1. Mayonnaise says:

    Couple this with Straw Poll victories in Lanier, Camden, and Pickens Counties this past weekend and Johnson is right on track!

  2. GAPoliticsisfun says:

    Who is Eric Johnson?

    Eric “I never voted for a tax increase” Johnson – “Georgians saw another side of Johnson in early 2003, when the Senate Republican leader announced he would back new Gov. Sonny Perdue’s plan to raise cigarette taxes. ”

    Eric “Competitive Bid” Johnson – My firm did almost $1,000,000 in state business I forgot to disclose $300,000, but it was all won through competitive bid.

    “He backed a sales tax exemption in 2007 on equipment used in the repair of aircraft not registered in Georgia. The savings, which went largely to a local company, Gulfstream, was estimated at $11.6 million a year.

    A little more than a month after the exemption passed, Gulfstream announced that it was leasing two buildings from the company Johnson worked for, North Point Real Estate”

    Eric “What ethics violation” Johnson – “A legislative committee he chaired dropped an ethics complaint against Republican House Speaker Glenn Richardson that accused Richardson of having an affair with a utility lobbyist. The complaint was dismissed without an investigation.

    Almost three years later, Richardson resigned after his ex-wife said he had, in fact, had an affair with the lobbyist. ”

    Will the real Eric Johnson please stand up?

    • Lady Thinker says:


      Thanks for your post. I knew some of those things but not all of them.

    • GOPwits says:

      Agreed… In another climate, when voters were more tolerant of corrupt and get rich in public service politicians Eric would have been a better candidate, but his baggage and the way he got wealthy off of public service and turned a blind eye toward corruption to “play the game” in Atlanta just won’t fly this time with GA voters…

      I mean, Eric is from Louisiana so I guess we shouldn’t be surprised by his shady ethics toward public service…

  3. GAPoliticsisfun says:

    Can you imagine the ad that Barnes will run.

    “He fought Barnes’ attempts to change the state flag, which included the Confederate battle emblem. Johnson said he opposed the way Barnes changed the flag without a public vote. He waved the old flag proudly from a convertible in the 2001 St. Patrick’s Day parade. “

    • TPNoGa says:

      Do you really think people will vote against EJ because of the state flag? I think we have bigger issues. How about Barnes’s promises to the public sector that he is going to give out lots of goodies to them without details of how to pay for it. Does he think furloughs were given out because we like them? There is a budget shortfall, and last I checked there are only two ways to balance a budget with a shortfall…..raise taxes, or cut spending. If he has figured out a way around this little inconvenient fact, I would love to know what it is.

  4. Georgia Judge says:

    Good ad and glad to see it up.

    This race is quickly coming down to a choice between Johnson and Deal.

    • GOPwits says:

      I suppose if you are deaf and blind or have been under a rock for the past year you could argue that this race is between Johnson and Deal, however, between the two of them, they have enough corruption to make Oxendine look ethical…

    • Capt. Jack Sparrow says:

      It’s not good. Any idiot can see that. The only reason you’re glad to see it up is the unrealistic belief by Johnson supporters that his huge warchest will propel him from 4t or 5th place to 2nd.

      With this ad, Johnson might do worse than Chapman!

  5. TPNoGa says:

    Barnes for Governor:

    No furloughs….ever.
    Higher teachers’ pay.
    Smaller class sizes.
    Build more roads, bridges, mass transit.
    A unicorn in every driveway.

  6. ricstewart says:

    Did I really understand correctly that Mr. Johnson thinks illegal immigrants are costing jobs?
    That’s completely counterfactual. Undocumented immigrants actually create more jobs than they fill. Either Johnson is playing to reactionary populism or he actually believes what he’s saying, which would mean he has a complete lack of understanding when it comes to the fundamentals of economics.

      • PoliticalOutsider says:

        I think he understands the fundamentals of economics. Tulane is a very good school. The “they’re costing us too many jobs” is in reference to the Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Washington DC crowd the commercial mentions at the open.

      • ricstewart says:

        As a great American once said, “the only thing anecdotal evidence proves is that you have a good anecdote.”
        Overall, the imperical evidence does not support the notion that undocumented immigrants are “taking American jobs.” In fact, undocumented workers have been shown to have relatively little effect on the American economy and when they do have a measurable effect, it is typically a positive one. In fact, according to the Heritage Foundation, undocumented workers usually create more jobs than they fill. Many studies have concluded that undocumented workers actually drive American wages slightly up and create higher-paying positions for American workers.

        There’s not a fixed, etched-in-stone number of jobs in the American job market. That’s one of the fundamentals of the free market: flexible job markets.

        • Doug Grammer says:

          We don’t have free markets. Other countries have tariffs on our goods and we hammer out trade agreements that remove the concept of “free” markets. The US has a higher standard of living and freedoms that aren’t found in the rest of the world. I am fine with other countries becoming more democratic (small d) and improving their standard of living.

          I don’t want an invader (that’s what they are) of this country taking a job that a US citizen could have. We have enough people without a job in Georgia. Let the people who are here legally have them. When we get back to 3.5% unemployment, then we can talk about hiring extra help and bringing them into the country legally.

          • ricstewart says:

            You’re right that we don’t have free markets in this nation. Our immigration policy is a perfect example of government hindrances to free market economics. My point was that we should move toward free market policies (immigration included).
            If we did have free market policies, starting with market-based immigration policy, then we’d see unemployment go down. But stopping immigrants – regardless of legal status – from working in the United States is not helping our economy at all. There has never been a single legitimate study done that says a job filled by an immigrant is one fewer job for an American.

            And for that matter, just why is it “a job that a US citizen should have”? Based on what? That sense of “I’m entitled to a job before other groups of people” isn’t all that much different than the view liberal Democrats like Obama and Pelosi espouse.
            What right does the government have to tell me who I can and cannot hire?

            • Doug Grammer says:

              Ok Ric,

              Go hire a bank robber. If you conscious is clean hiring someone who broke the law, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. I am working to elect people who will pass laws that people knowing hiring illegal immigrants will be fined, lose their business license, and, or be sent to jail.

              If you think government has no place telling you who you can hire and how you can treat them, if the free market would bear it, would you hire 10 year old kids to work for a quarter an hour?

              As far as a “single legitimate study,” did you look at the link I posted? Illegals OUT (of a job), US Citizens who live in N. Georgia IN (a job). Are you one of those who want to study problems or solve them? Based upon your comments, I could see you being in favor of slavery because studies show that it would lead to more jobs and higher wages for US citizens.

              Wrong meet Ric, Ric meet wrong.

              • ricstewart says:

                Bank robber and undocumented immigrants?
                Not the same thing.
                A bank robber has committed a crime.
                An undocumented immigrant has not (or at least not necessarily.)
                Living in the United States without permission is not a crime; it’s a civil offense or a violation of administrative regulations, depending upon the circumstances. When deportation court proceedings begin, it’s not a criminal proceeding, it’s a civil proceeding.
                Nice try, though. Undocumented immigrants are not criminals. I know that’s hard for folks to understand, but that doesn’t make it any less true.
                Regardless of whether or not the two were comparable under the law, it’s not an issue of morals or conscience. It’s an issue of whether the government has the authority to tell me who I can and cannot make an agreement with based on what papers they may or may not possess. I also didn’t say I would hire undocumented labor, or that anyone should. But the purpose of the law is not to legislate morals or to make sure your conscience is clean. If you’re concerned about your conscience, don’t hire undocumented immigrants. Just don’t use the force of the law to enforce your conscience on others. But since the bank robber/undocumented immigrant comparison isn’t valid, it doesn’t really matter, does it?

                Promoting slavery and hiring undocumented workers? Again, not the same thing. One is forced, the other is a mutual agreement.

                Hiring child labor and hiring undocumented labor? Again, not the same thing. One is a consenting adult, the other is not.

                • Doug Grammer says:

                  A bank robber and an illegal alien are two different types of people breaking two different types of laws, but they both broke the law.

                  Promoting slavery and hiring undocumented workers? Have you not heard of indentured servitude? Voluntary indentured servitude goes on now in relation to illegal aliens. Sometimes it involves prostitution and child labor. You are for promoting the economy based upon unethical treatment of labor.

                  In civil law, a private party (e.g., a corporation or individual person) files the lawsuit and becomes the plaintiff. In criminal law, the litigation is always filed by the government, who is called the prosecution. Most people don’t sue an illegal alien to have them removed. It is an action of the government, and that makes it criminal.

                  Do you think being arrested for not having a drivers license but still driving on the road is a criminal or civil offence? Do you think being arrested for staying past the expiration of a visa is a criminal or civil offence?

                  What laws are being broken?


                  (created in 1952)(Updated Through March 4, 2010)
                  TITLE II — IMMIGRATION

                  ACT 236 – APPREHENSION AND DETENTION OF ALIENS Sec. 236. 1/ (a) Arrest, Detention, and Release.-On a warrant issued by the Attorney General, an alien may be arrested and detained pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removed from the United States. Except as provided in subsection (c) and pending such decision, the Attorney General-

                  (1) may continue to detain the arrested alien; and

                  (2) may release the alien on-

                  (A) bond of at least $1,500 with security approved by, and containing conditions prescribed by, the Attorney General; or

                  (B) conditional parole; but

                  (I also think this is worth pointing out:)
                  (3) may not provide the alien with work authorization (including an “employment authorized” endorsement or other appropriate work permit), unless the alien is lawfully admitted for permanent residence or otherwise would (without regard to removal proceedings) be provided such authorization.


Comments are closed.