A Question For John Konop

I noticed this on your website.

Erick admitted to posting a nasty rumor about State Representative Judson Hill based on nothing more than an e-mail from someone he does not know. This would be the same as if I got one random e-mail claiming Erick Erickson had beat his wife and I posted it is a discussion piece.

Please tell me what the nasty rumor was that I posted? Because frankly, I posted a post trying to figure out what all the hubbub was. And so far as I can tell, it must be nothing more than some lobbyists angry at him for healthcare reform.

184 comments

  1. DoubleDawg3 says:

    Wow, does that guy not proof read his posts before putting them up? “State Rep” Judson Hill, that’s a downgrade isn’t it ….”congressmen like Isakson”, yet again a downgrade ….and I especially liked the fact that Isakson was after the “coveted fiancé ” committee assignment…is the men engaged to be married committee that big in D.C.? I’d think the more popular committee would be the men who are married but still cheat on their wives committee.

    I’ll vouch for Mr. Erickson here…his post DID NOT accuse Judson Hill of anything, all it did was create a forum where others, it appears some of them jokingly, posted different “conspiracy theories” about what Senator Hill was doing (or not doing). People read the comments on here and take that as the cold, hard truth – geez.

  2. Jason Pye says:

    I’ll vouch for Mr. Erickson here…his post DID NOT accuse Judson Hill of anything…

    Same here. This thing has created a life of it’s own. Erick did not accuse Judson Hill of anything.

  3. Bill Simon says:

    I don’t give a sh*t what you two “vouch for.” Neither of you SAW Erick’s original post regarding Judson Hill.

    How good of Erick to consult libel statutes in his decision to take-down his ORIGINAL accusation on Judson.

    Whether it was the title Erick revised or the initial post, HE REVISED IT to exclude the use of the word “bribery” to label Senator Hill.

    What I’d like to know is who the medical lobbyist was who Erick decided to listen to in the FIRST place.

  4. Brian from Ellijay says:

    I hate to say this, but Bill Simon calls Judson – Scudson. There is no way that he would be taking a hit for him if this weren’t true. I originally said this was in bad taste, and the fact that it is still there is even worse. Senator Hill is a noble statesman.

  5. Doug Deal says:

    BS,

    You are bordering on madman status, and that border is protected about as well as our Mexican one.

    I saw the post a few seconds after it was posted. IT NEVER SAID WHAT YOUR IMAGINATION TELLS YOU THAT IT SAID! Why not try to nurse your credibility back to health, instead of manufacturing silly conspiracies.

    I am not a big fan of Erick’s innuendo posts, but this was not one of those.

  6. John Konop says:

    BTW Erick taking away the fact you changed the original post lets deal with your question.

    If I got a random e-mail that you beat your wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

  7. Icarus says:

    “But the difference between us is”…

    That Erick is soon to be an elected official, and you’re not?

  8. John Konop says:

    BTW Jeff at one point you defend Erick about free speech to destroy a person reputation for sport and the next breath you tell me to “shout up”. What is your point?

  9. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Nice job of ignoring, Konop. Let me try once more:

    (A) Nothing was changed from the original post. Not one thing. Bill Simon is, unfortunately, incorrect. You are wrong on this count (or a liar — your call there).

    (B) What charge did he level at Sen. Hill in the form of a discussion piece? What “rumor” did he post? Again, specifics.

    That’s right — you don’t have any. So nice of you to try. Why don’t you go back to protesting the North American Union, or chasing some other conspiracy theory? We don’t have time for your conspiracies (or blatant falsehoods) here. My IQ can’t afford the loss that interacting with you causes.

  10. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    If I got a random e-mail that Erick beat his wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

  11. Jeff Emanuel says:

    John,

    Either you are purposely being thick (which I hope is the case), or you are one of the least intelligent people I’ve ever had the misfortune of communicating with.

    Scroll up and read my comments to you. Answer the questions therein. Once you have done that, I might consider giving an ounce of thought to your ridiculously insipid example, which has not bearing or remote relevance to this non-situation whatsoever.

  12. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    Konop, you are blowing a non-issue out of proportion. Erick never posted any nasty rumor. He simply created a discussion thread saying that others were mad at Senator Hill.

    The bottom line here is that you need to find something else to talk about because you are just making yourself look like a fool in this conversation.

  13. John Konop says:

    drjay

    As far as Mad Dog he comments and post on my site as well as many others. Anyone who reads my blog would not call him “my guy”. My site is a Town hall of ideas from all sides.

  14. Rpolitic says:

    All of you must try and understand, Konop and Simon are irrelevant. But they so desperately want to be relevant that they will say and do anything.

    If memory serves John was a Methodist running for Congress blasting Tom Price. His rants got him about 17%. But now he is a Jew who wants to control congress. And Bill Simon was a paid consultant for the campaign.

    Bill Simon believes that he can control the presidential preference primary and money in Georgia. Just go take a look at his “memo” post on his site. He threatens everyone and then in the end tells the Thompson people specicially that if they talk to any one he just blasted Bill personally will make sure that the real money people of Georgia won’t support him.

    It is also good to remember a couple of other things, John was Democrat before he moved to Georgia, Bill is over dramatic and just likes to blast away to hear the sound of his voice and to see his name in print.

  15. Bill Simon says:

    Robert Trim,

    According to Bart Brannon, your new candidate to oppose Roger Garrison for Sheriff is your “girlfriend.” That race should be HILARIOUS to watch.

  16. TPSoCal says:

    Wow!

    John Konop and Bill Simon are using traditional liberal stategy. Repreat a lie enough times and it will become the truth. I saw the post when it was first posted. It did NOT make any accusations, it just asked why people were mad at Senator Hill. I remember this because I thought the post was about Hillary Clinton.

    No matter how many times BS & JK repeat it, it will not become true.

  17. Ben Marshall says:

    Bill Simon, I only know you from peachpundit and your website, but you appear to be the most useless person that is even relatively involved in politics.

    Konop is off his rocker, as he has displayed ever since being first introduced to him when he ran against Price.

  18. Bill Simon says:

    Jeff,

    Erick originally had his post titled “Judson Hill accused of bribery”…THIS title I distinctly remember because it occured in the same 24-hours that Herr Erick accused Johnny Isakson of “bribery” as well…which is what caused my first post to that thread to be on the order of relating Cecil Staton to a hypothetical charge of adultery.
    http://www.peachpundit.com/2007/06/16/senator-hill/#comment-74543

    Jeff, stop lying for Erick, okay? You didn’t see notice the post because, in Athens, where you spend most of your time, you have no concept of who Senator Judson Hill is.

    You claiming such now begs a few questions as to YOUR ability to tell the truth.

  19. Bill Simon says:

    Well, BEN, if all you do is judge a person based on a few blog posts, that demonstrates that you are about as useful as yesterday’s sewage.

  20. John Konop says:

    Rpolitico

    Your facts are wrong as usual.

    I was registered Republican in South Dakota before I moved to Georgia. In fact I worked as an executive for the Former Republican governor in the banking industry.

    As far as my religion, BTW this has nothing to do with the post but since many of you like spreading false rumors to destroy people I will answer your question. I do find it strange some you seem to condone the attacks and yet call yourself social conservatives.

    I am Jewish and my wife is Christian. We have been attending various Christian churches for years. At the time we were attending Sixes Methodist Church way before I ever though of running for office. We have many close friends who attend this small church.

    BTW most the people at the church knew I was Jewish as well as most are friends and the last 3 CHAIRMENS of the GOP in Cherokee!

    We now attend His Hands church for family reasons. We have nothing against Sixes Methodist Church and still have many close friends at the church.

    As far as my personal beliefs I do think people can come to good in many different ways. Our family prefers going to His Hands bottom line.

    I would hope in America that you would not want a COUNTRY that turns religions against each other like the Middle East!

    If this is Robert Trim this attack on my religion is due to the combination of his support for Tom Price and some editorials I wrote that were published or on my website.

    I will give you links to few articles to give a better understanding. BTW Rpolitico demonstrates the difference between issues and being hateful!

    Garrison vs.Trim-Partner for Sheriff?

    http://controlcongress.com/miscellaneous/garrison-vstrim-for-sheriff
    Why I Support Harry Johnston

    http://controlcongress.com/?s=harry+johnston

  21. Bill Simon says:

    TPSoCal,

    Nothing “classical” about this…Erick changed the post. Period.

    You want to “claim” you saw the post a certain way, why don’t you have the balls to disclose who you really are, and then we can make a judgement as to the frequency of truth-telling that you do. 🙂

  22. drjay says:

    mr. konop–i am a horrible speller and don’t use a lot of grammar when i post on a blog site–but i was referring to the awful proofreading orf the text of your thread–someone has already mentioned the “fiance” committee about isakson–and i was pointing out you lament cited senator “justin” hill and was making a joke that it was an outrage that erick was blasting both judson and justin…

    and bill, i may be misremembering but i do not recall “bribery” mentioned until the post that appeared to be a play off of the isakson thread where bribery was mentioned in the title

  23. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Bill, I’m sorry, but you’re wrong. I’ve met Senator Hill (can’t claim to “know” him; that’d be a real stretch), but that’s not the point, and has no bearing on this whatsoever — you are wrong about the post and the title. Neither were changed, and neither ever said anything specific about (or made any charges against) Sen. Hill.

    If you choose to question my integrity, then that is your decision to make. I’m disappointed that you’d be so out of touch with reality (and with my own personal history here and elsewhere) to do so, though.

  24. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    Bill, are you serious?? Robert’s girlfriend is running against Sheriff Garrison?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  25. Bill Simon says:

    Jeff,

    I would not have reacted the way I did (with the post regarding Cecil Staton, a person whom I know Erick is close to) had Erick not included the word “bribery” IN HIS ORIGINAL POST.

    I didn’t imagine it.

  26. Bill Simon says:

    Ragnar,

    Note that it is not only Robert Trim’s “girlfriend,” but also his “business partner.”

    I cannot wait to hear what other secrets Bart “Loose Lips Sinks Political Ships” Brannon has to reveal about his pal Trim.

  27. LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

    Bill, how and when did this very enternaing fued with Robert Trim start? Makes for good reading, that’s for sure 🙂

  28. TPSoCal says:

    Fair enough Bill. My name is Tom Pruitt. I currently reside in Long Beach, CA. I used to live in Sandy Springs years ago. I have spent the last 12 years working for various Studios in Finance / Accounting. I was Director of Finance / Accounting at my last job, one of the depts I was responsible for was Gov’tRelations. Being the only Republican around, they enjoyed sending me to state GOP functions. I am currently trying to re-locate to the Atlanta area to re-join my family. Once settled, I hope to become involved in GOP groups there. I was a precinct captain for Bush/Cheney ’04 in Beverly Hills. Try going door to door in West LA campaigning for Bush.

    So sorry, I am not a politico here in GA, just someone who loves politics.

  29. Erick says:

    Thanks for this. I actually put this thread up just because I thought Bill and Konop are so freakin’ hilarious about this whole alleged accusation that they cannot prove.

    It’s been a great laugh. I think we’ve successfully shown that of all the readers at Peach Pundit there are apparently only two who are conspiracy theorists and one of them also buys into the whole North American Union thing.

    You know, lately I’ve been asking people if they are Ron Paul supporters and, if so, ignoring them. I’ll do the same from here on out with John Konop. (No offense intended to Jace, who I think is the most reasonable Ron Paul guy I’ve ever met and is worth talking to)

  30. John Konop says:

    Ben

    Please tell me why you support Tom Price knowing his voting record and support of out of control spending and big government failed programs?

    Out of Control Spending

    Tom Price has not found a pork bill he did not like: from the Highway Bill with its Bridge to Nowhere to the Energy Bill that gave billions to oil companies away while gas prices soar.

    Tom’s irresponsible spending has put America close to $9 trillion in the red. The General Accounting office has warned Price that his addiction to pork spending will bankrupt our country.

    Education

    Tom Price is a strong supporter of the scandal-ridden, pork-filled No Child Left Behind legislation. Any honest school administrator will tell you this Big Government program has failed our kids and driven school expenses way up. The only winners are corporate lobbyists (who buy support for the program though campaign donations).

    Tom Price does the bidding of his globalist, corporate masters by falsely claiming we need more unfair trade, more outsourcing (to countries like China and India), and more immigration to:

    Fake Job Ads defraud Americans to secure green cards

    Watch

    http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/fake-job-ads-defraud-americans-to-secure-green-cards

  31. John Konop says:

    Erick

    Why do you avoid the question?

    BTW Erick taking away the fact you changed the original post lets deal with your question.

    If I got a random e-mail that you beat your wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

  32. John Konop says:

    Erick

    BTW like JEFF, your silence about the hateful attacks on my religion which has nothing to do with topic demonstrates your moral integrity!

  33. Bill Simon says:

    Erick,

    1) It’s not a “theory” about your original Judson Hill post, but a fact.

    2) You DO love Tom Price which, in and of itself, proves you to be nothing but an ass-kisser of the GOP when it suits you. I wonder who you know in the Price apparatus who you’re trying to earn Brownie points with in order to gain a position of influence…hmm?

    3) I did hear some guy say in some post on some blog in a galaxy far, far away that you quit beating your wife. Is that true?

  34. rightofcenter says:

    Note to Erick:
    I apologize profusely for being the first person to mention “bribery” in the original thread on Hill. It was meant as a joke (what I thought was a somewhat obvious one given the previous day’s thread on Isakson). On the bright side, it did give some reason to visit the site over the last few slow-news days.

  35. Erick says:

    John Konop,
    What is your religion? I haven’t paid attention other than to laugh at you and Bill and this great conspiracy of mine over the title of the original Judson Hill post.

    Rightofcenter, it’s not your probably some people buy into random conspiracies and see black helicopters when there are none.

  36. John Konop says:

    Erick

    NICE LAWYER SPIN!

    Please answer the question?

    BTW Erick taking away the fact you changed the original post lets deal with your question.

    If I got a random e-mail that you beat your wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

  37. Erick says:

    Ooohhhhhhhhhh. I see Rpolitic’s post about you being a Methodist and now Jewish.

    Pffffft. Yeah, that was really an attack on your religion.

    It reminds me of the time Bill’s comments got held in moderation and he sent out this email accusing me of anti-semitism for banning him from the site. I put up a post about it, explained what happened, and Bill came scrambling asking me to take down the post once he realized I had not in fact banned him from the site.

    You two are made for each other.

  38. Bill Simon says:

    I was “made” long before Konop came on the scene.

    Speaking of which, I think I “made” you way back in 2001, Erick. You went on to start Confessions of a Political Junkie and have blossomed to what you are today. I’m proud of you, Son. 🙂

  39. Ben Marshall says:

    Bill, with the way you behave on here and your blog, you provide enough material for any person to make judgement of you. You pass judgement on others and make wild assertions simply because some disagrees or has another opinion. You claim Erick loves Tom Price, and somehow that equals him being a GOP party brown noser trying to get favors?! That’s the kind of garbage you spew, and is why no one gives you any credibility.

    Konop, I never said any statements about support of Tom Price, refer back above, I simply said you were off your rocker, which you have displayed.

    This post and both of your comments prove Erick’s point. Jeff has pointed out in a previous blog how you’re wrong, but you two continue on a conspiracy theorist crusade on something that doesn’t exist.

    Please continue to make my Friday interesting.

  40. Erick says:

    Whisper to Ben:

    This post and both of your comments prove Erick’s point. Jeff has pointed out in a previous blog how you’re wrong, but you two continue on a conspiracy theorist crusade on something that doesn’t exist.

    Please continue to make my Friday interesting.

    That’s why I put this thread up. But don’t tell anybody.

  41. John Konop says:

    Please tell me what part of the post was wrong?

    Erick Erickson founder of the PeachPundit and executive at ReadState.org has used his popular political blog to attack people for sport and to drive readership. It is one thing to point out flaws in policy differences, but to personally go after people with no facts or on flimsy rumors is wrong.

    Erick admitted to posting a nasty rumor about State Senator Judson Hill based on nothing more than an e-mail from someone he does not know. This would be the same as if I got one random e-mail claiming Erick Erickson had beat his wife and I posted it is a discussion piece.

    Erickson has pattern of this kind of irresponsible behavior; attacking based on rumors with no purpose other than to destroy reputations.

    Erick also accused Senator Isakson of taking the coveted fiancé committee as a bribe for his support of the immigration bill. The only problem with Erick’s fantasy is Isakson got appointed to the thankless ETHICS committee, which very few Senators want. A blogger with “ETHICS” would have taken down the post and sent an apology to Senator Isakson.

    I have been very outspoken about my disagreements with congressmen like Isakson on our immigration and trade policies. But to falsely attack the personal character of Senator Isakson, as well as State Senator Justin Hill, on baseless rumors and without facts is flat out wrong!

    I encourage you send an e-mail to Erick asking him to stop using his website as a tabloid with the intent of destroying people’s career based on his whims.

    Check it out if you want!

    http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/peachpundit-hateful-attacks

  42. John Konop says:

    Erick

    Old lawyer trick attack the person when you know you are wrong and do not want to answer the question!

    ONCE AGAIN!

    BTW Erick taking away the fact you changed the original post lets deal with your question.

    If I got a random e-mail that you beat your wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

  43. Icarus says:

    UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE – 6TH DISTRICT
    Republican
    100 % of precincts reporting

    JOHN KONOP 10,322 17.7 %
    TOM PRICE 47,925 82.3 %

  44. GOPeach says:

    ERICK-

    So would this make you an S.O.B.?
    [ Son of Bill] 🙂

    Now you know Bill is not a father- more like a mother!

    Cut the APRON STRINGS QUICK!!!! Before he starts kissing you in front of people and pinching your little fanny.

  45. Bill Simon says:

    Ben,

    Of course it doesn’t exist NOW because it was ALTERED before!

    Ben, are you aware that Erick, with his Admin privileges, can alter every single post on this blog, and not leave a public track of doing so? He can alter your posts, he can alter my posts, and he can alter his posts.

    If one can alter a post, anything’s possible…and, in this case, it is not only possible, but it did happen.

    As far as the Tom Price comment goes, Erick spent a blog article a few months ago in utter worship of Tom Price. You probably didn’t see it…

    http://www.peachpundit.com/2007/04/16/price-is-going-high-profile/

    Ben, more people know me off this blog than on it. Your opinions and observations about me are about as meaningful to my life as Robert Trim’s (“Rpolitics”) are.

  46. Bill Simon says:

    Icarus,

    What’s your point? Tom Price won, but that doesn’t mean he’s a great leader.

    As HardCore mentioned in that thread I posted above on Tom Price, too bad Price didn’t engage in his “liberal legislation watch” games while the GOP WAS IN THE MAJORITY.

    Price is a putz. Given a candidate with enough money, Price could be in trouble. Konop chose not to spend money.

    Let’s look at these results, Icarus:

    Price spent $2.282 million to obtain 47,925 votes. That makes every one of his votes a cost of $47.62 each

    Konop spent $101,555 for his 10,322 votes. That makes every single one of his votes cost only $9.84 each.

    Konop was outspent and out-raised nearly 5-to-1. Obviously, Price was quite the worried little man with Konop in the race.

    But, Icarus, don’t let a few FACTS cloud your points.

    http://www.fecinfo.com/cgi-win/x_racepg.exe?DoFn=GA062006H

  47. TPSoCal says:

    I have to admit this is fun reading!

    John Konop – would you consider yourself a populist and Price a pro-business rubberstamp?

    My folks live in Price’s district and they seem happy with him. What they are upset about is Alpharetta annexed their sub-division and the speed limits went down and the taxes went up.

  48. Jason Pye says:

    John Konop – would you consider yourself a populist…

    Add protectionist to that.

    John,

    You are a nice guy, but I sincerely regret supporting you last year.

  49. John Konop says:

    TPSoCal
    I would say that is close except I would say Price is Pro big business that donates the big bucks to his campaign. I also think this why you have Ted Kennedy and Tom Price agreeing on failed policy like No Child Left Behind.

    This bill was written by major publishing houses at the expense of our children.

    You might find this interesting as to how it has affected our schools in Georgia.

    http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/sonny-perdue-must-stop-kathy-cox

  50. John Konop says:

    Jason

    I am sorry to hear that but your candidate in the 6th district agreed with me on trade.

    This might help you understand why.

    UNHOLLY ALLINANCE DESTROYING AMERICA
    PART 1

    We have an unholy alliance between many leaders of the Republican and Democratic Party who have sold out our Country to finance their campaigns to maintain power. This policy may help the stock market yet has hurt the average American family. They have pitted Small business and Middle Class America against overseas workers and illegal immigrants with limited rights.

    Adam Smith the one of the fathers of the free market system in his Book Wealth of Nations (which is used most universities economics programs) talks about the right of workers to negotiate wages as a key principal in a free market economy.

    Yet both Parties with the help of many bought and paid for economist never mention this principal when they talk about trade or immigration policy. Economist and Politicians act baffled as to why real wages are going backwards around the world as we do trade deals ( NAFTA, CAFTA WTO CHINA…) with Countries that have workers who are treated like slaves competing with Americans. They are even more surprised as to why wages would be hurt by an unlimited supply of workers (visa) legal and (Illegal immigrants) illegal with very few rights also pitted against Americans.

    The only solution is real trade and immigration reform that does not over supply our Country with workers and pit Americans against overseas child and slave labor. What do you think?

  51. Doug Deal says:

    Bill,

    Economics does not work that way. John Konop could have spent $0, and probably gotten the same amount of votes, does that mean Price is any more vulnerable, since it would have been $0 per vote?

    There is something called “the law of diminishing returns”.

    Previous to this silly witch-hunt against Erick, I had no problem with you or John Konop. Now, you have made yourselves look like fools. Is this REALLY that important to you, that you two will sacrifice all credibility for the sake of “proving” Erick wrong?

    It is pointless to even mention facts, because you choose to ignore then, but I saw the post the very minute it was posted. It never mentioned bribery. The first commenter added that as a joke.

    You become more and more certain of your “evidence” as more and more people line up to challenge you. The sphere of conspiracy is getting wider and wider, I bet this goes all the way to the President.

    Let me know how it turns out.

  52. Jason Pye says:

    John,

    I don’t really care what Jay Fisher said about trade. I had to support him because he was a Libertarian Party member running for public office.

    I disagreed with a few of our candidates on certain parts of their platform.

    What is your point?

  53. Holly says:

    FWIW, I didn’t pay attention to Tom Price until recently, and he doesn’t seem all that bad. Then again, I only started paying attention to him around October 2006.

    What I do know about him is that he and Lynn Westmoreland have been doing a great job making sure Republicans aren’t walked all over while in the minority in the House.

    What is it that’s so bad about him? NCLB? Didn’t everyone in the Georgia Republican delegation vote for that at the time? It seemed like a really great idea, and it still has some really great goals. They’re just poorly executed and the bill is badly written. It didn’t take into consideration a lot of things that are clear in hindsight, and that’s why I suspect it won’t be reauthorized. Nor should it be.

    That said, I don’t believe Tom Price was in office when that legislation was written. From what I remember, Johnny Isakson was the major author in the House, and when he ran for Senate, Tom Price ran to replace him, yes?

  54. John Konop says:

    Doug

    How am I the fool when Erick will not answer the question and keeps changing the topic?

    BTW let us say Erick made a mistake about it being a choice committee appointment. If he had class he would apologize about his mistake. Because the post makes no sense that Isakson took a bribe that was worthless!

    Erick has a history of this type of irresponsible behavior. My hat is off to him for building his website traffic. Yet he should not abuse people with no facts for sport!

  55. TPSoCal says:

    John Konop – I have to agree with you about no child left behind. I would add the debacle of prescription drug coverage and campaign finance “reform”. Anytime I see Kennedy’s or McCain’s name on a bill, I cringe.

  56. Bill Simon says:

    Doug,

    I don’t really care WHO lines up against me on this. As long as Erick chooses to keep bringing it up, I will choose to keep posting the facts.

    Posts can be easily altered on a blog. That is a statement of fact. If you and others choose to disbelieve in that fact, then I really cannot help you.

  57. Bill Simon says:

    Jason,

    You said you’re “sorry” you supported Konop. Interesting stance. So, you’re telling me that you don’t stand on principle, but are swayed by the emotions of a moment in time. Goof to know.

  58. John Konop says:

    Holly

    Tom Price has publicly been a big supporter of No Child Left Behind. And Price wants to continue the failed program. The truth is scores have steadily declined since the 80’s when Federal and State have taking away local control. And most the money for the failed mandates ends up in publishing companies hands instead of the classroom.
    Why not go back to local control? And if you do not like the results you can vote out the board of education.

  59. Jason Pye says:

    Bill,

    I’ve regretted for some time now. Ask Jace Walden or Erick.

    BTW Jim from the 10th also supported my trade position.

    John, I disagreed with Jim as well.

  60. Bill Simon says:

    Jason,

    Is it a regret of supporting him when you wished you had supported Price, or is it a matter of just supporting him in that had you not supported him, you wouldn’t have made any call in the 6th district race?

  61. John Konop says:

    Jason

    Why do you think Adam Smith (an abolitionist) the father of free market economics is wrong about Slave labor hurting the system? Why do you think Adam Smith was wrong about the employees must have rights to negotiate wages in a strong legal system of justice? And why do you think we can keep letting Countries like China that steal 200 billion a year in intellectual Property rights and do nothing about it?

  62. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    John, you are not doing yourself any favors by continuing on with this. It just hurts you more and more. I guess you just like the attention.

  63. puckett says:

    I’m having a hard time deciding who is crazier: John or Bill. They make a compelling case for state-funded mental institutions.

  64. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Hahahahahaha. Konop, you’re an even bigger fraud than I thought. Don’t spout a single word from here on out about your free market “knowledge” if you are so poor at recognizing the name of a free market legend like Ragnar Danneskjöld that you actually call him “Ranger.”

    Wow. Looks like the clock’s struck midnight on your time outside your hole, Konop. Time to crawl back under the bed and leave sane society alone for another good long while.

  65. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Bill, I really wish that you would calm down and listen to reason. I’ve never had a reason to dislike you or to lie to you; likewise, there’s no reason for everybody not named “Konop” in this thread to tell you how wrong you are, if not for the fact that everybody — everybody — saw the exact same thing except, apparently, you. I don’t know how many times we have to go over the same facts, or why we have to do so.

  66. Doug Deal says:

    John,

    I am with you on China. Without what amounts to slave labor and cut corners, China would not be able to compete as well as they do. Look at the way they have poisoned American pets and have defrauded American companies by boosting the reported protein content of wheat glutin by adding a poison (melamine) which give a false positve for wheat gluten.

    Of course, it’s no big deal, it’s so cheap. Who cares if a Chinese company INTENTIONALLY poisoned American Pets and probably people as well in order to undercut our own industry.

    Look at this example of fine Chinese engineering. Look at comment 36!

  67. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    Please tell me how I was wrong about what Adam Smith?

    BTW I thought you were a political science major. But hey you might have been sleeping during the classes about our Country. A little hint to show you how far off you are, the phrase Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness was coined by ADAM SMITH!

    BTW you still have not answered the question I ask you about the topic.

    If I got a random e-mail that Erick beat his wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

  68. John Konop says:

    Doug

    Thank you for the post and link I would like to use it on my website. I read that China is going to use the NAFTA agreement to get around our trade deal and send us more sub-standard products made with child and slave labor.

  69. John Konop says:

    puckett

    Other than ERICK style personal attacks do you any facts about what I said that was wrong? Or like ERICK you will just tell me what you feel!

  70. Ben Marshall says:

    Bill-this is what you posted in an earlier topic:

    Follow-up post:

    I just edited the title of my Mike Jacobs post from yesterday…I added the word “testy” to the title.

    As you can see, the Time-and-Date Stamp of the original post did not change:

    This entry was posted by Bill Simon, on Tuesday, June 19th, 2007 at 10:10 am and is filed under Rumors.

    Here’s the link to the article, just in case you think I make this stuff up:

    http://politicalvine.com/politicalrumors/rumors/welcome-to-the-land-of-oz-mike-jacobs/

    This was Jeff’s response, and you NEVER REPLIED TO THIS. Jeff showed you why you were wrong, by using your own example, and you never countered against it because it showed how you were wrong:

    Bill, are you serious? Read it again. You can change the title, however, the url does not change.

    Your own example proves this: you added the word to the title of your Jacobs post (and it shows up as the new title), but the url retains only the original title. Take a look at it.

    Come on, Bill. There really is no “there” there, and I think that if you re-read this thread — including your own example — you’ll see that.

    There ya go Bill. Erick pointed it out, Jeff pointed it out, and you proved it while you were trying to prove otherwise. Yes, you can change the title. But, even with doing so, the URL retains the original title, just as in your post on Jacobs.

  71. Jason Pye says:

    Is it a regret of supporting him when you wished you had supported Price, or is it a matter of just supporting him in that had you not supported him, you wouldn’t have made any call in the 6th district race?

    BIll, if I had to do it over again. I wouldn’t have supported anyone in that race.

  72. Jason Pye says:

    John,

    Do you really believe that raising tariffs (protectionism) is really the answer? That will only hurt our economy.

    Trade with all entangling alliances with none.

  73. Bill Simon says:

    Ben,

    And then I figured out it was the post contents that he changed.

    I would not have reacted the way I did with the post I wrote regarding Cecil Staton if Erick’s post was innocuous. I would have slammed RightofCenter, not Erick.

  74. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    I never said a student. Did you not get a degree in political science? Did you not question my knowledge of economics? It is very strange that you would claim to have this vast knowledge as writer about politics and you would not also know that ADAM SMITH wrote the bible of free economics WEATH OF NATIONS!

    And the same ADAM SMITH was used to help frame our constitution!

    If you do not understand the basics about our Country one has to wonder how well thought your position are in you articles.

    BTW you still have not answered the question I ask you about the topic.

    If I got a random e-mail that Erick beat his wife from someone I do not know and posted as a discussion piece do you think that would be responsible?

    BTW I have never hid the fact I am dyslexic.

  75. Jason Pye says:

    Actually, the Constitution and Declaration of Independence were more Locke-ian documents that revolved around the concept of natural rights, though I have no doubt that Smith was an influence…but nowhere near the same level.

  76. John Konop says:

    I never said raise tariffs. I said if we are trading with Countries that respect the rule of law that we should have no tariffs and subsidies ie farm bill…….

    BTW respect of the rule laws means, NO CHILD AND SLAVE LABOR, IP LAWS…..

    If A Country violates the rules and does follow the rule of laws we should penalize them to take away the incentive to violate the rule of law.
    What we have now is managed trade not free trade.

  77. John Konop says:

    Jason

    FYI

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The phrase is based on the writings of John Locke, who expressed a similar concept of “life, liberty, and estate (or property)”. While Locke said that “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions”, Adam Smith coined the phrase “life, liberty, and the pursuit of property”. The expression “pursuit of happiness” was coined by Dr. Samuel Johnson in his 1759 novel Rasselas.

    Written by Thomas Jefferson, the words in the Declaration were a departure from the orthodoxy of Locke and Smith. Locke’s phrase was a list of property rights a government should guarantee its people; Jefferson’s list, on the other hand, covers a much broader spectrum of rights, possibly including the guarantees of the Bill of Rights such as free speech and a fair trial. The change was not explained during Jefferson’s life, so beyond this, one can only speculate about its meaning. This tripartite motto is comparable to “liberté, égalité, fraternité” (liberty, equality, fraternity) in France or “peace, order and good government” in Canada.[1]

  78. Jason Pye says:

    The original draft of the Declaration of Independence was written with life, liberty and property, pursuit of happiness was added later.

  79. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    Does anyone even know what is being discussed any longer?

    To answer your childish question John, no that would not be responsible. BUT, if you were to post that you had received a lot of emails from people who were pissed at Erick and asked “what’s up with all these emails?” then that is fine.

    So, what I am saying, is that what Erick posted is fine. It is nothing to start WWIII over. And I think you are carrying on about it because you like getting some attention.

    Now, I am friend of Senator Hill’s and would do anything I could for him. And if I felt, Erick had done something that was wrong in regard to Sen. Hill I would say so.

    Now, I have answered your question, so stop acting like a middle school child.

    ControlJohnKonop.Please

  80. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Sigh. Konop, you bore me, and I honestly have no idea why it is that I’m still responding to you. I’m sure the fly buzzing around the window of my office will soon prove far more interesting. However, while you still have a hold of even a tiny bit of my attention span, let me respond to your latest round of vapidness.

    (A) No, my degree is not in political science. If you really want a C.V., I’ll see if I have time to email you one; however, my academic record includes such things as a degree in Info Systems Tech, a degree in Classics (and classical archaeology), and a research fellowship with the Center for International Trade and Security at UGA.

    (B) Yes, I did question your free-market credentials. A real free-marketeer would instantly recognize the name “Ragnar Danneskjold” as being a character in Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand’s seminal work on capitalism and the free market. I never mentioned Adam Smith or Wealth of Nations — though I would be willing to wager that I’ve read it more times than you have (something, unfortunately, unprovable).

    (C) Sorry, John, I’ve never “claim[ed] to have this vast knowledge as writer [sic] about politics.” Not once.

    (D) Jason is correct — our Constitution is based far more in Locke’s vision of humanity and natural law than it is in Smith’s vision of economics. (And using wikipedia as an authority — really? You’re not one of the three people alive who doesn’t know that anybody in the world can post and edit entries there, are you?)

    (E) I’m not going to get into a p*ssing contest with you over who better “understand[s] the basics about our Country.” I suppose that it is up to you and to the other readers to decide for yourselves “how well thought [sic] [my] position [sic] are in [my] articles.” It’s no skin off my nose either way.

    (F) Sorry that you’re dyslexic. I didn’t realize that dyslexia made people insipid and incoherent. Must be a very unique, strange case. Perhaps you should stop trying to engage people in time-wasting debates over made-up stuff if you have to fall back on a “handicap” as the reason for your getting drubbed.

  81. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    Well said Jeff!!

    And to you John, Jeff is right Ayn Rand is the real free-marketeer. Adam fights for capitalism because it is good for “society” and the “community.” Ayn Rand fights for capitalism because it is best for each individual and an end result is that it is good for everyone.

    And being a dyslexic is no excuse for being crazy.

  82. John Konop says:

    Ayn Rand was an atheist who did not believe in the Life, Liberty and Pursuit of happiness and her books are based on Adam Smith philosophy without god!

    Adam Smith was a moral philosopher as well as an economist who believed in God!

  83. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    Jeff
    Adam Smith was known as a moral philosopher more than an economist during that time period.
    It is hard to argue with you because you do not want to read the actual facts which I have posted in the past.
    All you want to do is tell people what you feel with no facts.
    And when one challenges your lack of knowledge about the topic you go personal.
    Why not take a deep breath and open your eyes and learn. If you want I will give you the links to educate yourself. But you have to be willing to learn!

  84. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    BTW you have the God given right to follow an atheist philosopher(Ayn Rand) for your core beliefs? BTW you can thank the fact that our constitution was based on moral philosophers like Smith instead of Ayn Rand style or you would not have that right!

  85. John Konop says:

    Ragnar

    BTW let us say Erick made a mistake about it being a choice committee appointment. If he had class he would apologize about his mistake.

    Because the post makes no sense that Isakson took a bribe that was worthless!

    Do you not see the problem here?

  86. Jason Pye says:

    Ayn Rand was an atheist who did not believe in the Life, Liberty and Pursuit of happiness…

    That’s laughable. You are talking about a woman whole left an oppressive regime (Lenin’s Russia) and came to the United States to seek a better life for herself. Her story is the epitome of that phrase.

    Yes, she was an atheist…and God bless her for that.

  87. John Konop says:

    Jason

    She has the right to be an atheist. But an atheist does not believe in the god giving rights of the individual. And that is a big difference between Adam Smith and Ayn Rand and their core philosophy about human rights, the rule of law and justice.

  88. John Konop says:

    BTW like I said you and Jeff have the right to let an atheist drive your core beliefs.

    BTW you can thank the fact that our constitution was based on moral philosophers like Smith instead of Ayn Rand style or you would not have that right!

  89. Bill Simon says:

    Jason,

    You are to blame for starting this tangential thread about capitalism and Adam Smith stuff.

    Next time, invite John over to YOUR blog where y’all can discuss it, ‘k?

  90. Jason Pye says:

    Bill,

    You are to blame for making shit up about Erick. This thread could have been easily avoided if you could read and comprehend. Don’t shift the blame.

  91. Bill Simon says:

    Jason,

    Thank you for tracking the conversation back to the original topic.

    I didn’t “make-up” anything at all. This is the order of events:

    – Erick posted something bad
    – I responded and slammed him for it.
    – Erick revised the post upon realizing that if one accuses someone of “bribery,” one could get personally sued for it.

    …And then, Erick’s claque has chimed-in to support him at all costs. That is, people like you are a member of his claque.

    Now…to borrow an acronym from Nicki, STFU!

  92. John Konop says:

    Jason

    I have posted a similar comment to you on my site as well here about what Erick said about Isakson.

    And nobody will tell me why Erick should have not taken down the Isakson post and apologized when he found out his wild accusation was based on false information? BTW the false information was his mistake!

    “BTW let us say Erick made a mistake about it being a choice committee appointment”. “If he had class he would apologize about his mistake”.

    “Because the post makes no sense that Isakson took a bribe that was worthless”!

  93. Jeff Emanuel says:

    John, you do know that this isn’t about Isakson, but about Judson Hill, right? The State Senator you called a State Rep?

    Hello?

    Must be the dyslexia.

  94. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    Read the post it was about my article I wrote about Erick attacking people with rumors!

    In the post Isakson was one of the examples.

    READ

    Erick also accused Senator Isakson of taking the coveted fiancé committee as a bribe for his support of the immigration bill. The only problem with Erick’s fantasy is Isakson got appointed to the thankless ETHICS committee, which very few Senators want. A blogger with “ETHICS” would have taken down the post and sent an apology to Senator Isakson.

    I have been very outspoken about my disagreements with congressmen like Isakson on our immigration and trade policies. But to falsely attack the personal character of Senator Isakson, as well as State Senator Justin Hill, on baseless rumors and without facts is flat out wrong!

    I encourage you send an e-mail to Erick asking him to stop using his website as a tabloid with the intent of destroying people’s career based on his whims.

    Check it out if you want!

    http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/peachpundit-hateful-attacks

  95. John Konop says:

    Ragnar

    BTW you have the God given right to follow an atheist philosopher(Ayn Rand) for your core beliefs? BTW you can thank the fact that our constitution was based on moral philosophers like Smith instead of Ayn Rand style or you would not have that right!

  96. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    my rights of individual freedom, liberty and property are not givn to me by some invisible hand; they are given to by being born in this world. I don;t remember God granting them to me or giving them to me.

    When discussing economics and philosophy, you must leave out the unproven. You must use reason and logic. You can have faith on your own time.

    How would I not have that right John? Have you ever read Ayn Rand? Hav you ever studied her philosophy? Religion has nothing to do with it. I don;t give a flying shit what religion anyone is. For instance I dont care if you are a Jew, a Methodist or a Mormon.

    I like Ayn Rand refuse to be an altruist and refuse to use altruism: the public good as the moral justification of freedom and free enterprise. Adam SMith bases his support for capitalism on altruistic grounds and Ayn’s support of capitalism stems from individual rights which the Founding Fathers believed in.

    And it is Adam Smith’s altruism that his destroying what he put forth as Laissez-Faire Capitalism.

    Erick, I request this post be shut down so we can get rid of John Konop. Please!!!

  97. Jeff Emanuel says:

    Konop, two quick, final things: (1) You do know that “BTW” means “by the way,” do you not? Is there a particular reason you start every.single.sentence. with it?

    (2) Yeah. Nice try at the extra traffic, but no cigar; try as you might, none of us are going to surf over to your site to read more incoherent babble. We get enough of that from you here.

  98. John Konop says:

    Jeff

    I am glad to see now that you read and understand the post that we agree Erick step over the line.

    Also Jeff you are confused again about this post being about me promoting my website and radio show.

    The facts are Erick wrote the post called “A Question For John Konop”

    Unless you are saying Erick and I set this up to promote my website your logic is flawed.
    As far as my traffic on the Website and Radio show we were growing at a very rapid rate without Erick. The radio show grew by 360% last book. The website and news letter unique readers are around 40 to 50k a month. Not bad for part time gig less than 12 months old!

    I do understand you better now that I know your core beliefs are based on an atheist (Ayn Rand). I respect your rights to belief that way, but you should read about God giving rights if you want to understand AMERICANS who have my views.

  99. John Konop says:

    Ragnar

    YOU SAID

    “my rights of individual freedom, liberty and property are not givn to me by some invisible hand; they are given to by being born in this world. I don;t remember God granting them to me or giving them to me”.

    You did an excellent job in your post explaining the atheist view that Jeff Emanuel and you support!

    In fact your comment does a great job of showing the difference between Any Rand and Adam Smith!

    Founding Fathers believed in God in my opinion and hence are the core debate between all of us!

    If you do not believe in God giving rights the concept of justice is void in what you and Jeff belief.

    That is why Child and Slave labor means nothing to you guys.

  100. Ragnar Danneskjöld says:

    John you don’t have clue. There is not a stauncher supporter of individual freedom than Ayn Rand. She believes in the freedom of the individual and can be shown through the quote, “I swear by my life and my love it that I will never live for the sake of another man, or ask another man to live for mine.”

    I also believe in the Founding Fathers Philosophy. They created a COnsitution that led to the most free nation on earth. BUT the same Founding Fathers who believed in God had slaves and SUPPORTED and condoned the enterprise of slavery. If Ayn Rand would have started this conuntry there wouldnt have been slavery.

    She came from a country that oppressed with slavery and she left for the simple reason that there was no individual freedom.

    John I will not debate a philosophy of someone you have even read nor could u understand.

    And yes John, I believe and support free business and free enterprise and yes I support businesses being free to do what they can to offer the best and most reasonably priced product they can. Government should, in no way, restrict business as you wnt them too

    Justice is the fact that will no longer debate someone like you because that will give you credibility and you have none

  101. Three Jack says:

    Not satisfied with losing in his home district, John Konop now considers run against Saxby Chambliss (from controlcongress):

    blogger writes — I WILL SUPPORT JOHN FOR SAXBY’s SEAT!
    John– I will be YOUR BIGGEST WORKER AND SUPPORTER!

    What do you say John? That’s at least two supporters.

    JohnKonop Says:
    June 10th, 2007 at 7:07 pm

    Thank you I am thinking about it!

  102. John Konop says:

    The debate about slavery before our Constitution was big. In fact Adam Smith was one of the famous abolitionist of his time!

    The argument made before the Civil War was if we freed the slaves it would ruin our economy and take away right of business.

    The Rand view of economics was not knew she just wrote about it! If you talk to scholars about economics Rand is not in the same league as Smith. Also Rand is referred to as an Atheist view of Adam Smith free market economics.

    You can spin it any way you want but that is the truth. But in your first post you did do a good job pointing out the difference between Rand the atheist and Smith who believes in God.

    I am sorry that you, Jeff, Erick…. Did not understand that your core belief in Rand is an atheist view of the world!

  103. John Konop says:

    Three Jacks

    I have gotten a lot of letters and calls to step back in. At this time I am heavily involved in a new venture. I do not think the timing is right for my family at this time.

    I will say that if a Chip Rogers type candidate steps in from any party I would support that person!

    Thank you for asking!

  104. Jason Pye says:

    You do not have to believe in God to believe in individual liberty. A belief in the harm principle is the foundation for a “moral” life.

  105. Donkey Kong says:

    Jason,

    Your belief in individual liberty presupposes certain inalienable rights. Those rights presuppose an granter of those rights. I think its fair to call that Provider God. You don’t have to believe in God to believe in individual liberty, but you’re missing the larger picture if you exclude the provider of the rights that demand individual liberty.

  106. Donkey Kong says:

    Also, Jason, a belief in the harm principle lacks a sound moral imperative. That’s where an atheistic attempt at individual liberty can quickly fall apart.

  107. GOPeach says:

    Okay Okay Okay …

    Somebody get Mother Simon a bottle of Midol.
    S/he is PMSing all over the internet today.

    Ms. Billy -Jean Simon needs to to go lie down and get hu summa aftanoon nap!

    Git on now kids — Give Mother Simon some down time – hear?

  108. GOPeach says:

    Jason-

    Look- Billie gets real huffy when s/he feals stupid… because s/he is the BIG MAMA here on
    Peach Pundit as Erick is his/her son!

    Now whachu want to bet Mother Simon is at the PRIDE festival today? 🙂

  109. Bill Simon says:

    Ragnar

    You quoted Ayn Rand as follows: ““I swear by my life and my love it that I will never live for the sake of another man, or ask another man to live for mine.”

    If Ayn Rand is the atheist she was known to be, what is the purpose of her “swearing” to anything? Why would an atheist use the word “swearing?” What does it mean?

  110. John Konop says:

    Jeff,
    Since you support our current managed trade policy via WTO China, NAFTA, CAFTA,,,,, which turns a blind eye to the rule of law, child and slave labor and human trafficking that would but you in the Ayn Rand camp.

    Ayn Rand core belief was that of an atheist Adam Smith version of economics you support!

    I will remind you again Adam Smith was against slavery unlike you! As Donkey Kong pointed he believed in GOD GIVEN rights unlike you.

    Because it would be illogical that you believe in GOD GIVEN rights and support trade deals that do not!

    Jason and Ragner did an excellent job explaining why people agree that exploiting people for profit is ok. But hey as I told you many people had your view prior to our own CIVIL WAR. In fact the argument made was freeing slaves will hurt business and take away the rights of business owners.

    Do you think freeing slaves was a good idea?

  111. Jason Pye says:

    John,

    I have railed so many times about an $8 million purchase my county made to acquire a “battlefield” from the Civil War. I called it a “monument to slavery” in the AJC. I do not support slavery. I support the market and individual liberty. My heroes in economics are Mises, Friedman, Rand and Hayek…none of these people supported slavery or oppression.

    For you to make such an assertion is damned stupid and a lie.

  112. Jace Walden says:

    John,

    This is a bunch of bullshit! I don’t know how it happened, but in the past 3 days, on this very thread, it is clear that you have gone completely off your rocker.

    I’ll tell you right now, you are full of dog sh*t if you think Jason Pye or Jeff Emanuel support slavery or anything of the sort.

    You need to let it go. You’re acting like a goddamn hypocrite. You acuse Erick of spreading innuendo and rumor, and then you do the same thing to Jason and Jeff by twisting their words and creating fallacious comparisons.

    I think freeing the slaves was a GREAT idea, for the record. And also, for the record, so did Ayn Rand. Ayn Rand’s philosophy was based on individual rights, a concept which you apparently cannot grasp, and a concept which is contrary to your fallacious associations with slavery.

  113. bowersville says:

    John, what are you saying? Please, go look in the mirror and see if there is a reflection to make sure you are still in this world.

  114. John Konop says:

    You guys make no sense! If you support trade deals with Countries that promote slave labor and human trafficking how would you be against slavery?

  115. John Konop says:

    bowersville

    Do you think that slave labor and human trafficking is not going on in China, Oman……

    Do you think that Adam Smith moral philosophy and belief in GOD was not a major influence in our Constitution?

    Do you think Ayn Rand was not known as an Atheist version of Adam Smith?

    Do you think before our own CIVIL WAR that the pro slave crowd did not argue that if we free slaves was that it would hurt the economy and take away rights of business?

  116. bowersville says:

    John, while you are looking in the mirror to see if there is a reflection, get up close, take a deep breath, blow, and see if the mirror fogs.

    If it does, you need to take your left index finger and test it to make sure it’s real. Rub across the fog and see if it leaves a trail, then we’ll talk.

  117. John Konop says:

    Jason

    You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say you are against slavery and yet trade with people who promote it. That is why Adam Smith said a free market system cannot function proper unless labor has rights to negotiate! Also justice and the rule of law must be for all!

    Do you understand known of the above is part of China, Oman, Mexico….

  118. Jason Pye says:

    John,

    You are so full of it.

    I support open trade with all countries and entangling alliances with none. That is the stance of the Founders.

  119. Jason Pye says:

    Since you cannot come up with an intelligent response and all you can do is launch personal attacks that means you got caught!

    John Konop just defined himself.

  120. bowersville says:

    The only thing that is caught is your lunacy.

    Believe what ever you wish. As far as an intelligent response, or statement from you, I have yet to read one.

  121. John Konop says:

    Jason

    Your facts are wrong.

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    There are two sides to the history of tariffs in the economic history of the United States and the role they have played in U.S. trade policy. In the first place, it was the single most important source of federal revenue from the 1790s to the eve of World War I, when it was finally surpassed by income taxes. So essential was this revenue source, and so easy was it to collect at the major ports, that all sides agreed that the nation should have a tariff for revenue purposes. In practice, that was an average tax of about 20% of the value of some imported goods. (Imports that were not taxed were “free”.)

  122. John Konop says:

    Jason

    Thomas Jefferson once said that American democracy would fall if everyone became wage slaves because people would no longer be independent. You don’t have to endorse that statement entirely to get a sense of what he was on about. We will not be good global citizens if we simply become dependent on foreign multinationals, a distant outpost of globalisation incorporated, a branch office of Monster Corporation. To be a good global citizen we need a degree of self-reliance – a degree of internal strength from which we can engage with the rest of the world.

  123. Jason Pye says:

    “WE MUST HAVE PROTECTIONISM!!!”

    The underlying problem is the tax structure in the United States. It punishes small and large business and inhibits economic growth. And I believe that one of the problems is populist/nationalist fools like yourself that chose to use simplistic rhetoric to completely distort the issue.

  124. John Konop says:

    Jason

    You keep leaving out justice and rule of law!

    FYI

    The Heritage of Economic Liberty
    by Richard M. Ebeling, July 1990

    For the Founding Fathers, economic liberty was inseparable from the case for political freedom. Many of the grievances enumerated in the Declaration of Independence concern British infringements on the free movement of goods and men between the thirteen colonies and the rest of the world.

    It was not a coincidence that the same year that saw the Declaration of Independence also saw the publication of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. Both represented the ideas of the age. When Smith spoke of a “system of natural liberty” in which “every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interests his own way and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of other men,” he was expressing the economic vision of most of those who fought for freedom from British imperialism in the thirteen colonies.

  125. John Konop says:

    Jason

    I would hope you want use President Bush type talking point about trade. Look we have poorly negotiated trade deals not free trade. The guy you support Ron Paul has said that many times.

    And if you simplify the argument down to a you’re with us or against us is how you end up with a out of control trade debt!

  126. Jason Pye says:

    And made it clear free market does function well with slave labor!

    John,

    You are so damned stupid. I’ve already gone over this with you. I am a believer in the harm principle. Do a Wikipedia search on it if you have to.

    I don’t even want the State of Georgia to remember the Confederacy in 2011.

    I’m not going to continue to repeat myself.

    Look we have poorly negotiated trade deals not free trade.

    I’ve already said that, John.

    The guy you support Ron Paul has said that many times.

    I know that, John. I gave you a link to an article where he supported the beliefs of the Founder, which is “trade with all, entangling alliances with none.”

    And if you simplify the argument down to a you’re with us or against us is how you end up with a out of control trade debt!

    No, John. You end up with an out of control debate when it is John Konop on the other end. You are so sparatic and nonsensical.

    And this is why I regret backing you last year. I would be embarrassed to see you in the United States House of Representatives pulling the same shit there that you have been doing here. It may be funnier than anything Cynthia McKinney pulled.

    If you do run against Saxby Chambliss (and I am no fan of him) or anyone else…I hope they drive you into the ground.

  127. John Konop says:

    Jason

    From encyclopedia of Economics

    Biography of
    Adam Smith (1723-90)

    FYI

    Adam Smith has sometimes been caricatured as someone who saw no role for government in economic life. In fact, he believed that government had an important role to play. Like most modern believers in free markets, Smith believed that the government should enforce contracts and grant patents and copyrights to encourage inventions and new ideas. One definite difference between Smith and most modern believers in free markets is that Smith favored retaliatory tariffs.

  128. John Konop says:

    BTW can anyone telll me how this was not an unfair attack by Erick Erickson?

    I bet not!

    Erick also accused Senator Isakson of taking the coveted finance committee as a bribe for his support of the immigration bill. The only problem with Erick’s fantasy is Isakson got appointed to the thankless ETHICS committee, which very few Senators want”. “A blogger with “ETHICS” would have taken down the post and sent an apology to Senator Isakson.

  129. Bill Simon says:

    John,

    This blog is a lot like Spanky and his gang on The Little Rascals.

    Erick is Spanky (surely he has a beanie cap that he wears when he is on the ‘puter), and nothing you or I or anyone else tells him is wrong will faze him, or his fellow little rascals.

    I’m not sure if Darla is better played by Jason Pye or Jace Walden or Ragnar…it’s clearly a 3-way split there.

    I guess, by default, Buckwheat will have to be played by Andre…

  130. Jace Walden says:

    Bill,

    If you are insinuating that I like to defend Erick on here, you obviously haven’t been paying attention to PP lately….or John Konops website either…I did dedicate a whole thread afterall to trashing Erick for a thing he wrote on RedState.

    Who I am defending though, is my friend Jason Pye, who is having his name tarnished by YOURS and Konop’s bullshit.

    AND, I know you don’t give a damn what I have to say, and that’s fine, but if you guys are willing to trash Jason’s name for NO reason in order to get some kind of point across about Erick manipulating some thread, then I am wholly less inclined to believe that Erick manipulated a thread.

    Just my opinion, Bill. Like I said, I know you don’t give a damn.

  131. John Konop says:

    Jace

    I will say you are no fan of Erick. but my comments about being against slave labor and illegal immigration and guest workers with limited rights to compete against American workers has been consistent.

    As you know you have the right on my website to say what you want! But I did not need a debate on economics to proof what Erick did was wrong!

    BTW I even took attacks on my race which Erick and Jeff Emanuel condone. Yet at the end no one has told me how what Erick wrote about Isakson was not anything more than fact less hit piece.

Comments are closed.