Lt. Gov. Candidate Exits Race Amid Questions About His Past

Oxendine twice during the “Big 5” debate mentioned Georgia had a lot of similarities with Illinois. And from the state that taught us the “Chicago Way”, we have this gem:

CHICAGO (AP) – The Democratic nominee for Illinois lieutenant governor has dropped out of the race less than a week after winning the nomination amid a political uproar about his past.
Scott Lee Cohen announced his decision Sunday night at a Chicago bar.

The pawn broker and owner of a cleaning supplies company won the nomination Tuesday. Since then, it has become widely know that he was accused of abusing his ex-wife and holding a knife to the throat of an ex-girlfriend.

The girlfriend herself had been charged with prostitution. He also admits using steroids in the past.

Since this has nothing to do with Georgia Politics, let’s just consider this an OPEN THREAD:

109 comments

  1. Harry says:

    Engage Gwinnett is an organization that has been designated to “look at the community’s needs for current and future government services and propose funding strategies to pay for those services over the next five years.” There are two co-chairs and forty committee members, including several people I know of and respect: Julianne Thompson, Bob Griggs, Jose Perez, and Keith Shewbert. http://www.engagegwinnett.com/members.htm

    However, as a fiscal conservative, person involved in the financial sector, and Gwinnett resident, I’m starting to wonder if these people are merely being utilized as window dressing in an organization whose primary mission is to provide cover to the political class and governmental bureaucracy of the county while claiming to have utilized diverse outside advice to find all means of reduction. Has this committee really been effective in suggesting how to eliminate unnecessary fluff and frills? Are they really given a free hand to suggest cuts in non-public safety departments? For one example, has pension reform been fully explored? Given that property taxes have doubled in the last ten years and the sales tax rate has increased, while property assets and human resources are still not utilized to the greatest degree of efficiency (ie, Gwinnett school system). I’d like to get others’ opinions and knowledge as to whether or not I’m off base with these concerns.

  2. Open thread!!!!!

    OK, While the state legislature is considering ethics laws, could we please move into the 20th century and:

    1 – Require all contributions to be reported and posted online within one week of receiving the contribution;

    2 – Requiring public access to those records and,

    3 – Requiring that ALL donations be posted no later than 3 days before the election or the donations must be returned.

    Just a suggestion of a place to start.

    And, I know someone will say why wait a week. The candidates may want to vet contributors whom they do not know.

      • polisavvy says:

        Good job, Ken. I couldn’t agree more, particularly the part about the business or employer and city and state of the contributor. This is what I’m talking about — total transparency.

        • Hi macho,

          It’s required quarterly, I’d like it done within a week. The technology is there and if we’re going to do it, why not do it in a reasonable, timely manner?

          I like transparency – the real kind, not the Harry Reid, Barack Obama kind.

    • Doug Deal says:

      Although I think I was one of the first to say that the artificial reporting periods were silly (back on the Thubert Baker “over-reporting” thread) and that if they are reported, they should be done in real time, I do not think they should be reported in the first place.

      Donations are political speech, and sometimes political speech needs to be anonymous. Posting such confidential information from donors is ridiculous in a supposedly free society. The left and right have threatened at various times to go after the donors of the opposite side. Is this really the type of behavior we should empower?

      Look to the Supreme Court to one day throw out public reporting of donor identities for this very reason.

      • Kellie says:

        With out a donor list, how will the candidates know who to shake down? or who belongs on their enemy list? 😉

      • Doug,

        I understand your concerns – AND I owe you a phone call which I’ll attempt later today.

        There is a certain amount of protection in going completely public. It does do away with the ignorance excuse, “What makes you think barring his company from state business was personal? I had no idea he donated to my opponent.”

        The reason I say this is that I live in an area where publicly and loudly staking out a position – at least in the past – has literally been safer than working behind the scenes.

  3. John Konop says:

    Kathy Cox new math program has set off the same anger level here and it is very similar concept. And this issue crosses all lines and parents are pissed off! I was at a Town hall in Cherokee county a few weeks ago and when this topic came up it was like throwing raw meat at tigers. Office holders, politicians better take note!

    AJC-Mass, a University of Washington professor of atmospheric sciences, said, “Since this is a very flawed approach. Parents who were able to get their children tutoring or move to different school districts — those parents were able to salvage their kids. I did both.”
    Apart from finding the Discovering material generally inferior, its detractors also claim that its more verbal approach to math discriminates against students who aren’t fluent in English.
    “In more traditional math approaches, students who don’t know English well can do very well at math,” Mass said Thursday.
    For its part, Seattle Public Schools said in its statement that it “followed an extensive process in adopting these materials, which were thoroughly vetted by a diverse group including mathematicians and teaching professionals.

    What’s interesting is that other Washington state districts are using this series, one for five years. (Read the story more details.) I am surprised a judge would wade into the question of textbooks or the math curriculum

    Any lessons here for Georgia?

    http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/02/07/seattle-judge-think-again-abouty-inquiry-based-math/

    • polisavvy says:

      I equate the math program here to be the same as “Whole Language” which was used here in 1990. You know the one, you teach the child how to read using phonics and spell words phonetically for two years, then OOPS you’re spelling it incorrectly, and have to learn how to spell it correctly. When our older son was entering first grade and I learned all about Whole Language, we moved to a private school which taught traditional English/Reading, so he could get a good foundation for his future.

      I just want to know who comes up with some of the dumb ideas that the education community always wants to jump on and adopt. I mean, does anyone give thought as to rather or not we are going to lose a group of kids valuable skills because of some fad or not thoroughly thought out idea? There are young adults who still don’t have the reading skills we do because of Whole Language.

      • John Konop says:

        polisavvy,

        I have talked to numerous teachers who have been in the system for a while and they say the exact same thing. I think part of it is the system promotes catering to lobbyist. More than likely Kathy Cox will get a job working as a lobbyist promoting a new education concept for cash after leaving office.

        This problem permeates itself in all parts of government on both sides. We need leaders connected with the real world, not using their offices as means for cashing out.

        • polisavvy says:

          Well, what are the answers to these problems? In other words, what will it take for somebody to finally listen to the very ones who are responsible for the education of these children (the teachers) and quit trying these fads. Granted, things have changed; however, the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic should never have been gotten away from — we are products of that education and seem to be functioning in this world just fine. I truly feel for today’s teachers — they are between the rock and a hard spot.

          And you are absolutely correct about the lobbyists. The reliance on them has gotten out of hand. They, along with the politicians who accept money from them, are ruining many facets of our lives and our government.

          • ByteMe says:

            The answer appears to be simple: set the standard for graduating at the state level, but leave the implementation — and teacher salaries — to the local school districts to determine. It’ll either solve the problem… or reduce the unemployment rate for lobbyists who will have so many more politicians to pay off that they won’t be able to keep up.

          • polisavvy says:

            I wish someone would take note of your suggestion. Sounds like a solid plan to me and one that would work.

          • polisavvy says:

            As an aside, didn’t it use to be that way a long time ago? For some reason I think is was when I was still in school. Does anyone remember when it changed (if it did) and the reason why it changed?

          • John Konop says:

            If I remember right, President Reagan ran against this push years ago. And we all know it got put on steroids via No Child Left Behind. This friendly debate between Maureen Downey at the AJC defending Kathy Cox/NCLB and I, does a great job defining the debate.

            Bottom line, the NCLB crowd thinks that if we force a national and or statewide standard on a one track college bound or out, that will force all kids to be on that track. I think that education should be based on aptitude and skill sets of the individual and that college is not for everyone. And that it is better to have kids with a real skill set than the 60 to 70% who drop out, get passed along, or have a GED with no real skill set looking for a job after high school.

            This comment hit me the hardest!

            Tonya
            January 28th, 2010
            3:24 pm

            Maureen is coming from a very liberal-minded perspective. I have seen destitute poverty, and the lack that no skills or education can bring first-hand. Everyone IS NOT college material, and forcing every square peg into a round hole will never work, no matter how much you try to force it in. A good vo-tech program IS rigorous, as it is generally a preparation for some type of testing or apprenticeship. Every tried doing your own writing? Or being your own draftsman?

            My husband is a teacher. He could make more money putting his handyman or computer skills to work than what he W-2 for 2009. But he loves teaching and it is why he does what he does. But he has been offered as much as $50 hour with NO formal vo-tech training to help friends with their homes and electronics.

            Friendly debate: A single academic track or multiple tracks?

            http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/01/27/friendly-debate-a-single-academic-track-or-multiple-tracks/

          • John Konop says:

            The only candidate running against Kathy Cox I have talked to is Roger Hines. And Roger as a former teacher, agrees the one track system does not make sense.

          • polisavvy says:

            You are exactly right. Not all kids are cut out for college. (My older son was not, even though he tried). As I’ve said before, we have to have blue collar workers just as much as we need white collar workers. To cookie cutter all children is unfair and counterproductive in the long run.

          • polisavvy says:

            And while we’re at it — there needs to be an alpha and an omega. There needs to be a beginning to the end of this type of teaching. It is not working and is leaving thousands of kids in the dust.

  4. John Konop says:

    When many ask why I do not plan on running for office again, it is because of retaliation garbage like this over real debate over issues. The truth is I have not taking in a dime to offset my loan and closed my option of ever recovering the money. I will double check with the people who took care of this for me. If they filed it wrong I will be happy to update.

    This will not stop me from giving my opinions agree or not.

    Office of General Counsel,
    Federal Election Commission,
    999 E Street, N.W.,
    Washington, D.C. 20463.
    Toll Free 800-424-9530
    Local 202-694-1100

    February 8, 2009

    Complainant:
    Douglas Edward Grammer,
    P.O. Box 202
    Rock Spring, GA 30739

    Respondents: JOHN KONOP H6GA07122

    JOHN KONOP FOR CONGRESS C00414748
    P.O. Box 706
    Lebanon, GA 30146

    Treasurer, Stoll, Steve Mr.
    1308 Oak Bluff Court
    Canton GA 30114
    770-854-2222

    The committee known as “John Konop for Congress” is in violation of FEC law for failure to provide a December 31, 2009 report on the campaign committee and has also yet to file a termination report. This campaign committee has outstanding debts to the candidate. I also failed to find a statement of personal finance on file. Based upon a search of the FEC website for the candidate and campaign committee, none of these reports are available for public viewing.

    Per the Campaign Guide for Congressional Candidates and Committees Chapter 2, page 14:

    If outstanding debts remain from the previous election, the committee must continue to report the debts as well as the contributions that have been designated by contributors to retire them. 104.11, 110.1(b)(3) and (4) and 110.2(b)(3) and (4).

    And under Chapter 12, Page 77

    Under the Ethics in Government Act, candidates for federal office must file personal financial reports.

    Chapter 12, Page 78

    Committees must continue to file quarterly reports until the Commission notifies them in writing that their termination report has been accepted.

    Please address this in the appropriate manor. Looking over the schedule of schedules of penalties, I would expect fines from $250 to $750.

    Thank you,

    Douglas
    Grammer ie GOP GEORGIA

    • GOPGeorgia says:

      Yes. I wrote it. I sent it as an e-mail to Icarus around 5 PM Sunday night. By 7 AM John is telling all of you about it. What he did not tell you is that the subject line said “here’s how to file.” The posting left off “sent in triplicate” and “signed and sworn to before me under penalty of perjury ” for a notary.

      What I find a little curious is that neither of them called or sent an e-mail to ask if I was being rash. John had been complaining about Deal and his campaign loan. I suggested he do something about it, such as file a complaint. Icarus stated that because John had ran for office for two years and spent hundreds of thousands of his own money (paraphrasing) that John was above such measures.

      I wanted to check out Iracus’s claims. We now know that he ran for 10 months not 2 years according to FEC reports and the money was exaggerated as well. While looking, I noticed a few items were missing. Not mentioned in the sample complaint I had drafted, was that he also missed a October quarterly report deadline as well.

      This is not the first time his campaign has missed a deadline.
      http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?F26039110249

      http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?F26039262171

      Now John is probably, but not necessarily OK, on the reporting due in 2009 because the FEC said they intend to cease the reporting obligations, but he still, AFAIK, has not filed the termination report. He has also filed reports after that notice to make matters more confusing.
      http://images.nictusa.com/pdf/723/28039820723/28039820723.pdf#navpanes=0

      I have seen a few posts that shown disapproval. What you don’t know and that Icarus and John have failed to tell you is that they know I have not filed anything yet.

      Here is the e-mail I sent to John and CC’d Icarus.

      John,

      The title of the e-mail I sent to Charlie said “here’s how to file.” I wanted to see if it would make it’s way to you and it did. For someone who complains about other candidates and their loans, your ducks are not in a row.

      When you have a compliant against a candidate, you have the option of registering that complaint with the appropriate governing authority. You should cite what you think is wrong: December 31 report not filed, no personal financial statement, no termination report. You should cite where you gathered that information: not listed on FEC website. You should cite why you think it’s wrong: Campaign Guide for Congressional Candidates and Committees Chapter and page number, or appropriate law.

      Here is some friendly advice, and I suggest you run it past an attorney who specializes in election law to make sure it’s good. I would either forgive the loan (if allowed) or give the campaign 40K and pay yourself back. If you have no plans to run again, I suggest you file a termination report.

      I have approached a candidate who did not follow campaign finance laws within 48 hours of the discovery of the infraction(s). I have given you a remedy to cure the violation(s), and I understand the fines are not as bad if the candidate self-corrects. I don’t want it said I was covering up for a candidate, you.

      If you ask me to, I will file this complaint so you will feel we are doing everything by the book. If you have filed these items (on time) you need to address that with the FEC as to why they are not listed. If you haven’t filed them and refuse to file your Dec 31st 2009 report, personal financial statement, and termination report, as a good law abiding citizen, I will feel compelled to file.

      I do not want to silence your opinion on issues. I agree with you more than I disagree with you on the issues. I would appreciate that you stop lying about me, my character, or making projections as to what I think or how I feel. That wish has zero to do with a possible complaint. I am prone to give you a chance to self-correct on the FEC matters. You can do that and still lie about me. That’s not my permission; that’s your option. As long as it’s corrected quickly, I don’t see the need to file.

      Let me know if you want me to file so we aren’t covering anything up. Please let me know how we should proceed.

      Regards,

      Doug

      To end, we talk about candidates missing filing deadlines on here all the time. The fact is it looks like John may have violated FEC guidelines. I didn’t make him do it. He did that on his own. I’m just pointing out that he has little room to criticize other campaigns concerning loans when it appears he hasn’t taken care of his own business properly. I also want to note, I did that off PP, and he decided to bring it up. Not me.

    • GOPGeorgia says:

      Yes. I wrote it. I sent it as an e-mail to Icarus around 5 PM Sunday night. By 7 AM John is telling all of you about it. What he did not tell you is that the subject line said “here’s how to file.” The posting left off “sent in triplicate” and “signed and sworn to before me under penalty of perjury ” for a notary.

      What I find a little curious is that neither of them called or sent an e-mail to ask if I was being rash. John had been complaining about Deal and his campaign loan. I suggested he do something about it, such as file a complaint. Icarus stated that because John had ran for office for two years and spent hundreds of thousands of his own money (paraphrasing) that John was above such measures.

      I wanted to check out Iracus’s claims. We now know that he ran for 10 months not 2 years according to FEC reports and the money was exaggerated as well. While looking, I noticed a few items were missing. Not mentioned in the sample complaint I had drafted, was that he also missed a October quarterly report deadline as well.

      This is not the first time his campaign has missed a deadline.
      http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?F26039110249

      http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?F26039262171

      Now John is probably, but not necessarily OK, on the reporting due in 2009 because the FEC said they intend to cease the reporting obligations, but he still, AFAIK, has not filed the termination report. He has also filed reports after that notice to make matters more confusing.
      http://images.nictusa.com/pdf/723/28039820723/28039820723.pdf#navpanes=0

      I have seen a few posts that shown disapproval. What you don’t know and that Icarus and John have failed to tell you is that they know I have not filed anything yet.

      Here is the e-mail I sent to John and CC’d Icarus.

      John,

      The title of the e-mail I sent to Charlie said “here’s how to file.” I wanted to see if it would make it’s way to you and it did. For someone who complains about other candidates and their loans, your ducks are not in a row.

      When you have a compliant against a candidate, you have the option of registering that complaint with the appropriate governing authority. You should cite what you think is wrong: December 31 report not filed, no personal financial statement, no termination report. You should cite where you gathered that information: not listed on FEC website. You should cite why you think it’s wrong: Campaign Guide for Congressional Candidates and Committees Chapter and page number, or appropriate law.

      Here is some friendly advice, and I suggest you run it past an attorney who specializes in election law to make sure it’s good. I would either forgive the loan (if allowed) or give the campaign 40K and pay yourself back. If you have no plans to run again, I suggest you file a termination report.

      I have approached a candidate who did not follow campaign finance laws within 48 hours of the discovery of the infraction(s). I have given you a remedy to cure the violation(s), and I understand the fines are not as bad if the candidate self-corrects. I don’t want it said I was covering up for a candidate, you.

      If you ask me to, I will file this complaint so you will feel we are doing everything by the book. If you have filed these items (on time) you need to address that with the FEC as to why they are not listed. If you haven’t filed them and refuse to file your Dec 31st 2009 report, personal financial statement, and termination report, as a good law abiding citizen, I will feel compelled to file.

      I do not want to silence your opinion on issues. I agree with you more than I disagree with you on the issues. I would appreciate that you stop lying about me, my character, or making projections as to what I think or how I feel. That wish has zero to do with a possible complaint. I am prone to give you a chance to self-correct on the FEC matters. You can do that and still lie about me. That’s not my permission; that’s your option. As long as it’s corrected quickly, I don’t see the need to file.

      Let me know if you want me to file so we aren’t covering anything up. Please let me know how we should proceed.

      Regards,

      Doug

      To end, we talk about candidates missing filing deadlines on here all the time. The fact is it looks like John may have violated FEC guidelines. I didn’t make him do it. He did that on his own. I’m just pointing out that he has little room to criticize other campaigns concerning loans when it appears he hasn’t taken care of his own business properly. I also want to note, I did that off PP, and he decided to bring it up here. Not me.

      • GOPGeorgia says:

        My apologizes for the double post. Apparently my time out is over. I tried posting that during my time out. For further clarification, I never sent the sample complaint to John directly. I sent it to Icarus to get his feedback and he forwarded it to John without saying anything to me. John posted it PP. Neither of them have tried communicating with me offline on this matter. I was not out to publicly embarrass John. I have not filed a complaint with the FEC and if John is correcting it, I don’t feel the need to file.

        I don’t see that e-mail as a statement that John should back off questioning Nathan Deal, but more of I saw him as a pot calling the kettle black. I was comparing that there were two campaigns and both had loans involved. One campaign did the paperwork correctly and was being questioned about if it was ethical to do it that way, and another didn’t do their paperwork correctly and had not been questioned on it at all, AFAIK. As a statement of fact, I (more or less) said John should express his opinions.

        Now if John has done his paperwork correctly and the problems are solely with the FEC, I apologize if he felt offended by a private e-mail I sent to Icarus.

        To any who think I am covering up for John and feel he should be held accountable to the highest extent of the law, you have a complaint written where you can just insert your name instead of mine.

        As for me, I will proceed pretty much as if this hadn’t happened, but I will make an effort to be a tad more civil. I am just a little amused at some of the things that were said about me and names I have been called.

      • John Konop says:

        GOP,

        The memos you sent me is obvious harassment anyway you slice it. I would suggest you drop it. I have no attention to take action against you and or anyone involved with this irresponsible violation of my rights. I only posted it to stop you and or others from using tactic like this to bully and or silence people. And any rational person reading your memos would definitely wonder what your real attentions are. I will give you the benefit of the doubt at this point. If you persist on this harassment I will be left with no choice but to seek legal advice as to how protect my rights against anyone involved.

        As I said on this thread, the FEC has told us we have filed everything correctly.

    • Doug Deal says:

      Man, what an absolute douchebag.

      I skipped this the first time it was written because it looked like cut and paste wate of time stuff, but really?

      How absolutely petty can one be? Why would anyone in the GOP want to work around this pathetic loser?

      I guess this means you won those arguments, John, and he was fighting back the only way he knew how.

      • Mozart says:

        Looks like GOP Georgia may not have been the one being a douchebag here as he (if his posts above were accurate) was only writing to Icarus as an “FYI”.

        • polisavvy says:

          I feel like you do on this. (I can’t believe I have already agreed with you this early in the day). 🙂

        • polisavvy says:

          As an aside, I’m glad I never took sides on this one. I thought both seemed logical in their discussions. Now, the plot may be thickening. I wonder if there is more to come?

        • Doug Deal says:

          Yes, perhaps others could be added to the list, but to be so petty as to write a “sample ethics complaint” for something so trivial for and so long ago shows that something is not working correctly in the author’s mind.

          I am tired of people who have this win-at-all-costs attitude. For too many people, it’s not about winning on issues, it’s about bashing the opposition, whether one is right or wrong. (see the left’s obsession with Palin and her family or the right’s obsession with Obama’s birth certificate).

          • polisavvy says:

            I totally agree with you about the “win-at-all-costs” attitudes. If something’s true (or legitimate), put it out there; if not, don’t even go there.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            Doug,

            I only looked at John’s FEC reports because exaggerated claims were made about how long he ran for office and how much money he raised. I wrote that to show how to do something more than complain, which others seem to think they are above doing. When you look at the FEC page regarding his campaign, the fact that he had filed twice in 2009 and there was no year end report stuck out like a sore thumb. December 31, 2009 was not that long ago.

            As I said before, if the problem is with the FEC, John has my apologies. If it’s not, then it’s all true. I fail to see how any of this violated his rights, but maybe something is not working correctly in my mind.

  5. Chris says:

    Best Tweet of the weekend:

    @scottforga Vivien says Colts, Wells says Saints. Ox says Steelers. You know it’s funny go ahead and laugh. Vote scottforga.com

    • BuckheadConservative says:

      Haha, that is good. I need to sign up for twitter. Ox’s gaffes and Austin’s shtick is worth the price of admission alone

      • polisavvy says:

        Austin’s barbs and jabs are rather comical and providing thought as well. He certainly does have a knack to get under the skin of Deal and Ox.

  6. polisavvy says:

    I know that people keep going off on Ox a lot; however, I ask you all a few questions: After what the AJC said about him being the candidate that the GOP does not want (basically), why is he still pursuing this thing and why hasn’t anyone advised him that he’s not the type candidate the party wants representing them? Does this man have no shame and believe that everything that everyone is saying about him is untrue and unfounded? Does he actually believe that the stories are going to end? Does he really care so little about his family that he will drag them through this? Delusional maybe?

    At an event on Saturday, there was a whole lot of snickering going on in front of him. Is he, as my mom used to say, as “thick as an Augusta brick?”

    • polisavvy says:

      Do you truly think that he and/or his campaign would provide honest answers? I don’t. I think they are actually believing the Rasmussen poll. Additionally, I don’t think that all the stories about him are out in the open yet — think there are still more to come. Do you think you’d get an honest answer?

  7. John Konop says:

    I am sure many of you have seen comments like this before. And this was on my blog today. I merely questioned how Palin could endorse Rand Paul who wants out now and rips Obama on Iraq and Afghanistan who basically agrees with her. And many of us have seen the same attacks as before.

    My question is do you really believe the below about Obama? Why not debate on the issues and get off the personal attacks?

    Teabagger Extraordinaire says:
    February 8, 2010 at 2:11 pm

    Why do you hate REAL Americans like Sarah Palin!?!?

    Obama can’t even TALK without using a teleprompter, and he’s a Chicago style crook and Acorn killed my grandmother and WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE and he’s a Muslim atheist communist nazi Marxist fascist and I’m not a racist, he’s the racist and I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!!

  8. Jeremy Jones says:

    While we are talking education, please defeat HB995 requiring the school year to start after Labor Day. While I like the idea of a later start than the first of August, it should be left to local school boards. My guess is, we have Six Flags et. al. to thank for this bill.

    • Chris says:

      That’s an interesting, and quite substantial bill there. None of the listed co-sponsors are from the Cobb area.

  9. rugby says:

    Can this be an official request to perma-ban GOPGeorgia? While he and I contribute around the same (nothing), I don’t think I’ve filed a specious FCC ethics complaint against a well liked (or at least liked by me) poster.

      • ByteMe says:

        Don’t ban him, but I’ll be amazed if he slinks back in here without taking some serious sh*t from the rest of us about his seriously miscalibrated moral compass.

        • polisavvy says:

          I wonder the same thing; however, I have enjoyed some of his posts. Some are very thought provoking, at least in my opinion.

          • polisavvy says:

            I don’t know and have wondered the same. I like reading both of their posts (not all the time, but most of the time), and I was amazed at their banter. I hope John sees this and answers it as well. I’d like to know what his future plans are.

          • polisavvy says:

            Byte, I couldn’t get it to pull up. So, you’re saying that the complaint was filed? Why if what John is saying is true? I’m kind of new to this so I wasn’t expecting the dialogue I saw on Saturday.

          • John Konop says:

            Ken,

            I do not know, my people just called the FEC and verified if we filed the termination paperwork right and they said it was all fine.

            I also got a strange e-mail from Doug which seemed to imply I should back off questing Nathan Deal about his ethical issues because I have my own alleged problem. And, what I found bizarre is to equate a mistake of filing he thought I made, to what Deal did is very strange.

            I have kept records of all of this in case I receive any further harassment.

          • John,

            I was wondering about that “questing” stuff and wondered if you had read L’ Mort d’ Arthur one too many times. 🙂

            Anyway, there is a reason I asked the question about the complaint being filed. Doug called me yesterday and told me that he had not filed the complaint, that it was an example of how to file a complaint. So, I asked him how your name got used as the example and he admitted it was to goad you.

            I hope, and believe him when he says, nothing was actually filed. Anyway, that’s why I asked you because if he didn’t file it then I feel somewhat better about all of this.

            I like you and Doug both and have respect for your opinions. I also believe that Charlie was right to put Doug in Time Out because name-calling can chill people’s participation on this board and I told Doug my position on this yesterday.

            If Doug didn’t actually file the complaint then that should probably be known, too. Now, having stuck my nose in too far on this already, I am going to go back to being just a smart-ass commentator who wishes fervently that he knew less about all of this mess.

            I wish you and Doug both the very best and hope that we can all focus much more on issues and far less on personalities. And now I need a hot shower.

          • John Konop says:

            Ken,

            Agree or not, I always appreciate your well thought-out views. A far as Doug, I feel bad the relationship has come to this point. I realize as a party chairman he feels like he must defend all the candidates. And I happen to think this is the problem with both parties. And as you know I care more about issues than any party.

            I only posted what happen to make sure it did not ever happen here again. People should not fear making a post under their own name for disagreeing on a topic.

            I would hope someday Doug and I could have a beer and forget about what happen.

          • Mozart says:

            Looks like it was never intending to be filed. GOPGeorgia’s posts above indicates he wrote the letter to Icarus as an FYI.

  10. Harry says:

    From USJF:

    As of the filing of our brief on Monday, Barack Hussein Obama has not allowed independent or official access to his vault (original hospital) birth records and supporting hospital records. Mr. Obama’s citizenship status has been challenged in over 20 different legal actions in various federal and state courts, which challenges cast doubt on the validity of the electoral process, regardless of the outcome.

    Here is the short of what we know at this very moment: Mr. Obama entered this race for President without having met the eligibility requirements for the office of President of the United States. As a result, Dr. Alan Keyes and Dr. Drake have been injured because they did not have fair competition for the offices they sought. They were not given a fair opportunity to obtain votes for President and Vice-President of the United States! They sustained “injuries,” according to Federal Court case law.

    I know that all this sounds like a lot of legal terminology—but all that we simply want is the TRUTH—is Barack Obama qualified, by our own U. S. Constitution, to serve as President of the United States.

    NO—I am not on some “witch hunt,” as the media has painted me. Veterans, soccer moms, businessmen, school kids, seniors, divorcees, hard workers—all they want is THE TRUTH! Especially our men serving in “harm’s way” in our military–they really need to know!!

    Did you know that John McCain had a lawsuit filed against him, to force him to establish his citizenship (Hollander v. McCain) during his campaign for President! After he produced evidence and official documents, and after Congressional hearings (!), the U. S., by Senate Resolution 511, John McCain was recognized as a “natural born citizen.” If he had to go through these “hoops”—why didn’t his presidential opponent have to do the same??

    Here is how our United States Constitution actually reads: “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

    Here is how our brief, in part, reads: “APPELLANTS allege that OBAMA is legally disabled by his birth status. Therefore, all votes cast in favor of the OBAMA/BIDEN joint and severable ticket by the California Electors should be deemed null and void, since the votes were cast for an individual ineligible to run for the office of President of the United States.”

    It’s just that plain and simple!

    Never in my wildest imagination would I ever think of me having to do this in the United States of America. And, despite what you may have been told by the Obama-controlled media, there are a number of legal precedents for this action.

    Like former radical, Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, who was taken off Presidential ballots , both in Utah and in California (the California removal resulted in the ACLU filing a lawsuit to put him back on the Presidential ballot that went all the way up to the United States Supreme Court—and California won that case!) for not being old enough…

    Like former North Dakota Governor Thomas H. Moodie, who was duly elected to be that state’s governor; however, afterward, it was discovered that he had not resided in the state for a requisite five years before running for office, and, because of that ineligibility, he was REMOVED from office by that State’s Supreme Court in 1935.

    I assure you; I am not on a personal vendetta against Barack Hussein Obama. JUST LET US KNOW THE TRUTH!! The bottom line: voters DO NOT have the power, or the right, (according to the U. S. Constitution!!) to determine the eligibility of a candidate—no matter how popular that person may be!

    Here is the crux of this particular case: Ms. Bowen, the California Secretary of State, did NOT exercise her required “due diligence,” by certifying candidates to run for office without verifying that they had met all of the requirements of eligibility for office.

    What proof do we need?

    • An original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor who delivered the candidate

    • A passport with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries

    • Any other documents that could certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office.

          • John Konop says:

            This is very interesting the Birther conspiracy started from hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters! The irony!

            DB…..Investigations for my new book, Wingnuts, revealed that the Birther conspiracy theory was first concocted by renegade members of the original Obama haters, Party Unity My Ass, known more commonly by their acronym, the PUMAs. They were a splinter group of hard-core Hillary Clinton supporters who did not want to give up the ghost after the bitter 50-state Bataan Death March to the 2008 Democratic nomination.

            In the early summer of ’08, message boards on sites like PUMAParty.com began lighting up with the ultimate reversal-of-fortune fantasy—that their party’s nomination could be overturned on constitutional grounds. “Obama May Be Illegal to Be Elected President!” read one representative e-mail: “This came from a USNA [U.S. Naval Academy] alumnus. It’ll be interesting to see how the media handle this…WRITE TO YOUR LOCAL newspaper editors etc. Keep this out there everyday possible. Also write to the DNC too!”

            That June, the Obama campaign released his certificate of live birth on its Web site as part of its “fight the smears” effort. Factcheck.org and other organizations examined the document in person and declared it genuine: “Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.” But posters at the PUMA sites were unimpressed: “Nobody believes it’s for real, except the Kool-Aid drinkers themselves.”…..

            http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-02-08/the-secret-history-of-the-birthers/?cid=hp:mainpromo2

  11. Harry says:

    Factcheck.org needs to check their facts. That piece of paper left out several vital facts, such as hospital, attending physician, time of birth, and biostats.

  12. ByteMe says:

    What proof do we need?

    It’ll never be enough.

    And is debunking this crap more pressing than debunking FairTax crap? Really, the debunking squad needs to set priorities, because they have only so much time and there are so many conspiracies out there. 😆

  13. Harry says:

    Since most of you seem fixated on the impossibility of Obama being anything other than a Hawaii natural born citizen, and this being an open thread, I just offered up a couple of unrelated links for additional enlightenment.

    • GOPGeorgia says:

      Thanks for your thoughts. A lot was posted when I couldn’t reply. I wanted to answer any remaining questions.

      • polisavvy says:

        I don’t blame you one bit for defending yourself. As a matter of fact (and I’m sure there are some on here who will blast me for it), but I missed your posts. Believe it or not, I have learned a great deal from you with your political insight. Thanks for that. I have also learned a lot from John and his insight as well. Hang in there — it will all work out one day.

Comments are closed.