1. Rick Day says:

    Q: Who assures elected Leadership is chosen not by qualification, but who can sow fear and bullplop in 32 seconds.

    A: The persons with the most moneyFreeSpeechmoney to spend.

    It’s all becoming so transparent, these days.

  2. hannah says:

    I like it. Without the sound, it is visually impressive. For Republicans who want to be ruled, rather than be expected to make choices, Barnes looks ideal. If I remember correctly, Georgia was thriving during the Barnes years and things have been going down hill since. Wait until Georgians get a gander at their new property assessments. During the boom, our conservative assessors jacked the values up and everyone felt rich, even if their taxes tripled. This year, a quarter million dollars just disappeared while the envelope was slit open.
    Georgia is not alone. Some condos in the Jacksonville area have fallen by 75% — from $208,000 to $53,000. So, whom are the voters going to blame? How about our corporate friends who are sitting on $3 TRILLION in cash that they’re refusing to spend.
    Yes, the Treasury can print more. But, as long as the gnomes on Wall Street can siphon off their cut and hide it in the vaults, that’s just sending good money after bad.
    Btw, though I don’t give a hoot about the deficit, it should be noted that it’s been reduced 8% from what the last Bush budget projected. At this rate, we’ll be back to Greenspan wringing has hands over what to do with a surplus before you know it.

  3. ACCmoderate says:

    Note the message isn’t “vote for Deal”

    Unless the GOP can articulate to me why I should be voting for Nathan Deal, he won’t be getting my vote.

    Then again, the GOP on every level doesn’t really have any answers, they’re just riding the anti-incumbent wave and holding out hope that people won’t be blaming them come 2012.

  4. ZazaPachulia says:

    Nice ads… Seriously, they look and sound good. The only problem is that there are still a bunch of Republicans like me who will not vote for a crooked former congressman (and former Democrat) from Hall County who can’t even manage his own house, let alone a state in a severe budget crisis.

    Had we (the GOP primary voters) gone with Johnson, Scott, Chapman or even Handel, these ads would really pack a punch.

      • ZazaPachulia says:

        the numbers don’t lie, Right of Center. All “12 of us” surely weren’t called for this poll. If there’s only a dozen of us, why is the governor’s race so much closer than the others?

        • rightofcenter says:

          Oh, maybe because Barnes has spent millions of dollars and the number of undecided is much less? I was obviously making a joke in reference to the Peach Pundit dozen, but if there were a bunch of Republicans who were not voting for Deal his numbers would look much worse.

          • ZazaPachulia says:

            Did you even read the story? The number of independents overall has shrunk decidedly, with many of those former indies now calling themselves Republicans. I call myself a Republican and have since I was 18 and I will not vote for Deal. I’m not alone. We’re in a Red state in a Red year and the other big races (and down ballot races) are polling Bright Red. Yet, Deal and Barnes are within the margin of error of one another — even before all the insolvency news hit the proverbial fan… Sounds to me like we’ve got plenty of people out there (like me) who will vote a predominately Republican ballot with Barnes at the top.

            • Doug Grammer says:


              From your posts, you wouldn’t vote for any other GOP candidate other than Rep. Austin Scott for Gov.

              Congressman Deal has managed his own house. His assets are greater than his liabilities and he’s not missed a payment on anything. He is solvent and probably has a better credit rating than you do. He’s broken no laws, and I am getting tired of hearing sour grapes from people whose candidate did not make it through the primary.

              Take the time to look at Donna’s link for Congressman Deal’s voting record. If you do it with an open mind, you might be surprised. If you aren’t going to have an open mind, then it’s a waste of your time. If that’s the case, for the sake of being concise, please use she following phrase from now on when commenting on the Gov’s race: “My candidate didn’t make it through the primary, so I am going to cry and moan about how bad the nominee is. It doesn’t matter what the facts are, he’s horrible.”

              By the time the election gets here, you can trim that down to : “compliant number 42.”

              If you are going to keep bringing up that Congressman Deal was a Dem 16 years ago, please shink that to: complaint, codename Reagan.

              • Donna Locke says:

                Doug, I’ve noticed a number of people on this blog are blissfully ignorant of some aspects of reality, especially the train headed our way as the coalition of interests using the Democratic Party continue to remake this country to suit their agenda.

                There are steps that must be taken NOW, like YESTERDAY, to ensure we even have conservative political choices at all in the future, choices that can actually be elected.

                Aside from the increasingly possible closing of political pathways, with consequent, certain implosion of the OPM supply, we — all of us and/or our offspring in this country — face a crowded future of astronomical population numbers (being driven almost entirely by immigration and births to immigrants) coupled with finite natural resources that are already strained.

                Even if we got the numbers under control now, our population growth would continue for many, many years to come because of the numbers already here.

                Much of the quality of life you take for granted now will be gone in your lifetimes.

                This is a crisis. This IS our particular rendezvous with destiny. I am not religious, but I do believe Americans living today will be held accountable somewhere somehow for their protection and stewardship of this nation, the survival of which is crucial not only to the evolution of humanity but to the very survival of humanity.

                We’re on the verge of losing every worthwhile thing about this country. No amount of money will buy it back.

                Our nation’s founders left us a number of warnings, which have not been heeded.

                Some 14 years ago, President Clinton’s task force on sustainability concluded what had been concluded by experts, casual observers, and our enemies long before: The United States cannot be a sustainable society without stabilizing its population, and immigration must be reduced dramatically for that to happen.

                Nathan Deal understands this. He has been a top leader in Congress on this issue.

                  • polisavvy says:

                    But, David, he is a choice for Governor. It’s now up to the voters to make a serious decision. I’m concerned which way they are going. There is a strong possibility that I may end up skipping it and Lt. Gov.

                    • Yep.. I know he’s on the ballot. I’m just saying it eliminates him from the possibility of gaining my vote at all.

                      At least if you were to vote for Monds, it shows the GOP that at least one more person refuses to accept their candidate just because they have an R beside their name. It also helps the Libertarian Party gain equal ballot access to the R’s and D’s. (We have to hit 20% with a Gubernatorial or Presidential candidate to be able to run for state house, state senate and a variety of other positions without getting 5% of the registered voters’ signatures.)

                  • Donna Locke says:

                    Voting for an open-borders, come-one-come-all libertarian is foolish at this critical point. The states are the battleground on illegal immigration.

            • rightofcenter says:

              You certainly have a right to call yourself a Republican, or a Whig, for that matter (perhaps you and Barnes can re-start that party together). However, judging from your own posts, it would be more intellectually honest for you to call yourself an independent. Let’s see, you’re voting for Barnes, Porter, Hicks – did I miss someone? That’s about 50-50 – about as Republican as Lincoln Chafee.

              • ZazaPachulia says:

                Doug, like I said in the previous comment on this thread, I’d be happy to vote for Johnson, Scott, Chapman or even Handel over Barnes. But not Deal (or Ox or McBerry).

                If you want to call me an independent for demanding ethically qualified candidates rather than blindly selecting every (R) on the ballot, fine. But, I think it’s better for the party in the long run if we don’t elect our weakest links to high offices. I’d much rather take four years with the other guys (or girls) in office than risk turning this state blue for good.

                “I am getting tired of hearing sour grapes from people whose candidate did not make it through the primary.”
                It’s not sour grapes, Doug. It’s disgust that we’ve got an ethically-challenged crook at the top of the ticket. Take away the salvage business influence peddling fiasco and give us a Nathan Deal who can actually afford to put his finances in blind trust while he serves as governor and we’ve got a decent candidate. I don’t dislike Deal for his voting record. I won’t vote for him because I can’t trust him. It’s pretty simple.

                • Doug Grammer says:


                  Have a cup of reality. Johnson, Scott, Chapman or even Handel are no longer choices for 2010. You may vote for Deal, Barnes, Monds, or not vote. This state isn’t going to turn blue, unless it’s from people who are holding their breath because their candidate did not win the GOP primary. I expect a blind trust soon.

                  • B Balz says:

                    A blind trust would go a long way toward helping Rep. Deal.

                    Gov. Perdue chose not to do this, and I think it creates an appearance of impropriety.

                    • ZazaPachulia says:

                      I don’t expect a blind trust because Deal is verging on bankruptcy.

                      Reality is this state came awfully close to voting for Obama in 2008. Shifting demographics coupled with mismanagement by Georgia Republicans in power could tip the scales sooner than you think.

                    • Doug Grammer says:

                      So Zaza, if election time hits in about 40 days, Deal has a blind trust and has satisfied his debts, does this mean he has your vote?

                    • ZazaPachulia says:

                      “So Zaza, if election time hits in about 40 days, Deal has a blind trust and has satisfied his debts, does this mean he has your vote?”

                      Absolutely. And if Deal does that, I’ll be buying some powerball AND mega millions tickets immediately after leaving my polling place.

  5. ACCmoderate says:

    Obama, cough… I mean Barnes, gave us laws we didn’t want.

    Hmm. The 2008 Presidential Election results would beg to differ. Wasn’t the Republican retort to criticisms of Bush: “he’s the President” or “he was elected.” How quickly that goes out the window when a Democrat is in office.

    Ignorance is bliss.

    • Ken – I can… a term under Nathan Deal. But then again, I’m a Monds supporter… I prefer smaller government where the government stays out of peoples’ sexual preferences, gambling preferences and other personal decisions.

      • polisavvy says:

        Touche. I want the government out of my business just like you. I could care less someone’s sexual orientation (we are all the same in God’s eye). I think gambling would be a good thing for Georgia — it certainly saved Mississippi after Katrina. I think we should be able to buy alcohol on Sunday. You are really starting to get my attention with Monds (oops — once again I may have to turn in my “card”).

        • B Balz says:

          I personally like the CATO Institute, think many Libertarian ideals are admirable, and remain completely unconvinced that they could, if elected, change anything.

          And I am not gleeful about that, either.

          • polisavvy says:

            To be quite frank, I’m finding less and less to be gleeful about. Other than Austin Scott’s election, I’m just not that overly happy! I see myself skipping a few slots. Am I wrong in my thinking, and could you or someone else enlighten me on this; but, is it true that Libertarians do not believe in war? (I don’t know why I feel as though someone has told me that). Of course, on the State level, it should really not be as big an issue for me. Any idea?

            • polisavvy – some Libertarians are indeed anti-war. It’s not that they don’t believe in it… it’s just that they believe that other avenues should be taken instead.

              Either way, I can guarantee you that John Monds will not attempt to start a war or invade another state or country. 😛

              • polisavvy says:

                You are hysterical! I knew he wouldn’t start a war with say Mississippi. I was concerned more on a federal level. Once again, hysterical post!!

                • seenbetrdayz, Ph.D. says:

                  Not really anti-war, just non-aggressive. I’ve got a fair collection of firearms, but I’d never intend to use them on someone else unless they were to threaten me with lethal harm (and then only as a last resort).

                  Some people don’t even own firearms (nothing wrong with that, if it’s their decision) but then some of those people tend to look the other way (or even actively support it) when the U.S. government goes to war without a declaration.

                  But yes, on a state-level, foreign policy is a non-issue.

Comments are closed.