Cagle: It’s OK to buy your politicians

Reminds me a bit of Oxendine’s accidental honesty before some auto insurance execs.


  1. polisavvy says:

    Do politicians not think before they speak? Cagle should understand by now that “politics is perception.” How does he think a comment like this is going to be perceived and received?

    • redrock says:

      I’d love to see the rest of the clip for context.

      I remember Tom Vilsack being certain USDA employee Shirley Sherrod was a race baiting bigot…

      ….and then you watch the rest of the video.

      • polisavvy says:

        True, but if what he says beyond this point is not a good explanation of what he said in this sound bite, then people will perceive what he did say in this clip as the way he feels. You are right, a snippet here and a snippet there can certainly cause problems for politicians or anyone else, can’t they? For all we know, some tracker for Mrs. Porter could have posted this thing on YouTube. Trackers make it their job to make whatever candidate they are tracking look as bad as possible. For that reason, candidates need to be very careful what they say.

      • getitright says:

        i was there, the context is accurate as seen. That’s what he said, that’s what he meant. Honestly it doesn’t surprise me a bit, i was shocked when he said it. Makes me wish even more someone would have run against him in the primary.

  2. ACCmoderate says:

    Not only is it perfectly ok to buy your politicians, its perfectly ok to get a woman that isn’t your wife to allegedly perform sexual acts on you because you’re the Lt. Governor.

  3. Wiley says:

    Classic case of taking a tiny portion of someone’s remarks out of context. I attended this meeting and me, along with everyone else present, heard the Lt. Governor go on to talk about getting active and involved in politics. The comment was obviously made in jest, hence the laughter from the crowd. I think most of us know better than to take these out of context words to heart. Ahhh the dismal life of a campaign tracker…

    • polisavvy says:

      Wiley, by the end of the campaign season, trackers are some of the most hated people around. In some states, and I know one in particular, they are actually threatened with bodily harm. It takes a special breed of person to do that type of work, in my opinion.

      • AubieTurtle says:

        Is a campaign tracker someone who goes to campaign events and records them? If so, I can’t see what’s wrong with that. Pols shouldn’t be able to play the game of saying one thing to one special interest group and then something totally different to another. And they shouldn’t get away with “well I couldn’t say this in public but y’all are my kind of people so… [enter remark offensive to most of the public]”. If they’re running for public office, their campaign should be public.

        Now if campaign trackers are the ones who take the recordings and selectively edit them to intentionally give the wrong impression to those who don’t see the whole thing in context, yeah, that’s pretty low and I could see why they would be hated. But those who are hated for making pols accountable for what they actually say… that’s just bad for society.

        • polisavvy says:

          A tracker does just what the name implies — they track the moves of the opposition and film their events in order to try to garner “gotcha moments.” The campaign trackers do not selectively edit recording and then disseminate them. It’s against the campaign laws for them to selectively edit what is actually said. That is usually done by someone else who is not paid with the campaign’s funds. My implication was that the tracker probably actually filmed Cagle’s remarks. I sincerely hope that I did not leave you guys with the impression that the tracker is the one who changes/edits the remarks. I know a young man who tracked out of Georgia. His job was strictly to try to catch “gotcha moments.” When he did, he most certainly put them out there; but, they were not edited or changed.

          • AubieTurtle says:

            I can’t speak for anyone else but I didn’t get the impression you were making any sort of claims about trackers doing editing. I asked because I simply didn’t know the full extent of what they do and wanted to understand better.

        • Progressive Dem says:

          You mean like Andrew Breitbart who selectively edited the video he took of Shirley Sherrod that made her look racist when she was in fact helping someone of a different race?

          • AubieTurtle says:

            That’s incident was one of the first ones that came to mind. Of course that speech wasn’t part of a political campaign but does illustrate the danger of viewing/hearing comments out of context and how it is intentionally done for political gain.

            In Breitbart’s case, he apparently assumed he was the only one with a recording of the event and that no one would press for the whole thing. Or maybe he didn’t care and knew that he’s score points for “his team” even if it was later found out to be selectively edited. It’s the editing where the problem comes in. Any of these clips should be accompanied by access to the full recording. I don’t like Cagle, heck, loath would be a good word for how I feel about him but I still have a hard time taking any of this seriously without getting a better view of the whole picture.

            • Progressive Dem says:

              I agree that the snippet of Cagle’s remarks is insufficient to make a judgement. Breitbart is a deliberate liar who attempts to manipulate events into “facts” that confirm his politics. He makes propoganda.

        • Erick's Mortal Enemy says:

          Please, share with us how he ended with it. I mean, seriously, that’s just not something you say. Unless he comes back and says “But seriously, I kid. Even though there are kingmakers, I abhor them, and everything they stand for.”

          • LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

            I think he ended it with some comment about Ghetto Grandmothers. and to some poster on this site, that is a perfectly OK thing to say as long as Ghetto Grandmother is used in its proper context.

    • getitright says:

      I attended too and you are mistaken. I’m not sure how you get this wrong unless the only reason you were at this meeting is because you are with the Lt. Governor.

      He did mention getting involved in politics, that doesn’t take away from what he said.

      That was nervous laughter. My mouth dropped and I looked at the guy next to me. We both are informed to know enough about Cagle not to be too surprised. And one more time, this was not taken out of context, this is what he said and meant.

  4. AlanR says:

    You make this sound nefarious or criminal. There’s nothing wrong with Cagle’s statement. A lot of people who make big money love to give it to politicians and then tell the elected official what they think. It does not constitute a bribe. Especially when the politician does what he pleases which is most of the time.

    A lot of people with no money love to tell elected officials what they should and shouldn’t do. No big deal. And if they happen to be leaders of a labor union or a welfare rights group promising legions of votes, that’s not a bribe either.

    The important thing is transparency. Campaigns should make an issue of who funds their opponent and why its bad. Simple as that. Running an effective campaign in anything larger than a state house district requires lots of money. Candidate will ask and listen to who gives. It doesn’t mean they will do what their told.

    In fact, I wish some of them would . . .

    • Erick's Mortal Enemy says:

      That’s not exactly what he said. He said “tell them what to do.” That implies much more nefarious than giving an opinion. I personally opine on many unsuspecting candidates and politicians, however I do not also accompany that with a $1,000 donation (because I don’t have that kind of dough) and a wink and a nudge.

      • Doug Grammer says:

        People can tell them what to do, but that doesn’t mean that they will do it. People give money to candidates for different reasons. One of them is to gain access so that their ideas will be heard. That doesn’t mean that the candidates are “bought.” It means they received a campaign contribution, (hopefully within the legal limits) and listened to the idea of the contributor.

        Does anyone think Carol Porter will take a campaign donation and not listen to the ideas of whomever gave it to her?

    • AlanR, I agree. There are many methods of political participation–getting involved & volunteering for a campaign or an issue, circulating a petition, voting, writing a letter to the editor of the newspaper, and, yes, donating money to causes, candidates, or elected officials you believe in.

  5. Progressive Dem says:

    Cagle is going down. Politically. If Carol Porter runs a decent campaign Cagle will pay the price for GOP excesses in the Gold Dome. South Georgia isn’t going to vote for two folks from the 9th. They’ll split their votes. Women are another group that may split their votes. He’s a train wreck.

    • Velasco says:

      Keep up the wishful thinking Carol.

      Please divulge the “GOP excesses in the Gold Dome.” I’m pretty certain the GOP controlled Gold Dome has shrunk the budget by 4-5 billion dollars over the last few years.

      And South Georgia will turn out huge for the GOP “ticket”, save Dublin…maybe.

      • Progressive Dem says:

        Velasco, aka Cagle Sock Puppet:

        Ask Speaker Richardson about the excessive access of lobbysts, and the excessive use of power. It’s pretty obvious to most of the state. I wasn’t talking about the budget, but now that you brought it up…

        Tell me about the benefits of shrinking the budget: high unemployment, worse schools, more bankruptcies, more foreclosures, more bank failures. Where is the macro benefit of GOP budgetary policies? Georgia didn’t perform better than other states in this recession; it performed worse! You had to draw down Obama’s money to avoid a catastrophe.

        • Doug Grammer says:


          Does this mean you are openly advocating for a larger budget? If so, what taxes would Dems raise to pay for your new spending? How many more BILLIONS would you like to spend? How many more BILLONS in new taxes?

          • Progressive Dem says:


            That’s an incredible and illogical leap in assumptions and a rather poor deflection of the issue.

            The sock puppet who recently appeared and is all over this post defending Cagle claimed that a benefit of GOP control was a smaller budget. What’s the benefit? Did it help Georgia ride through the recession in better form than other states? Georgia’s economy has performed worse than most states. Unemployment is higher, foreclosures are higher, more banks have failed here. What is the empirical evidence that proves the benefit of Republican stewardship of the budget?

            And Doug, I’m not trying to attack you personally, but I’m sure I speak for everyone at Peach Pundit when I bring this up. We all have to question our sanity when we debate a middle aged man from north Georgia who wears a red beret. For the love of God man and in the words of your hero, Ronald Reagan: Doug Grammer tear down that avatar!

            • Doug Grammer says:

              As far as the avatar goes, I was trying to lighten things up. You should see the pic of me in my “pimp” hat. Maybe I’ll share that with you soon and you will long for the beret.

              As far as the state governement goes, we are in a better position than many other states. I’m not sure I can provide a better summary of that than what Senate President Pro Tempore Tommie Williams posted on May 20, 2009:

              “One of the challenges that many state governments face during difficult economics times, such as the one we are currently facing, is that not only do states have less revenue, but at the same time, they also have increased demand for government services as more people go on unemployment and utilize other government programs.

              Last week the April revenue numbers came out showing state tax collections were down 21 percent for April compared to April of last year. This is a big hole and brings the state’s total year-to-date revenue decline to 9.5 percent.

              Thankfully though, through the strong leadership or our governor and the fiscal discipline of the state house and senate over the past few years, we were able to build up our state’s “rainy day” fund, or the state’s reserves. It would have been very easy to squander this money through unnecessary spending or on pork projects much like Washington does. Instead, these reserve funds will allow the governor to fill holes created by the revenue short fall and keep important government services operating through the fiscal year.

              There are also signs of good news on the horizon too though. This past session the general assembly trimmed and streamlined government, and passed a balanced budget by cutting the FY09 and FY10 budgets by a combined $4 billion without raising taxes. I believe that because we have not raised taxes and because we have continued to encourage and create incentives for small businesses and people to be productive, we are seeing signs that Georgia is attracting companies and quality growth to our state. Here are some signs that this is working, even during these challenging times.

              According to a highly-respected national ranking of small business activity in the U.S, the just-released Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity shows that Georgia is home to 590 entrepreneurs per every 100,000 adults, moving the state from third in 2007 to number one this year. Additionally, Georgia ranks third in the U.S. in the number of companies on the 2008 Inc. 500 Fastest-Growing Private Companies listing.

              Already in fiscal 2009, small businesses with fewer than 20 employees, assisted by Georgia Department of Economic Development representatives, have invested more than $354 million in locations and expansions. Georgia Department of Economic Development figures show that small business activity has increased 30 percent from April 2008 to April 2009, proof that the entrepreneurial spirit continues to be very high in the state regardless of economic conditions.

              This was not an accident. Other states around the country such as Michigan, California, New York, and Pennsylvania have continued to spend themselves into debt and increase the tax burdens on their citizens and businesses. This has caused people and businesses in those states to leave and look at states such as Georgia.

              At the beginning of this month, Chicken of the Sea announced it was opening a domestic canning operation in Lyons, Georgia. The company will create over 200 jobs and invest $20 million in Georgia. This is wonderful news for our state.
              I encourage all of us as we are enjoying this holiday weekend to remember the significance of Memorial Day. President Ronald Reagan once said “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”
              Many men and women have answered the call to duty and stood in harms way to defend this country and our freedoms. Many of these individuals paid the ultimate sacrifice and Memorial Day should be a time we remember their service to our country.

              Georgia’s own 48th Brigade of the National Guard is deploying to Afghanistan this month. Let’s remember to keep them in our prayers and do all that we can to support them and their families. “

              • Progressive Dem says:

                DG, I don’t doubt that is the best you can find, but a few anecdotes from a 2009 Memorial Day speech don’t come close to proving that Georgia fared better in the recession than other states. The fact is we know that Georgia’s economy performed worse than most states regardless of a reduced state budget.

                Any discussion of Georgia’s budget must acknowedge the tremendous sums Georgia received from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Without that money Georgia’s state budget would be in total shambles. Hard as it may be to admit it, but Georgia government has been propped up by the stimulus money.

                Georgia has requested $449 million for roads and bridges and spent $88 million. $93 million went to the Board of Regents mostly for faculty and staff. $12 million went to Corrections to close the $25 million budget reduction they took. Georgia took $498 million from increased federal Medicaid match and used it to offset the state budget deficit. Georgia took $698 million in education money to stabilize local school boards. The state also recevied additional millions to help teach students with disabilities. The above are funds that went to replace existing state spending. None of the above money went to new programs.

                I don’t see Georgia GOP having a lot of bragging rights about the state budget when the federal government bailed us out. The GOP wants to sweep that fact uder the rug. Furthermore, I don’t see how GOP management of the state budget produced any better results than other states. Georgia has performed worse than most states in the recession.

                • Doug Grammer says:


                  You state that “we know that Georgia’s economy performed worse than most states regardless of a reduced state budget.” Do you have any evidence to back that up in a state by state comparison?

                  I know and acknowledge that Georgia has accepted federal money, but just for giggles, do you have any data on how much money Georgians (and other states) have sent IN to the IRS?

            • Velasco says:

              PD –

              Don’t twist what I post to fit your argument.

              I did not “claim that a benefit of GOP control was a smaller budget”. The current budget issues are a sad result of many long term compounding economic issues.

              I was asking what the excesses of the GOP were – since most often – it refers to out of control spending.

              All of the things you mention above – (“Unemployment is higher, foreclosures are higher, more banks have failed here “) – all have a direct correlation to years of having a much higher than normal growth rate in GA. Those are not issues that are caused in the short term – but build in the long run. And are not issues that stem from the GOP cutting the budget in the past year.

              But again – I would love for you or anyone to explain how cutting a state budget as revenue projections fall causes higher unemployment, foreclosures and bank failures on the macro level.

              • Progressive Dem says:

                Your two quotes Velasco:

                “I’m pretty certain the GOP controlled Gold Dome has shrunk the budget by 4-5 billion dollars over the last few years. ”

                “I did not “claim that a benefit of GOP control was a smaller budget”.

                Go find your hair splitting tool.

                • Velasco says:

                  Wow you’re dense.

                  The first “quote” is a factual statement. Benefit is synonymous with increasing the wellbeing of something. I’m not touting benefits of party control.

                  Go re-read the posts for context.

                  • Progressive Dem says:

                    Velasco, you are the master of the incredibly shrinking argument. A sandbar at St Simons would be firmer ground. Your point is that the GOP controlled government shrunk the budget (that was never disputed). However you are not claiming that reducing the budget was a benefit and you are not touting the benefits of party control. Wow, that is a really vacuous argument. Congratulations on proving…nothing.

        • Velasco says:

          Aaahhh. Sock pupet. Nice burn.

          Well when most talk about excessiveness under a capitol building – it typically refers to excessive monetary and budgetary policy – not a former speaker’s personal issues.

          To piggy back Doug’s question: What new taxes are you an advocate for? Because here in GA we can’t hit up the BEP every time we need money.

          And why you’re at it. Please explain how shrinking a state budget by 15% causes an increase in more bankruptcies, foreclosures and bank failures on the macro level…

          • ACCmoderate says:

            Velasco, the former speaker’s personal issues say a heck of a lot about the character of GOP leadership in this state.

            It was Glenn Richardson they chose to lead the house after Republicans regained control. It was Glenn Richardson they chose to let run the house like a frat party. It was Glenn Richardson’s affair WITH A LOBBYIST HE WAS CUTTING DEALS FOR, that Republican leaders were willing to blissfully ignore until it became front page news.

            Who you hang out with says a lot about you, Cagle and the rest of the GOP chose to hang out with that fruit loop.

            But the thing is, it wasn’t just Richardson. The General Assembly is known for being an out of control frat house, despite Speaker Ralston’s attempts for “ethical reform.”

            Blindly pushing for fewer taxes isn’t conservative, its retarded.

            The republican leadership in this state has acted as if taxes are some sort of tumor that need to be hacked off without matching cuts in spending and without planning for potential budget shortfalls down the road.

            Then again, forward planning hasn’t been their forte. They didn’t bother to devise a water conservation plan until we were caught in the middle of a drought. This the the “leadership” that hasn’t come up with a transportation solution in their 8 years in office.

            Doug, thanks for taking the time to prove you’re not a very logically adept individual. Even if PD was advocating for a larger budget, what, other than your ignorance, makes you think its going to involve “BILLIONS” in new spending?

            Georgia doesn’t need a larger budget, it needs a better budget. We need a government that fights to keep our teachers in our schools to educate our children. We need a government that assures we’ll have the water and natural resources to grow and expand. We need a government that can help to create jobs and get honest, hard-working people back to work.

            In eight years, EIGHT FREAKING YEARS, the Republicans haven’t done any of that. They may have given us a smaller budget, but they haven’t given us a better one.

            This state is worse off because of poor financial planning by Tubby Perdue and his boys in the state house.

            • Doug Grammer says:


              I’m asking a question on PD’s stance on how that a smaller budget is bad? The number is billions on much the budget has shrank. I assumed he wanted to go back to where we were or higher, but right now, we are waiting on him to clarify his position.

              Ignorance is an accurate word. It simply means I don’t know. It doesn’t mean stupidity and it doesn’t mean I forgot. it means PD hasn’t told us what he means..yet.

              It seems PD wants a larger budget. If not Billions, Millions, ….Hundreds of Thousands. The amount isn’t so much as the focus of the spending. What does PD think we should be spending money on that we are not and what taxes should we raise to pay for those projects?

        • Lady Thinker says:

          I know, who woulda thunk it? Politics makes for strange bedfellows doesn’t it but when our party doesn’t offer up enough qualified candidates for a post, we have to go outside to find someone better than what we have.

          I’ve never been your enemy, we have just been on a different side of the fence on some issues. You are really quite intelligent and have made some awesome posts that have made me rethink my view on some issues.

          • Scott65 says:

            I wish more people would take the time and judge a candidate based on their merit and not their party. I find Cagle to be an unacceptable candidate so I will vote for Porter as well. I think the amount of support she is getting in these forums alone is telling (its not particularly a ‘bastion of liberalism’ around here).

  6. Georgia Judge says:

    Cagle is the far more qualified candidate in this race and will win by a comfortable margin,Carol Porter are you serious????

    • Scott65 says:

      Qualified to what…participate in and foster a culture of more corruption? Yes, on that note he is more than qualified

  7. Georgia Judge says:

    Typical dem babble and pulling out a tired and baseless corruption card.Porter has zero qualifications for this position and would be a total joke as LG.The whole Porter and Porter ticket shows how pathetic the bench is for Georgia dems and why they will lose all statewide races…….and that is a good thing.

    When is the last time a Dem LG Candidate didnt even have the support of the Atlanta Mayor? NEVER.

    • Lady Thinker says:

      Carol Porter graduated from college, Casey Cagle attended college. From what I see in Carol’s bio page, she has the educational and business experience to become the Lieutenant Governor and she has no ethical issues over her head, like having an affair and refusing to honor subponeas regarding Deal using congressional influence to keep his monolopolistic Gainesville sweetheart deal. The only problem is Carol is a Democrat rather than a Republican, but since she is obviously the better candidate, I am going to ignore the “D” by her name and give her my vote to get Cagle out.

      • Scott65 says:

        …as well as working for 26yrs on her husband’s campaigns. I’d say you learn a little something about politics in that time frame. Also, ad hominem verbiage doesn’t make your point (Georgia Judge), it makes you look like you dont have a cohesive argument (typical dem babble…lets do better than that). If you think he is more qualified tell us why…it makes for a discussion instead of an argument.

  8. Georgia Judge says:


    Please tell me how an inexperienced liberal democrat can accomplish anything as LG presiding over a Republican controlled Senate.Her running for this office is all gimick,and that is why many democrats are not even taking her serously.

    Your candidate lost get over it,your constant baseless attacks are nothing more than sour grapes.Deal and Cagle both will win because they are the better choice.

    • Lady Thinker says:

      Your opinion, Georgia Judge, does not make it true. Yes Karen lost, but what is left isn’t worth voting for, a candidate with ethical baggage who may become a prison inmate. It is time to cross over the aisle and vote for the best candidate, not a future prison inmate.

  9. saltycracker says:

    LMAO – so the choice is between a future con (stealin’ a little for himself) & one taxin’ for the greater good and more public servants (stealing a lot for everyone)……easy choice there……

  10. no_spindoctor says:

    Lady Thinker,
    “Carol Porter graduated from college, Casey Cagle attended college.”

    You supported Karen….what college did she attend….better yet what High School????

  11. Atticus Grinch says:

    It looks like an out-of-context quote. But everyone is missing the real news on the video. It looks like Lt. Gov. Cagle’s back has been healed. Maybe he can make that gubernatorial run in 2014.

  12. Georgia Judge says:

    Deal isnt going to prison and you know that but yet you keep espousing this nonsense as if it were fact,unreal.You should vote Dem across the board because anyone who would vote for Barnes and Porter are alot of things but they certainly are not a Republican.

    • Lady Thinker says:

      Oh I am definitely a Republican but I am also smart enough to vote for the best candidate, not just the ones with an “R” by their names. And I am not the first one to espouse that Deal will be going to prison, it was one of the front page posters that put out the news regarding a federal grand jury investigation. That “nonsense” the federal grand jury investigation, can and probably will become fact and we can have this conversation again when it does so I can say, “I told you so.”

    • Georgia Judge,

      You should also vote Dem across the board then because anyone who would vote for Deal may be a lot of things, but they certainly are not a Republican.

      • Doug Grammer says:


        Nathan Deal is the GOP nominee for Gov. in Georgia. You may not like him, but the majority of voters in the runoff think he is a Republican and the best one to hold our party’s banner.

        I’m not going to encourage anyone to vote Dem, but they can if they like. Some will do so because they don’t want to take their ball and go home when their candidate lost, they want to start playing for the other team. That’s the epitome of a sore loser, IMO.

        • For most it’s not “my candidate lost so I’m going home.” It’s “this candidate” or “these candidates” are completely unacceptable to me based on XYZ. Don’t use childish anologies to trivialize the few engaged and informed people we have in our party who hold true to their beliefs.

          Just so you know, everyone who signs the loyal oath on qualifying day isn’t qualified for or deserves the office they’re seeking.

          • Doug Grammer says:

            People have the right to disagree, but saying Deal isn’t a Republican is silly. I’ll agree with you that everyone who signs the loyalty oath and pays a qualifying fee isn’t “qualified.” Otis Putnam comes to mind. Deal, however, is very qualified, IMHO, and in the opinion of most of the Republicans in the state legislature. If you are going to try to argue that he’s not, start with the realization that most of the elected Republicans in the state are going to disagree with you, and they did so before the runoff. Therefore, it’s not just a case of rallying and circling the wagons. They did so before they had to.

            You can say “Most” people don’t fall in the category of switching teams because their candidate lost, but we both the that there are regular posters on here who do fall into that category.

            • I think you are confusing EXPERIENCE with QUALIFICATION. The question should never be “Are they experienced?” It should be “What in their background makes me believe they are capable of providing ethical, conservative, competent, executive leadership to our state?” When you honestly look down the GOP ticket this cycle, you have to say “Not much”

              And when you look at the resumes of some of our state legislators, I don’t think they’d cut it in the HR department in some of the businesses in their district. I have no respect for their opinion of who is the best candidate for any office. They’re more interested in having someone who will “play along” than who is the best candidate.

              • Doug Grammer says:

                “I have no respect for their opinion of who is the best candidate for any office.”

                To paraphrase, you are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to tell you to stuff it.

        • “You may not like him, but the majority of voters in the runoff think he is a Republican and the best one to hold our party’s banner.”

          Most people used to think the world was flat. That did not make it so.

          Deal calling himself a Republican also does not make him any more of a Republican than if he were to call himself a woman. I think I’ll stick to examining his voting record (or lack thereof… he was absent from 25% of the votes or so, right?) to determine whether or not this person walks the talk of smaller government. Thus far, I’m not impressed.

          • Doug Grammer says:


            You may think what you like. If you want to think the world is flat and that Deal is not a Republican, I’m going to let you because of the fact that even if I did convince you he was a Republican, he still wouldn’t get your vote.

            He’s not going to make pot legal.

            • I think you’re confused. I’m saying the world is not flat and that Deal is not a Republican. Republicans are supposed to do more than just talk about smaller government, right? If he was a Republican, he might get my vote in the runoff if Monds doesn’t make it. Republicans wouldn’t have voted for TARP, NCLB, farm subsidies including paying farmers not to grow food, etc.

              I’m not a pot smoker (or ciggarette or pipe or anything else smoker…). But if I’m not mistaken the Governor isn’t in a position to “make pot legal” anyways. He can veto it, but even if he didn’t it would still have to be put to the voters of Georgia, right? So it would be voters who would make pot legal if they so chose… not the Governor.

              He’s also not going to make abortion illegal. Or homosexual relationships.

              • Doug Grammer says:

                The members of the legislature can carry bills for the Gov., usually called floor leaders. technically the Gov. can’t introduce any legislation, but there floor leaders can. Making pot legal would not have to go directly to the voters. (See changing the flag under Gov. Barnes)

                If you think Deal isn’t Republican, then you think the world is flat. I just mentioned pot because the LP is all about making drugs, prostitution, and gambling legal. Please let me know if you’ve changed your platform.

                Monds isn’t going to make it. Get used to it.

                • “the LP is all about making drugs, prostitution, and gambling legal”

                  No, those are just small issues in the platform that you disagree with. But if you want to discuss it, the prohibition is working rather well, don’t you think? There’s probably not an ounce of pot anywhere in Georgia because of this winning drug war, right? Prostitution… yep, that’s a winning front as well. All those billboards up and down I-75 on the way to Florida I’m sure are for just massages… the beautiful women I’m sure are just for looking at, right? And gambling… we’ve already got it… it’s just that the state has a monopoly on it.

                  Yes, you’re probably right. Monds probably won’t make the runoff. He’ll at least cause one. But when the media continues to neglect to mention him… when they focus on only the two major parties… what else would you expect? That’s right… a continued status quo in our legislature and Governor’s office.

                  • Doug Grammer says:

                    Monds may not cause a run off. If he does, and that’s his only chance, with no chance of winning, you could just say he cost the voters of Georgia more money for standing up for drugs, prostitution, and gambling.

                    A man truly concerned with the best interests of Georgia would either have a chance at winning or withdraw. Your candidate is putting the interests of his party over the interests of Georgia unless you can tell me with a straight face you think he can win.

                    • Three words: Instant Runoff Voting. Yes, I know you don’t like it… protecting the GOP’s interests and all. Stuff it. 🙂

                      Causing runoffs… you mean like Handel and Deal did? Oh.. right.. it’s only bad when third parties do it. My bad.

                    • Doug Grammer says:

                      The Dem Party and the GOP can’t decide our candidates in a crowded room like the LP can. (I’m not so sure it’s crowded.) Our candidates have chances of winning, therefore the cost is justified to find out who will hold office.

                      The LP just runs candidates without chances of winning and just cost the tax payers of Georgia money so they can make their point about the LP party being more important than the interests of the state.

                    • If the GOP was really looking out for the best interests of our state, it would support Instant Runoff Voting. But of course that puts their candidates at risk because they can’t really tout the wasted vote theory anymore, right? Protectionism at it’s best… (worst?)

                    • Doug Grammer says:

                      No state has implemented IRV on a statewide basis. You want Georgia to change the way it votes to advance your party over the interests of Georgia. We are not the LP’s Petri dish. Either field a candidate that has a chance of winning, or quit costing the taxpayers of Georgia money.

                    • “You want Georgia to change the way it votes to advance your party over the interests of Georgia.”

                      Just the opposite. I want Georgia to change the way it votes to advance the interests of Georgia over the interests of the two major parties. Nice try though.

  13. Georgia Judge says:


    Please tell me what makes Barnes and Porter the better candidates,and why we would be bettter off with them leading this state.Yes,we can have the discussion about the partisan attacks on Deal later,but you need to use better confirmation of facts than a frontpage poster on PP. This whole issue will prove to be what it is ,and that is a smear campaign and nothing else.

    • Lady Thinker says:

      I have answered your above questions, you chose to ignore my post. It isn’t just the front page PP or other posters. The news media is all over the federal investigation into Deal for numerous reasons. So since you really are not interested in what I am saying, I have one word for you – whatever.

  14. Georgia Judge says:

    Never have voted for a Dem and definitely wouldnt in this cycle.Deal will be a good Gov so I will be voting for him,dont agree with you on the Republican statement but each his own.

    • See, that’s the thing. I think either one would be an “okay” Governor. I just prefer someone that doesn’t pander to the various groups to try and win. But Deal used to be a Democrat. If you’re voting for Deal, get ready to vote for a Democrat for the first time in your life. 🙂

  15. Georgia Judge says:

    You have yet to tell us why Barnes or Porter would be better for Georgia.You just go back to bashing Deal,such a sore loser………

    There was no laws broken just a smear campaign at its finest……

    • Lady Thinker says:

      I already have but I am not going to do a cut and paste job of my previous answer for you. I have answered that question, so move on and find the post.

  16. ACCmoderate says:


    As someone with a deep and abiding respect for the legal system, I really hope that your closed-minded and ideologically small views don’t sit on a bench here in Georgia.

    • Doug Grammer says:

      Typical. Attack the messenger instead of debating the message. There no laws broken and instead of trying to think of a few, you just attack the messenger.

Comments are closed.