To quote Bernie Mac, Whitehead, “That’s a punk move”

One of my favorite movies is “Head of State” starring Chris Rock and Bernie Mac. The gist of the movie is that Chris Rock is running for President and Bernie Mac is his running mate.

Near the end of the movie, Rock’s opponent is refusing to face him in a debate…sort of like what Jim Whitehead is doing right now.

“Whitehead intends to skip the gathering, as well as a June 12 televised debate sponsored by the Atlanta Press Club and Georgia Public Television.” AJC Political Insider “Whitehead spurns last two debates for a paid TV barrage”

If y’all will allow me, let me throw a little Bernic Mac into the Tenth Congressional District special election…

“He’s scared. He’s holding the ball, hoping the clock will run out.

That’s a punk move…duckin’ and hidin’ like a little b***h!”

Sometimes comedians know exactly what to say.


  1. ToddH says:

    Of course, it doesn’t take a genius to see the logic in ducking a debate with a bunch of wannabees where it will be difficult to get any message across. For a good example of this see the cluster**** that is the latest GOP and Democratic debates. There are only two legitimate candidates and they’ll meet in the runoff.

  2. ChuckEaton says:

    “He’s holding the ball, hoping the clock will run out.”

    Having played basketball in school and being a fan, I’ve learned that “running the clock out” can be an effective strategy when you’re in the lead.

    Sure the losing team’s fans will taunt you and try to throw you off strategy, but when the game is over you’ve got a win and they’ve got a loss.

    It also works well in football and political campaigns.

  3. Federalist says:

    Fact is, only a handful of voters will be electing the next congress person to the 10th district. I should say congressman, since Freeman and Pascall are jokes. These 20 or 30 thousand voters are going to victimize the other 500,000 citizens of the 10th with a vote for Whitehead. Victimize, might be too strong a word to use to describe the infliction upon all of the citizens…but it is the correct verbage for those who have friends and loved ones in Iraq.

  4. Holly says:

    Victimize? Hardly, Federalist. Those people who choose not to vote shoot themselves in the foot. They have the same right to vote that you and I have. When they elect to stay home, they can’t blame the outcomes they dislike on anyone but themselves.

  5. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Well, if we’ve learned nothing else from this thread, at least we now know who that one poor soul is who paid to see “Head of State.”

  6. I Am Jacks Post says:


    ” . . . but it is the correct verbage . . . ”

    The only thing getting”victimized” is your spelling.

  7. Federalist says:

    It is not always a matter of choosing not to vote. I am willing to bet that half of the people in GA’s tenth do not know that Norwood is dead, that he was their congressperson, and that there is a special election.

  8. Holly says:

    Okay, it’s a choice to be uninformed, then. It’s still a personal responsibility issue.

  9. I Am Jacks Post says:

    I am willing to be that same 50% also cannot name Atlanta as the capital. Look, you’re always going to have a sizeable demographic that choose to embrace their ignorance, but that certainly doesn’t mean our elected officials aren’t doing their job. You can’t force people to open a newspaper or turn on the Internets.

  10. Federalist says:

    You can work to educate the public though, I am jacks post. Whitehead does not want this, nor do many of the representatives in our government. They all say they want everyone to vote at debates, forums, and at fundraisers…but they also try hard to ensure a low turn out for the competition. It can be argued that a low turn out in this campaign may be the result of an uneducated, and ignorant (as you stated) population. All Whitehead needs to do is make sure that as few people know about this election as possible.

  11. Holly says:

    There are so many ways that candidates try to reach voters.

    The Whitehead campaign has sent mailers and letters via the mail, makes nightly telephone calls, has made television and radio buys, participated in five debates, makes appearances at local festivals and parades, walks door to door in neighborhoods on the weekends, and works for earned media in the various forms. . . that’s a lot of voter outreach. It gives all registered voters in the district multiple opportunities to realize there’s an election.

    I have seen most of the other candidates using many types of outreach methods for their campaigns as well.

    Most of the people I talk to know good and well there’s an election. Some just haven’t made up their minds to go vote. I can’t tell you how many times I get a peron on the phone during the phone banks who answers something to the effect of, “oh, I might be too busy to bother with voting that day,” so I spend extra time with them answering questions and suggesting the avenues of early and absentee voting.

    So, if we’re honest, the people of the 10th who won’t vote on June 19th aren’t really victims of anything other than their own laziness.

  12. Holly says:

    Federalist, how are we working for low voter turnout? The more voters we turn out, the better the odds are for us.

    What are you doing to turn voters out for your guy? What methods are working for you?

  13. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Thing is, I don’t want the uninformed voting. I don’t want people picking candidates based upon looks, or who is going to take care of them, or how that candidate makes them feel about themselves, or whether the candidate empathizes with them (I’m looking at you Clinton voters).

    If you can’t name your current congressman, you’ve got no business voting.

    Let the charges of racism, poll tax, etc begin . . . . . now.

  14. I Am Jacks Post says:

    For the record, I find that ball bearings are the best method for increasing turnout. It’s all ball bearings these days.

  15. Federalist says:

    Ok Fletch. I contribute money to campaigns, i am too old to walk door to door. From my days on the campaign trail, and it has been a while, we only worked to get our voters out to the polls…screw the other guy. This is a special election though, information is the best tool in this case because of how low profile the election and its campaigns are. Whitehead can not afford to have too many people know about his positions, so why inform them? Why show up at the debate tonight? It will just be more ammunition. If he wants to win he will shut up.

  16. I Am Jacks Post says:

    You can only do so many of these lame “debates.” The frontrunner, Whitehead, has everything to lose and the also-rans stand to gain everything. It’s like when a crazy, rabid wingnut like Alan Keyes challenges an incumbent to 47 debates. He has nothing to lose.

  17. Federalist says:

    A pretty good friend of mine wrote a book entitled “Stealing Democracy” a couple of years ago. It is about voter suppression politics, a former student of mine just wrote a journal article on voter suppression due to be published very soon. Holly, voter suppression works…and it works better than “positive” campaigning.

  18. Holly says:

    How many people are really going to show up at this debate? Maybe 100? Less? Hard to say. The entire town will not turn out.

    However, each day, Jim himself gets a list of voters and calls them. Sometimes, if we’re talking to undecided voters in the call banks, Jim will ask us to let him interrupt and finish the call. He did that several times on Monday when I made calls. Over all, 650 voters were contacted that night. 850 were contacted last night.

    Given that and all the other Get Out the Vote measures I’ve given, how is that trying to keep the people uninformed?

  19. Holly says:

    Okay, how does voter suppression work? And who’s doing it? I’ve yet to encounter it, so please catch me up to speed.

  20. Federalist says:

    What lists are you using to get these phone #s? I am not saying that he is working on keeping voters uninformed, but he probably should.

  21. jackson says:

    “Voter Suppression” tactics only work if people ALLOW them to work. Last I heard, no one was out there holding a gun to peoples heads telling them NOT to vote.

    The fact is, people dont care. Its not new. No matter how much technology, etc is available, people dont care much for politics and politicians.

  22. Federalist says:

    you are such a simple creature Jackson. read the book, most of it is available online. The people that are targeted are not like, say…you or me. But that red-neck in a trailer park, or ghetto dweller, that shows up on election day because he/she wants to make sure the president/senator/congressperson is (blank)…fill the blank in with any visceral issue or even a political party. these are the targets.

  23. Holly says:

    Where is the book? And now you’re leaving me with a cliffhanger, Federalist. Not nice. . . What happens when they try to vote?

    Also, I think the lists are provided by the secretary of state, but I’d have to ask to be certain.

  24. Federalist says:

    When they try to vote they are denied the ballot, it is that simple. Google the book, use google books. It is relatively short, but it is a policy book…not an advocacy book. It sheds light on a little known issue that threatens the stability and legitimacy of our democractic republic.

  25. Federalist says:

    “Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression”
    by Spencer Overton – 2006
    It is available in most libraries. Keep in mind that it was written by a law professor, not by a radio talk show host.

  26. jackson says:

    “When they try to vote they are denied the ballot, it is that simple.” ONly if they dont have one of the 8000 forms of acceptable identification, or arent registered to vote.

    What does this have to do with Whitehead anyway?

  27. CHelf says:

    I’m sure those evil Dems and liberal activist groups are registering all of those illegal alien terrorists hiding out in the 10th to vote.

    To quote Roger Ailes today “the candidates that can’t face FoxNews, can’t face Al Qaeda”. Change some words up and it could apply to Whitehead. He won’t face his opponents before a crowd down to the wire. He won’t face an opportunity coming close to the election to appeal to an even broader amount of voters. And by the way Holly, it’s called free media. In campaign terms, candidates love free media because it puts their name out there and faces on newspapers. The reason behind this avoidance? Because it didn’t fit the structure they wanted. What’s that? Having to answer the tough questions with too much risk to botch it up? Again, it sounds like we’re scripting this in the mold of Hillary.

  28. Holly says:

    By the way, CHelf, Jim has earned media almost daily. That’s the actual term you’re looking for there.

    Missing one debate isn’t that big of a deal. Your boy Marlow missed the Banks County debate, after all. 🙂

  29. CHelf says:

    Yes it is called earned. But I was emphasizing cost here and the fact it has little to any obligation…well besides missing debates. And taking advantage of everything he can would be a good strategy. Avoiding these after so many gaffes clearly makes it appear as if Team Whitehead is tucking him away and giving him notecards for comments here on out.

    And it’s not just ONE debate and it’s not just ANY debate. Not sure why you’re referring to Marlow being my boy. “Wrong” seems to be a recurring theme coming from that camp. But thanks for the attempt. Marlow is not nor never has been my “boy”.

  30. jackson says:

    “He won’t face his opponents before a crowd down to the wire. He won’t face an opportunity coming close to the election to appeal to an even broader amount of voters.” He’s already “faced” them five times. As far as a “broader” amount of voters, I am sure the 8 people that show up or listen to those debates have already made up their minds. Its a ridiculous and naive assessment that the only guy with tv and radio ads isnt connecting with the goofballs that cant get people to give them money for their campaign, so the debates (and poorly written press releases) are their only way to lash out at their opponents .

    Its even more ridiculous to say that every candidate should attend every debate that his opponents decide to show up at. News flash: More people dont decide to vote based on who shows up at debates…especially in special elections.

    “And taking advantage of everything he can would be a good strategy.” Seriously? Why? YOu have no evidence to even back up your claims of what is strategically better to do.

    “And it’s not just ONE debate and it’s not just ANY debate.” You’re right. Its two. 5 out of 7. You’re right. Jim Whitehead just doesnt want to debate lunatics that wont even get 2% of the vote.

  31. jackson says:

    “He won’t face his opponents before a crowd down to the wire. He won’t face an opportunity coming close to the election to appeal to an even broader amount of voters.” He’s already “faced” them five times.

    As far as a “broader” amount of voters, I am sure the 8 people that show up or listen to those debates have already made up their minds. Its a ridiculous and naive assessment that the only guy with tv and radio ads isnt connecting with the goofballs that cant get people to give them money for their campaign, so the debates (and poorly written press releases) are their only way to lash out at their opponents .

    Its even more ridiculous to say that every candidate should attend every debate that his opponents decide to show up at. News flash: More people dont decide to vote based on who shows up at debates…especially in special elections.

    “And taking advantage of everything he can would be a good strategy.” Seriously? Why? YOu have no evidence to even back up your claims of what is strategically better to do.

    “And it’s not just ONE debate and it’s not just ANY debate.” You’re right. Its two. 5 out of 7. You’re right. Jim Whitehead just doesnt want to debate lunatics that wont even get 2% of the vote.

  32. Jeff Emanuel says:

    That’s cute. Did it come out of a fortune cookie? 😉

    Seriously, though, I understand that many would like to see a debate between the candidates. However, can anybody give a good reason what benefit the far-and-away leader in the race would possibly gain from participating?

  33. bowersville says:

    There is no good reason other than give a forum for the whiners and complainers and wanna-be front runners.

    Let them fight amongst themselves, maybe they can figure who’s on second.

  34. Concerned American, yes there are several quality candidates in this race…there are several looney tunes also.

    Regardless of quality, the carpetbaggers without a base, and without friends in the district don’t stand a chance. I haven’t seen a single good piece of mail from anyone outside the district. That says alot.

    …Whitehead didn’t want to show up in Athens because it is Paul Broun’s territory, plus Whitehead called in a bomb threat from Elbert Cty to UGA early in the race.

    The race is going to be a runoff b/t Broun and Whitehead…Broun coming from behind to win, unless Whitehead can shut his mouth and read off the notecard.

  35. bowersville says:

    Where is Elbert City?

    Why Broun? Is it because Tim Echols thinks Broun has pretty hair?

    Or is it because the homeschoolers are paying $50 to stand in the street at the bypass exit at Georgia Square and wave signs?

  36. Bill Simon says:

    “Atlanta is the capital of Georgia…”

    I am just wondering for info purposes here, is that something stated in the Georgia Constitution?

  37. MindyMay says:

    i havent gotten ANY good mail from broun either. BILL GREENE grew up in the tenth district you know. he has friends here and that scares paul broun because paul broun knows that BILL GREENE will make it to the run off. especially now that everyone knows how horrible he was about fundraising before charlies death. who does that?????

    whithead shouldve gone to the debate but hes scared of his opponents who are making ground on him in the final stretcch so he didnt want to deal with facing them. BILL GREENE doesnt skip debates………..

  38. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Mindy, it strikes me that BILL GREENE might not be the best candidate to condemn someone for making money off the name of the dead and dying.

  39. MindyMay says:

    ive not seen anything to proove that claim, i am jaccks post. whered you get your information from…….bardon phillips???????

  40. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Mindy, try this:

    Google “Bill Greene” and “fundraising” and “Terri Schiavo” and “Terri’s family asked Greene to stop profiting off Terri’s name but Bill refused to stop and kept the money he raised for himself” That should bring up a few hits.

  41. bowersville says:

    “Greene doesn’t skip debates…..?” Right, I didn’t see him at the forum I attended in Hartwell. Every R candidate was there, EXCEPT GREENE.

  42. CHelf says:

    Well Jackson since I’ve offered proof and your rebuttal is off in left field with sexual references I don’t know what else to say. You make odd comments, call the competition lunatics, think only 8 people see the result of a debate, etc. You question my ‘expertise’ but can only offer juvenile insults and insinuations. I stand by my point. Whitehead’s actions, ads, strategy, etc. are clearly obvious. Avoiding loose events spells out one thing: lay low to avoid what got him in trouble in the first place.

    As for being the front runner, I still await any polls indicating this. I know a few have been run but why no public display? And there have been no takers to my question as to how long you wait after a funeral to generate fundraising and a campaign. A few were quick to jump on Broun but I’d like to know when it is respectful to “move on” and gear up the campaign.

  43. jackson says:

    “Well Jackson since I’ve offered proof…” Sorry if I missed it. Where was it again, the PROOF that participating in the debates is the BEST way to win the election? Sorry, I’m hard pressed to find any studies on that.

    As far as competition, didnt say all were lunatics, though I can see how in your quick reading of my comments you could miss the point. Its pretty obvious to MOST observers of this race that not all the candidates running are playing with a full deck. And while you dispute it, several will only get 2%.

    As far as 8 people watching the debate, I am sure you have accurate numbers for me soon right? The point was that most of these debates are attended by people that already know who they are voting for. Most people going are not really trying to figure out who to vote for. That’s my point.

    “I stand by my point. Whitehead’s actions, ads, strategy, etc. are clearly obvious.” I have never disputed that his strategy is obvious> (actions and ads, by their very nature, are obvious.)

    “Avoiding loose events spells out one thing: lay low to avoid what got him in trouble in the first place.” And your point is? Candidates (even your favorite ones…do it all the time). Welcome to campaigns, my friend. The leading candidate doesnt determine his strategy based on what minor candidates want him to do. THAT is what is stupid.

    “And there have been no takers to my question as to how long you wait after a funeral to generate fundraising and a campaign. ” What would your suggestion be? Whitehead did NOTHING until after the funeral…not even hire or talk to a consultant for what I understand. I think that is pretty strong. The fact was, no one knew when the special election would be. It could have been a month after, who knows.

    “As for being the front runner, I still await any polls indicating this.” Check back here on Tuesday.

  44. CHelf says:

    Um..YOU were the one who mentioned 8 at the debate so I await your proof in numbers. Since you were insistent on that low number, I hope you can prove that. The burden is on you.

    “And while you dispute it, several will only get 2%. ”

    Did I dispute this? Funny I didn’t but yet you concluded that. Reread and try again.

    Let’s see. The funeral was Thursday afternoon? By Saturday he filed his statement of candidacy. Checks were dating 1 and 2 days after that. Not sure how such action can just happen overnight. Two days after the funeral of your best/very close friend is moving quite fast. I’m not sure but jumping in two days after a funeral of someone claimed to be so close is a little odd. Broun and Greene didn’t move that fast. I know this is an assumption but to have checks being written over the weekend just a couple days after the funeral indicates some people knew a lot and someone did something to provoke such rapid action. Did someone come home from the funeral and make phone calls?

  45. jackson says:

    Obviously, figurative speach is lost on you.

    You’re right, Helf. Jim Whitehead is an unoriginal, unispiring career politician.

    His soundites are familiar. He keeps referring to his friend Charlie Norwood, against the wishes of the masses that really dont want to hear about the “past”.

    He has a flawed strategy and game plan since the other candidates are so compelling and original.

    And he stood on his good friends grave because he asked for money after the funeral for an election that many thought was imminent.

    Man, it must be nice to live in the world you live in. Too bad no matter where you live, Whitehead is going to win.

  46. CHelf says:

    Imminent? Then Broun saw this as imminent as well but yet he is sleazy right? No other Republican saw the need to gather checks and announce through filing a candidacy two days after the funeral. I find it strange that one person’s actions are deplorable but yet another with even closer ties is acceptable. Strange how the others here didn’t go run off and file knowing the same thing about the date of the election as Whitehead. Why the rush? Just curious since everyone else knew the same thing. Why the rush knowing he’d be the annointed? Why the rush knowing there would be enough time regardless. Why the rush when you can’t even say Norwood’s name without crying? Just seems strange how Broun was laid out for what he did and a close friend couldn’t wait one weekend after a funeral to declare his candidacy. Just seems odd.

    Keep in mind Jackson that I’m only applying the standard set by Whitehead himself. He insults Cynthia Tucker for not reading newspapers and checking facts when he himself screwed up on the illegal immigrant Al Qaeda terrorists being registered by liberal groups. He wears UGA proudly on his sleeve but yet wants to blow it up. His people chide one candidate for campaigning for the seat before Norwood dies but yet cannot even wait a few days after a funeral of a good friend to go declare himself.

    So feel free to defend this. It shows what you have no issues with. I personally don’t relate to those values. Feel free to attack the lack of originality of the others in the race. Feel free to make this about how lousy they are. It’s strange that instead of propping up your own guy and offer his supposed solutions all you and others can do is attack the other candidates and only offer who was the best friend to Norwood. It’s sad that the “frontrunner” has nothing else to run on. While you say Whitehead will win, I say that is not a good thing. I could say too bad the Dems won Congress and will probably keep it as well. Just because one wins, it is not always a good thing. It could, in this race, mean that the pool is not exactly stacked with quality. But who am I to say right?

  47. I Am Jacks Post says:

    I don’t think Jackson is calling Broun sleazy. I think he’s calling him an idiot, for:

    1. Open seat shopping at least 3 times, and losing all 3.
    2. Practicing medicine without a license, claiming, “I didn’t know they were renewing licenses on the Internets now.”
    3. Enlisting the support of Tim Echols and his pay-to-play, preemie army.
    4. Embracing the mantle, “A lifetime of preparation.” One can only assume he refers to being raised in a political household, or his 3 losses.

    There are many more reasons why Broun isn’t the best option for this seat.

  48. CHelf says:

    I’m not saying Broun is the best option. Idiot or sleazy – both get a certain point across. And that was not directed at Jackson specifically. It was for several in his camp that have made that apparent in their views of Broun.

    One of the joys of being the ‘frontrunner’ is that the limelight and focus is on you. Adding to the fact that he’s made it so easy to criticise his words and actions, he becomes a magnet for this type of debate.

    As for your points, we in GA Republican circles have a history of seat shoppers and even embracing them repeatedly as our party’s choice. So automatically shooting those types down doesn’t seem to work. As for Tim Echols and the sign wavers, I’ve already made my slap at that. Again, ask Ralph Reed how that fared.

    Frankly, the talent pool is dwindling in politics as a whole. The GOP at the national level seems to place all hope in one of the biggest insiders and one who is not the best debater and public speaker for President. The problem with politics is that the people have to settle. It’s clear both parties have issues here. Who suffers? Who benefits? Sue me for having a higher standard or expecting more. Sue me for holding these candidates to their own standards as well.

  49. Holly says:

    Good heavens, my apologies, CHelf. I just keep hearing the same stuff from you that the Marlow supporters keep bringing up, even weeks after it’s been answered. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. . . I naturally assume it’s a duck.

    Since you agree that Jim’s getting plenty of earned media – he even got that from not showing to the Athens debate – then what is the point of going to the last two debates? Your suggestion to me was that he should go to them for free publicity, but from reading the article, it seems that even the other candidates were talking about Jim, so he’s still mentioned in the paper.

    We already agreed in an earlier thread that you’d accept none of the answers given by me or the campaign about the misquote of Michelle Malkin because you deemed them not good enough. You essentially told me that the campaign shouldn’t answer the question if it’s not an important issue, and I agreed to quit talking about it. So, in bringing it up to others here on this thread, aren’t you just wasting everyone’s time in knowing that you won’t get an answer you’ll accept?

    As for polling, you can keep asking for it, but you’re asking the wrong folks. Why not call one of the papers or campaigns instead of demanding supporters produce things they have no access to?

  50. CHelf says:

    Sorry Holly. But I’m not a Marlow supporter and thus not privy to questions they are asking. And the items I’m asking about, I’ve yet to see them anywhere publicly so forgive me if I’m not quite as in tune as you are. Perhaps being an insider you have the advantage that an average voter like me does not have. Again, forgive me.

    As for the earned media, let’s analyze. Yes he got that free attention. But what kind of attention was it? Negative. Far different than attention if he were there spelling out his agenda. I’m sorry but if you have positive value with being compared to a bobblehead doll, then you have some odd standards. Again, there is a difference between positive attention and negative attention. If Whitehead likes attention that compares him to constantly nodding inanimate objects and more speculation that he has to hide to avoid answering without foot in mouth disease then more power to you.

    Since you want to bring up Michelle Malkin, I just find it odd that someone who flaunts credentials would not even use those credentials to make his case. Come up with whatever excuse you want. But the man claims he’s the connected expert on the topic but when handed the chance to do so all he can do is quote an inaccurate pundit’s claim. Sorry again but that is not a case for a candidate being well-informed, researched, and in-the-know. The response was initially a denial. Then when held to the fire supporters claimed it was staffer error. The more info that came out on that, the worse it made Whitehead and his staff look. Hardly spectacular for someone seeking office on this issue. I mentioned it only as one in a long list of items adding up against Whitehead. I didn’t ask it in the form of a question so I don’t expect an answer. I’m not wasting anyone’s time unless they choose to read this. Obviously you feel the need to argue against it. Strange how if all of this is rehashed, answered, and old why do I find you and Jackson getting all fired up and needing to counter this?

    Since you bring up polling, let’s hold you and the other supporters to your standard. You say supporters don’t have access to this info but yet these same unenlightened people are claiming he’s on top and will win without a runoff. Call me a skeptic but the two make no sense. How can the uninformed make such boastful claims? I ask you and other supporters because it is these same people making these claims. So by your own statement are you and others admitting you are blowing hot air and don’t know what you’re talking about?

  51. Holly says:

    Yep, CHelf, you got me.

    I’m blowing such hot air and I am so completely unaware of what I’m talking about that I must agree that you’re right. Jim Whitehead is not the frontrunner and will in no way win the election. He’s wasting time and money with his commercials by talking about things people don’t care about and ducking debates because Don Nelson, Blake Aued, and Jason Winders hurt his feelings.


  52. CHelf says:

    So then do something simple and prove your statement. That’s all I’m asking. You and others make claims of this but offer nothing as proof. Is proof too much to ask or do you feel more credible making claims without backing them up?

    As for hurt feelings, I could care less about who had their feelings hurt. I never mentioned reporters or moderators so I am not sure why you even brought them up. Are you implying that is why he ducked those debates? I just figured it was to protect himself from gaffes. But if you say his feelings were hurt (still not sure how that came up)….

    I never asked for you to agree with me nor said I was right. I merely asked for you and others to back up the claims. Again, sorry for holding you to your own standards.

  53. Holly says:

    Perhaps I was too short with you, and I apologize. I got exasperated over the polling data because I thought you were twisting my words. In hindsight, I think we miscommunicated.

    Let’s try again.

    We know that you can’t get past the Michelle Malking quote. It was wrong, that’s been admitted, and we agree that you dislike my explanation given back in April. So, next topic.

    You obviously read the Athens Banner-Herald. I’d argue that since you do, you know how the debate was covered in hindsight. Given than I suspect you’ve read the article, can you tell me that the other Republicans were reported on in an unbiased manner? I’ve read it, and I don’t think so. I’d argue that the comments about Jim as a bobblehead were far more fair than the way Bill Greene was treated in the article. That’s very telling.

    My comments about the hurt feelings are from the editorial that was run prior to the debate by the editorial staff. They were extremely harsh, and at times, they were petty. The goal was clearly to make Jim look like an idiot whether he went to the debate or not. So after that, what was the point? It was obvious what the game was.

    I’ll change my opinion over the editorial when the ABH does an editorial about James Marlow not showing up to a debate because the panel was “Republican”. Didn’t see one? Me, either, though there was one short comment at the end of a straight article about it. There was no goading involved.

    Now, about that polling. I don’t have access to it, meaning I’m not authorized to release any data. I’ve explained how to get it; that’s the best I can give you. I can say that at a fundraiser last month, Jim told the crowd he was at 40% in an independent poll conducted by a firm in DC. I’m not sure which company did it, as it was not affiliated with any of the campaigns.

  54. CHelf says:

    So just because the debate or panel doesn’t seem unbiased we’re going to duck it? I hate to break this to you Holly but the man’s trying to make it to DC. If he can’t take the heat from a newspaper in this district how in the @%$# will he handle DC? If he cannot handle a little bias from reporters how can he stand up to Hoyer and Pelosi? Call it guts or whatever but running from something appearing to be biased is not a good quality to be tagged with. That same bias was stacked against the other GOP candidates but they chose to face it. Spin it how you want. So they made him look petty. If they were going to do that with him there as well why not defend yourself? Why not prove them wrong and show them what you’re made of? Basically what this comes down to is “when the going gets tough, Whitehead lays low to protect his image” or is it CYA or mouth.

  55. AlanR says:

    Federalist — check the FEC reports after the fact and see how much money was paid to media consultants and mail vendors. A lot of money is going into informing voters about something.

    Likes like likes. Don’t blame the candidate for trying to figure out who shares their opinions and bringing them to the polls.

    Suppression politics has not appeared in this race yet. Suppression is when you discourage people from coming out. There are a whole lot of issues that could be used in that way, and I haven’t seen any of them yet used in a scorched earth campaign (see Jesse Helms v Gannt or anyother opponent).

    I expected Bill Greene to do something online, but I haven’t seen it yet. I don’t think Broun has a clue. Whitehead doesn’t need to do it and probably wouldn’t allow it. If Marlow makes the runoff, you will see it, but probably not from him. 527s funded by DC types will probably do the dirty work. We’ll see.

    Maybe I’ve missed it. Maybe I’m not the right demographic.

    CHelf — who signs your check? Soros? Or Media Matters? No one can be so dense unless doing it professionally. If nothing else you have guarateed a place in heaven for the saintly Holly who has shown incredible grace and patience.

    Holly — bless you, but save your breath and keystrokes. CHelf doesn’t understand because he doesn’t want to.

  56. CHelf says:


    I hate to break this to you but just because I don’t drink the Whitehead Kool Aid doesn’t mean I am a Dem or a Soros employee. I find it amusing that someone with such high regard for himself would make such a stupid assumption. I guess you find no fault in such careless and incompetent behavior and clear double standards and hypocrisy.

    I don’t need to get paid for this. Whitehead makes this all too easy and makes his own actions the topic of discussion. No one needs to dig up anyting either as a paid professional or a private citizen. Your insults show you care little about someone having a concern over the actions of elected officials. You clearly show that you feel more need to defend someone of questionable credentials and actions rather than a private citizen’s concern over the conduct of someone with such impeccable credentials.

    I find it amusing that you think Holly’s actions are what guarantees sainthood and a place in heaven. I guess defending someone who repeatedly trips over himself and has to lay low to prevent from doing so is honorable. Frankly I think holding people accountable and checking them on their statements and ‘credentials’ is more honorable. So feel free to redefine religion and make stupid assumptions. Those assumptions tell me all I need to know about you. Thank you for clarifying that for me.

  57. Holly says:

    They also have Lettergate, Signgate, and Fundraisingate. Anything unusual gets “gated”.

    Clearly, they need better nicknames. 🙂

Comments are closed.