I once read a story where a woman who would give talks on racial insensitivty once vandilized her own car to make news. Unfortunately for her, she was caught on tape.

Without real proof, assumptions are often wrong, especially in politics. Politics attracks some very disgraceful people (pretty much the entire group who label themselves “political consultants”, as well as many of the politicians themselves.)

Who knows what people might do on their own, or what might be staged by an opponent to make a candidate look bad.

My point on HB1222 is that I do not ‘know’, two days before this election, if Stan Watson really sent out these two mailers. Common sense dictates he must have known about them.

Your point is well taken, yet true anonymity is very difficult to maintain, and I had to go ‘public’ on the recent North DeKalb incorporation issue.

Either you support free speak or you don’t. Anonymous speach is the most important type of free speach, as it allows publication of opinion that could cause harm to the speaker by those in power. If voters are not smart enough to figure out the motivations behind the speach , we aren’t well served by a republic.

Or is he just going to admire his turd in the punch bowl?

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2008/07/31/anonymous_campaign_mailings.html

I support SOS Handel in repealing this law. I am not sure what the good Senator from Cobb had in mind, but this seems to be a poor outcome.

The printing, mailing lists and postage for this flyer ran into the thousands. The person that did this expects to get something out of it. Altruism doesn’t appear to be a likely motive. Someone told Stan who did it because they want the credit.

This flyer doesn’t get dismissed by the voting and thinking public simply because a civil suit isn’t tried and won. Stan deserves the blame for this flyer.

The joke is you’ve taken the weak side of the argument to advocate a very narrow position. Political smears should be denounced. Period. End of story.

You (and Erick for that matter) have presented exactly no proof that Watson actually put out the mailer other than “golly, I know he did it.” Try bringing that to court and see how it holds up against a libel suit.

It is entirely possible that a supporter put it out without his knowledge. It is entirely possible (though admittedly unlikely) that an opponent put it out to make it look like he put it out. Other scenarios are possible.

If you’ve got proof that Watson put out the mailer, show it. Circumstantial evidence doesn’t mean anything.

No. That is contortionist thinking.

Making excuses and concocting illogical political strategies are sounding pretty stupid to me.

So it is plausible to you that some independent group printed an attack mailer focusing upon Stan Watson’s opponent without Stan knowing? Without Stan’s staff knowing? Without Stan’s political allies knowing? Without Stan’s financial contributors knowing? Nobody associated with Stan knew this was going to happen and no one told him it was going to happen? And no one including Stan and his political contributors ever had an opportunity to say, “No this is wrong. We can’t act lie and encourage racism.” If you believe all that, Sonny’s wants to talk with you about some swamp land in Florida that he owns.

Did it ever occur to you that someone who doesn’t like Stan could have put out the mailer to make him look like he’s race-baiting? Not saying that’s what happened, but you have no more proof that Stan put it out than there is that an opponent did it to make him look like he did.

In this case, the longer he stays silent about it, the more he appears complicit. Chances appear good he knew about it given some of his past tactics.

But there is no proof, and to come out and state unequivocally that that is the case could end up making you look real stupid if there’s more to the story.

This was a political act, not a violation of the law. It isn’t necessary to have a chain of evidence to hold him responsible. The circumstances prove his guilt.

Let’s see how loudly Stan speaks about this mailer.

And FYI, I held my nose and voted for Ellis in the primary despite him being directly up Sembler’s ass.

The guy has a terrible record of maintaining his campaign contributions, too. He blew past the June 30 filing deadline, and finally filed on the July 15th. He has been fined repeatedly by the State Ethics Commission for ignoring the rules. The guy is an arrogant racist hypocrite who tells black people one message and whites another.

Instead of participating in a televised debate – something that demonstrates the American political system at its best – he cancels at the last moment and instead participates in a racist mailer. Wow, there is a leader we can all respect. Shame on Watson and shame on those that stand by silently, excuse it or somehow find it acceptable.

The sting of reverse discrimination/discrimination will never be put to rest with the likes of these 21st century reminders to 20th century thinking.

I refuse to believe we cannot change.

I personally witnessed Stan Watson supporters illegally campaigning near the polling station at East Ponce and Sycamore, so there’s not a lot I’d put past him/them. His absenteeism at debates is totally inexcusable. But I think some due diligence needs to be done here.

Hey AJC! How about calling them the way you see them! Grow up and deal with race in today’s context, not the 1960’s.

When Vernon gets wind of an attack from the AJC, he has gone straight to AJC management time and again to threaten and bully them. Most of the time they roll over, and pull their punch.

I thought ours was a misprint, the “UNCLE TOM” in bold font Ellis photograph being left off.