The Hate Whitey Classic a/k/a the 2nd Mary Norwood Mailpiece from the DPG

I told you the race baiting would begin in earnest.

This one features an angry very photoshopped white Mary Norwood with a furrowed brow because she’s so concerned black lady.

Oh, Rush Limbaugh, George Bush, and Sarah Palin also make appearances.

In other words, black people will die if Mary Norwood is Mayor.

46 comments

  1. In the course of a few hours, Erick’s made TWO posts about the Dems attacking one of their own over purity… while simultaneously working the Scozzafava stunt to make a name for himself and avoid having to find a real job.

    The irony is stupefying. He should have posted these as Pete.

    • Doug Deal says:

      But wait! That would imply that Erick Erickson and Pete Randall are the same person. The whole idea is so diculous, it’s re-diculous.

      Don’t start that again. Lance Hunt Pete Randall wears glasses. Captain Amazing Erick Erickson doesn’t wear glasses.

  2. Angry Taxpayer says:

    So where do you think the funding for this comes from? Could it be Mayor Franklin’s campaign contribution “residuals” – a check written on the 26th of October from her campaign account to the Dem Party? Certainly there could be more paths traveled on this but this is the simplest one.

    Given that the mailers came out just after the 25th of October (a filing deadline for local races and campaign sources and uses of funds), for which Franklin would have to file – and certainly the Mayor does not like Mary – deductive reasoning says Franklin is funding the hit pieces!

    So why would Franklin do it – to most of us active in City politics it is pretty straight forward. My personal opinion – Franklin does not want Mary opening the books on Jan 3rd.

    • Mike Hauncho says:

      Let’s assume that Norwood received strong financial support from Atlanta Republicans. She would not be in the lead with only their support. That means there is large Democrat support for her. While the DPG is trying to attack her connections to the GOP they are also attacking all the Dems who support Mary. It’s not smart to throw some of your own under the bus to make your point. Plus, if Norwood wins the election the DPG has just made an enemy out of the Mayor of Atlanta. When was the last time that happened?

  3. arjay says:

    This reminds of the attack ads that went after Lee Morris when he ran for Fulton County Commission Chairman in 2006. Shirley Franklin and John Lewis claimed that if Morris (a progressive Republican) won, it would “turn back the clock on civil rights” to the era of fighting off dogs and fire hoses.

    • macho says:

      It’s definitely a hit piece, but comes nowhere near rising to the level of that hideous radio spot stating that if elected to the Fulton Commission, the Republicans would launch attack dogs onto black people.

    • Sleepy Tom says:

      On the other hand, the Atlanta Humane Society’s kennels are chock-full of dogs. Maybe dropping a few of them off at City Hall would help liven things up.

  4. macho says:

    It’s interesting to me that the DPG has now acquiesced and is admitting they are completely beholden to the City of Atlanta and its machine politics. The DPG has put far more of an effort into the Mayor’s race than their missed opportunities during Obama’s unprecedented Georgia Democrat turnout.

    It will be interesting to see if Shirley made a major contribution to the DPG and there is a quid pro quo going on here.

    While it may help in the short-term, I wonder what long-term penalty the DPG will pay for plunging headfirst into Atlanta racial politics. Is this advertising campaign going to stomp out the last vestiges of conservative and moderate Democrats in Georgia? Is this the Democrat party Roy Barnes wants behind him during his run for Governor? Barnes can’t win exclusively with the Atlanta vote.

  5. Romegaguy says:

    People trying to influence voters on who is the “real conservative” running in NY is ok. People trying to influence voters on who is the “real Democrat” is not ok.

    Good to know

    • macho says:

      I think it’s the difference between a partisan and non-partisan race. Being Mayor is really just about balancing the budget and public safety. It be good to concentrate less on the partisan and more on the “nuts and bolts” of trimming the payroll.

      • firestrike99 says:

        The job itself may be non-partisan, but the person holding the job traditionally has a pretty large partisan political role. Shirley, Andy, Maynard, etc. were all very active Democrats during their terms.

  6. AubieTurtle says:

    While I would like it if the state party kept out of the election, it really is a smart strategy on their part. Norwood’s strength appears to be that she has captured most of the white vote and a sizable chunk of the black vote. The ads won’t do much to the white vote but could have enough of an effect on the black vote to hurt Norwood. I doubt there are more than a small handful of people who were going to vote for Border or Reed who will now vote for Norwood because of the ads but many of the people who met Norwood at community meetings but have no real knowledge of her beyond that could be swayed by the ads.

  7. Doug Deal says:

    This one features an angry very photoshopped white Mary Norwood with a furrowed brow because she’s so concerned black lady.

    I guess English 101 is not a pre-requisite for law school.

    Yay, and God said “let their be commas” and there were commas. God saw that commas were good and He seperated the dependent clauses and the lists of items or descriptions.

  8. Game Fan says:

    Maybe Erick doesn’t like the idea of a white Democrat Mayor of Atlanta. It just doesn’t compute with some folks in addition to diluting an otherwise whiter Republican party and a blacker Democrat party. When race is off page one some people’s universe is in turmoil.

  9. macho says:

    I thought Towery had an interesting piece, on Insider Advantage, analyzing Norwood’s response ad, where she denounces the great Satan – the GOP. He mentioned it was understandable that you don’t campaign as a republican running for Mayor of Atlanta, but why would she go out of her way to alienate a core base of support. I know a lot of folks in the GOP who are torn between Norwood and Borders. As Towery mentioned, it wouldn’t be that hard for Borders to get a list of likely GOP voters in Atlanta, and flood it with auto-dials of Norwood going out of her way to bash the GOP.

    • Dash Riptide says:

      When did Norwood bash the GOP? She bashed party politics generally and the one Republican convention she did attend in particular, but she’s only hating on the game, not the players. She’s saying that the inside baseball stuff is not for her. It’s easy for political junkies to forget that most people who call themselves Democrats or Republicans feel the same way. -1 Towery

      • macho says:

        Dash-

        I think Norwood tried to thread a very tight needle with this ad and politics are all about perception.

        • Dash Riptide says:

          No doubt, but Atlanta Republicans are smart enough to realize that Norwood doesn’t deny going to that GOP convention and doesn’t otherwise claim to be a Dem. They can read between the lines. Norwood is casting herself as a Dem-voting independent because that’s the best she can do. For all we know she is lying through her teeth about who she voted for in past presidential races. The real question for me is whether the ad appears too weak and weasel-ish to its true target audience, not whether it alienates white Republicans.

          • macho says:

            Well, when you rattle of your votes for Barack Obama, John Kerry, Al Gore and Bill Clinton, there is a certain implication of your party affiliation.

          • macho says:

            Just for the record, I’m going to vote for Norwood, because I think she has the best combination of being closest to my philosophy and chance of winning. If I was just going to vote for who I think would shake things up, and provide the best future for the City of Atlanta, regardless of ability to win; it would be Jesse Spikes.

            I know there are some who say vote for the best candidate, regardless of their chances of winning, and maybe there are right; but I don’t want to “waste” my vote.

  10. Silent Outrage says:

    So essentially, if you are a white moderate democrat you are no longer welcome in the Democratic Party of Georgia is what this mail piece says…

    Very distressing…

    • firestrike99 says:

      You realize that the leader of the party (a.k.a. the one who had to approve this mailing) is a white moderate Democrat and that the party is currently actively supporting a white moderate Democrat down in the HD141 Special election. A commenter that doesn’t know his facts…

      Very distressing, but sadly very common…

      • Andre says:

        @firestrike99,

        It certainly is true that a commenter who doesn’t know their facts is very distressing and sadly, very common.

        Take, for example, your comment that the leader of the party had to approve this [anti-Norwood] mailing.

        Did you know that Article II, section 1 of the state Democratic Party charter says, “The State Committee shall be the highest authority of the State Party?”

        Did you know that same section reads, “The State Committee shall have general responsibility for the affairs of the State Party.”

        And did you also know that Article IV, section 2, paragraph one of the state Democratic Party charter says, “The Chair shall carry out the programs and policies of the State Committee, preside over the meetings of the State Committee and Executive Committee, provide general administrative direction to the Executive Director, and serve as an ex-officio member of all committees of the State Party.”

        The reason why I ask these questions is because you seem to believe that Jane Kidd, in her official capacity as the Georgia state Democratic Party chairman, had the authority to approve the campaign literature advocating the defeat of Atlanta mayoral candidate Mary Norwood.

        As I’ve previously stated in other threads dealing with this particular subject matter, at no time did the highest authority of Georgia’s Democratic Party approve the anti-Norwood mail piece; make it a policy of the state Democratic committee to become involved in nonpartisan elections; or enact a program that included the expenditure of funds to pay for the aforementioned mail piece.

        I encourage any interested individuals to review the official record of proceedings for the October 3, 2009 state Democratic committee meeting so that they may be completely informed of the facts.

        Like firestrike99 said, a commenter that doesn’t know their facts is very distressing and very common. Sadly, firestrike99 is one of those know-nothing commenters.

        • GOPGeorgia says:

          Andre,

          Has a Chairman for the DPG ever overstepped their bounds? If they did, what would happen? The mailer states paid for by the DPG, and gives the DPG address.

          Either the DPG authorized this or it did not. Either the Chairman was in on it, or she was not. Either the DPG paid for it or it did not. If the answer to all of these statements is “not,” then who did and why the disclosure stating the DPG paid for it?

          • Andre says:

            GOPGeorgia,

            I have been on the state Democratic committee since the winter of 2004 and to my knowledge, the state Democratic Party chairman has never overstepped their bounds to this magnitude.

            Once again, the highest authority of the Georgia Democratic Party is the state Democratic committee.

            The state Democratic committee last met on Saturday, October 3, 2009.

            At that meeting, the state Democratic committee elected a new Secretary; adopted the Party platform; and discussed amending the Charter & Bylaws.

            At no time did the state Democratic committee authorize or approve any of the anti-Norwood mail pieces.

            While I cannot speak for any other state Democratic committee members, I believe what Jane Kidd has done constitutes an intentional misrepresentation of the positions and/or policies of the Georgia Democratic Party [Article II, section 8, paragraph two; Bylaws of the Democratic Party of Georgia].

            The state Democratic committee has not taken a position on the nonpartisan Atlanta mayoral election. And for Jane Kidd to explicitly proclaim that, “As far as we [the Georgia Democratic Party] are concerned, Mary Norwood’s a Republican,” grossly misrepresents a position –or the lack thereof– of the state Democratic Party [Galloway, Jim (2009-10-28). State Democrats jump into Atlanta mayor’s race against Mary Norwood. Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Retrieved on 2009-11-1.].

            I would say that Jane Kidd’s actions violated the Georgia Democratic Party’s charter & bylaws, and that some sort of disciplinary action might need to be taken.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            Here’s an option, but it’s your party, your business.

            BYLAWS
            OF THE
            DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF GEORGIA
            As Amended through July 29, 2006
            BYLAWS ARTICLE II
            STATE COMMITTEE
            SECTION 8. REMOVAL
            BL2.8.1 Officers or members may be removed for cause by a 2/3 vote of the State Committee, provided there is a fifty percent quorum.
            BL2.8.2 Cause may include:
            Intentional misrepresentation of positions or policies of the Party.

        • Game Fan says:

          Yes it’s very distressing then again, if perception = reality in politics then a few un-informed comments from average Joe taxpayers may yet contain some value. For example it took a while for this “non-partisan” thing to sink in for moi. So basically she’s not a Dem or Republican? And for those who actually wasted 30 seconds out of their lives actually reading this comment, I could offer a lengthy apology but then this would only take more time for those involved. So therefore and in conclusion, once again to re-iterate, I still don’t know a darn thing about GA politics. 🙂

        • benevolus says:

          Andre, would you stop with this straw-man please? The body of the Party does not and never has voted on every action or every expenditure of the Party. If you think what was done was dumb, then fine, call her (and perhaps the Exec Comm.) out on it. But this smokescreen that somehow rules were violated is pretty weak.

          By the way, in the interest of appropriate disclosure, who are you supporting in the race?

          • Andre says:

            benevolus,

            I’ve outlined clearly, over several days, the facts as it pertains to this matter.

            Friday evening, I talked with Fox 5 reporter Justin Gray about this issue. And I’ll say to you what I said to him:

            I live nineteen miles south of the Atlanta city limits. State Democratic Party chairman Jane Kidd lives in Athens. Neither one of us has any business involving ourselves in an Atlanta municipal election — especially a nonpartisan election.

            Aside from having the positions and policies of the state Democratic Party grossly misrepresented by Jane Kidd, I have no dog in this fight.

            I am supporting no one, and I believe Atlanta will be well served by any of the leading candidates hoping to be the city’s next mayor.

          • benevolus says:

            All those quotes of the bylaws may be “facts”, but they don’t have anything to do with this issue. And being non-partisan” also is irrelevant. Is Kasim Reed supposed to pretend that he is not a Democratic Senator? Is he supposed to disown his past as a matter of political etiquette? Why?

            I think the DPG has significant interest given that the job of Atlanta Mayor has been held by a Democrat since 1943.

  11. Angry Taxpayer says:

    The word is – the hit piece was funded by one of the founders of Jackmont Hospitality (Airport vendor) – David Halpern. What I heard today from a very good source is that David provided the funding to the State Dem Party. It also coincides with millionaire Brook Jackson Edmunds endorsement of Reed as well as Reed’s first hit piece on TV this week (came out just as the mailer was dropped on Wednesday). Sounds like a lot of coordinating going on……

    Interesting that the attack was not just about partisanship but about “slush funds” and other rhetoric Reed started using at the beginning of the week. Sounds like a lot of coordinating going on……

    So what is Jackmont’s interest in the election……..and why would Reed but $100k of his own money in this. Lots of questions.

    • macho says:

      It will be interesting to see although difficult to prove. Airport Vendor (which just so happens to be one of the biggest gems the King of the Atlanta Machine can dole out to the Lords), makes a huge contribution to the DPG out-of-the-blue, then DPG just so happens to do a major hit piece in a non-partisan city race, while virtually ignoring other state partisan races. I’d like to see if this vendor actually made a contribution and what his previous contribution history to the DPG has been.

      I wonder if the DPG and Oxendine both use the same campaign accountant? I hope the AJC researches this with the same diligence that they have pursued Oxendine.

  12. bryce says:

    Good politics or bad is up for debate. The democrat flyer is bad for Atlanta and bad for Georgia too. They found the code words to bring race to the front of the race. The effect on the city will be terrible and long lasting.

  13. John Konop says:

    It is sad how both parties focus on a purification campaign against candidates especially during the primaries over focusing on real issues. I had an interesting conversation with Erick at a PP happy hour. He was complaining how a candidate had done a flip-flop on a no new tax pledge. I than asked Erick is it not a legitimate issue that some how you either have to pay for it or cut the service. And Erick agreed that was an issue but he insisted the pledge was a bigger point.

    I think this conversation is the problem with both parties. Any successful business, coach…. person will tell you they adjust strategy based different circumstances. And it seems like both parties forcing on purity over logic is why we are in the mess we are in.

    We all should be more loyal to what is best for our country not what is best for a movement or party. Also a strict ideology does not pay the bills. As I said most things in life are grey not black and white.

Comments are closed.