They are all Republicans and none of them are trial lawyers and all are apparently backing Hunstein.

    Hunstein does not need to use the Democratic Party, unlike Wiggins, she understands the meaning of “Non-partisan”.

  3. Wiggins does not seem to have the legal experience to be a supreme court justice. Let him be a judge first somewhere if he is so great.

    The interesting thing about this election will be to see just how much a seat on the supreme court costs. Wiggins passed the bar exam like many other thousands of georgians & has never tried a case as a judge. Hell, I know a couple of dozen attorneys with the same credentials . . . . . If this dude somehow wins we all know who bought paid for him.

    Sounds like some special interests think its worth at least $2.5 million to get their boy on the court . . . . . What could Wiggins do for them in return to justify that kind of outlay?? Noone makes that kind of financial investment without the expectation of a hefty profit.

  4. Big Mack says:

    Erick,

    Those who are democrats naturally think that Justice Hunstein hung the moon along with all of the other Justices and all the Appeals Court Judges because all except one were appointed by democrat governors. Over the years the former justices were careful not to leave an open seat that had to be run for. They would resign about six months before election time so that the governor could appoint somebody that would be recognized as the incumbent. If you are a real Republican you should support anybody that is running against these democrat appointees.

  5. Bill Simon says:

    Big Mack is right. Lord knows, we certainly need the following laws upheld:

    Laws against sodomy between consenting adults. Police need to be able to breakdown the door wherever oral sex is occuring.

    Laws that allow fire and brimstone Bible preaching courses in public schools.

    Laws forbidding individuals suing for financial retribution against negligent corporations who personally harm them. Screw the individual, the corporation’s existence is paramount in this world…and, besides, they’ve paid a lot of money to Wiggins and they want pay back on their investment.

  6. Romegaguy says:

    I have issues with political parties trying to sway voters in a non-partisan judicial election. It was wrong 2 years ago when the Dems did it and it is wrong this year when the Republicans do it.

    I am also against electing judicial candidates with little to no experience as a judge. I voted against Howard Mead and this year I will be voting against Wiggins.

  7. Mad Dog says:

    Bill Simon,

    I’m at gridlock on the question of judges hearing or trying cases?

    If you can hear while sleeping, then they hear cases.

    If they stay awake and listen to the lawyers, professional witnesses, and make sure the jury shows up, they’re trying cases.

  8. I can’t get over how many Republicans still think of Hunstein in terms of “Democrat” and “liberal.” Because she sure has an awful lot of bipartisan support.

    I think “independent” is a much more accurate description of Hunstein, not to mention “qualified.”

  9. Bill Simon says:

    Big Mack,

    Of course you wouldn’t. Because Barry Goldwater’s type of conservativsm is what I follow, and Goldwater wasn’t into intruding on people’s lives like you neocon Republicans are so bent on doing.

  10. Big Mack says:

    Bill Simon,

    I certainly voted for Goldwater and support his philosophy especially when it comes to Leahy of Vermont “A no good lousy sonovabitch”. I think that most anybody that the Republicans elect will be better than a democrat appointee and I am old enough to be your daddy so don’t argue with me.

  11. Bill Simon says:

    Big Mack,

    Remember what I said above…the act of sodomy between two adults must be consenual…don’t go getting any ideas that you can become my “mack Daddie”… 🙂

Comments are closed.