84 comments

  1. ZazaPachulia says:

    Deal’s truth problems are unacceptable. According the the AJC, his net worth just “grew” by $800k in a week. And it looks like Deal deliberately hid his name from the Wilder bankruptcy documents… From the AJC: “The Wilders were listed as the sole shareholders, however, Allen said the Deals held half the shares in the now-defunct company.”

    People as bright and intelligent as Nathan Deal is supposed to be (see letters from his youngest daughter and Mercer roommate) don’t make these types of “omissions” accidentally.

    No we know why Roy kept asking for tax records… And as cheesy as the commercial is, Nathan Deal truly is “slipperier than a bag of snakes.”

    On a side note, I have a feeling that this whole Deal train-wreck has a lot to do with a certain someone’s extended fishing trip…

        • At this point none of this stuff is important. It’s easy

          Roy Barnes = Bad
          Nathan Deal = Good

          It’s undeniable that this election is focused on destruction and pain as opposed to a vision for the state, but it is what it is.

          Do you really trust Roy Barnes with anything other than a law suit and perhaps putting together an engineering firm to suck $19,000,000 in state projects?

          At this time I could give a rip who has what or doesn’t have anything. Georgians are consistently telling pollsters they don’t want Roy Barnes. Why would Governor Barnes thwart an investigation into a pedophile who ran a cult in Putnam County? http://bibbrepublicanparty.com/

          • bowersville says:

            Maurice, the article that you link up to quotes Sheriff Sills lumping Roy Barnes in with the GBI and the FBI as an obstacle to justice.

            There is a little thing called “probable cause.”

            The FBI later raided the compound once sufficient probable cause was developed to secure proper warrants.

            • The man is serving 130 sentence for molesting dozens and dozens of girls. This is well documented story. The question remains, why would Roy Barnes thwart an investigation into a pedophile? Why would Sen. Tyrone Brookes use his connections to Barnes to thwart an investigation into a pedophile?

          • Roy Barnes = Bad
            Nathan Deal = Bad
            Georgia = Screwed either way

            “Georgians are consistently telling pollsters they don’t want Roy Barnes.”

            Funny, they’re saying the same thing about Nathan Deal.

    • rightofcenter says:

      You’re entitled to your opinion, but as you have proven on this blog, you had your mind made up long ago. Rather than saying something stupid like his net worth “grew” by $800,000, you might actually look at the two financial statements and notice that the business assets were not represented on the original balance sheet. Do you think that his share of ownership in GSD is worth nothing? And Deal withheld his name from the Wilders bankruptcy filing? He didn’t file the bankruptcy, moron, the Wilders did.

      • ZazaPachulia says:

        More from the AJC story, RoC… It’s hard to keep the lie alive when there’s so much truth floating around.

        “Bankruptcy attorney Richard Thomson with Clark & Washington, told the AJC earlier this week that Deal and his wife likely should have been mentioned at least as unsecured creditors in the proceeding.
        Allen (Deal supporter and new CPA) said the listing of the Wilders as sole shareholders was an error, not an act to conceal Deal’s involvement in the company.”

        • rightofcenter says:

          Uh, you are really not that clueless, are you? Yes, the Wilders should have listed the Deals as unsecured creditors in the proceeding. You know what an unsecured creditor is, don’t you? It doesn’t appear that you do. As for the second part, I don’t know that I can help you if you don’t understand that the Wilders filed personal bankrupcty, so anything that was filed on their behalf was their responsibility, not her parents. I’m not going to call you a liar – just ignorant.

    • Quaker says:

      Oh, come on. ANYBODY can overlook $800,000 in his net worth, while at the same time overlooking a $2.5 million personal obligation. And who wants to bet the Wilder losses found their way onto his IRS 1040, even though he had nothing to do with the business. This is the man I want running state – at least he hates gays.

  2. View from Brookhaven says:

    SRTA voted to keep the toll (and their jobs) until 2020.

    I think you can put a nail through any chances of the HB 277 referendum passing in 2012.

    • AubieTurtle says:

      If there was another toll road up and running (HOT lanes are coming soon but aren’t here yet), it is likely they would have ended the GA400 toll. This is about SRTA being able to continue to exist. Without GA400, there is no funding for SRTA.

      I doubt Sonny and the Board have any real idea of the long term consequences of extending the toll. When the legislature gets together, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if they changed the law and made the toll go away. Even people in rural areas who would usually be all for sticking it to Atlanta tend to be anti-toll and can see the problem with an obviously broken promise.

      Someone, be it the next governor or a member of the legislature is going to take the bull by the horns and take on this issue. They’ll almost certainly win the fight and get a lot of political capital in the process.

  3. jiminga says:

    Just in case this “open thread” is actually about 401K’s, IRA’s, etc., all we little guys should be out of the market now. I dumped all market related investments (except gold mining stock) long ago, put it in physical gold, and have had 42% appreciation (the gold mining stock is up 500%). Today’s market is controlled by the TBTF banks using HFT’s. Look at the low trading volume, and 30% of stocks traded are BANKS! They’re suckering in the small investor on up days and shorting them, thereby making money both ways. Today’s equity markets are for suckers and big banks.

  4. GOPwits says:

    Okay, so here’s the latest twist in facts from Camp Deal. You’d think these people could get their facts straight, however, when you’re telling so many lies and trying to pull a fast one on the people of Georgia, it is hard to keep the lies straight.

    http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/new-explanation-given-for-620325.html

    And here’s another one on Deal continuing to have to update his financial disclosure. These people are out of control in the web of lies and spin. They just can’t keep up. Georgia just cannot afford to have a liar and unethical person such as Deal in office anymore.

    http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/deal-discloses-finances-again-620432.html

  5. Buddha the Magnificent says:

    I’m not clear why Georgia always winds up having to choose between two chuckle-heads, but I’m reminded of Pete Seeger’s What Did You Learn in School Today ditty, where he sings “Our leaders are the finest men, and we elect ’em again and again.”

  6. TPNoGa says:

    I read on ajc.com that Republican Rep. Bob Lane is on a committee called Republicans for Roy. It says he is retiring this year. I guess he has no plans to ever run in the GOP again. Yikes. I know nothing about him, but I am sure he has lost a few friends in Atlanta.

    • LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

      I’m sure this may come as a surprise to you, but there are several Republican legislators privately voting for Barnes this fall. They just aren’t stupid enough to publicly announce it.

  7. MSBassSinger says:

    I am beginning to notice a trend. Whenever the Rockefeller Republican loses in a primary, they and many of their supporters immediately go on a crusade of trying to sink the choice of the Republican voters.

    Handel folks are trying to destroy Deal, Murkowski folks are trying to destroy Joe Miller in Alaska, Mike Castle undermining Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, etc. At least Charlie Crist in Florida saw the handwriting on the wall, and did it preemptively against Marco Rubio.

    The same tactics that Rockefeller Republicans used against Goldwater in 1964 are being used today. The “if I can’t win no Republican can win” mindset of the Rockefeller Republicans transcends time.

    I think it is time to simply choose “none of the above” when I vote for an office where the candidate is clearly a Rockefeller Republican. It is a case-by-case judgment call as to whether any given Republican candidate is too “RINO” in his or her positions and track record for me to vote for. I am not looking for perfection, but I am looking for at least rarely imperfect consistency.

    • TPNoGa says:

      I am pretty sure Handel is not a RINO. I am also pretty sure Erick is not a RINO. I know I am not a RINO. I am still undecided on Deal vs. Barnes. I don’t care for either. But you Deal supporters need to do a better job of attracting us Handel voters to your side. Insulting potential voters seems to be pretty counter-productive.

      P.S. – Deal used to be a Democrat. I kinda think he is a RINO.

      • MSBassSinger says:

        I am pretty sure Handel is a Rockefeller Republican. Any Republican that does not understand why social issues are absolutely essential to conservatism (without being exclusive of the other facets of conservatism) is, to me, a Rockefeller Republican. (http://msbasssinger.wordpress.com/2010/08/19/do-social-issues-belong-in-a-campaign/)

        And it may be that Rockefeller Republicans are what people want, just like they wanted King Roy until he showed who he really was, just like they wanted Obama until he showed what he really was, etc.

        It is quite possible people need to reap the consequences of their choices by electing Rockefeller Republicans over conservatives until they learn from their mistakes, or totally prove conservatives like me wrong.

        My prediction for 2010 and beyond: Rockefeller Republicans take control of the House and Senate. They spend most of their time trying to block Obama, but not doing anything substantive to stop what the Obamacrats have done and are doing. By 2012, their lack of leadership and abundance of stumbling around, and a new crop of character scandals, will lead to the Obamacrats taking control of Congress and Obama being re-elected. Because the Rockefeller Republicans hijacked the “conservative” label, running as a real conservative, and winning, will be nigh unto impossible for decades.

        I sure hope my prediction is wrong.

        • kyleinatl says:

          It’s the social issues that are running your party into the ground…it’s frankly embarrassing. The Government has ZERO place in my, your, or anyone else’s bedroom, television set, art, music, lifestyle choices, anything…and by damn, it needs to stay that way.

    • Baker says:

      The problem for conservatives is when the “RINOs” win primaries they fully expect the Tea Party types to get on board for the general, which they usually do. When RINOs actually lose primaries, like this year, they turn into a bunch of whiners and endorse the Democrat or threaten a write-in campaign.

      • Baker says:

        Also, somebody explain this to me.

        In the mind of conservatives, wasn’t the health care bill the worst thing ever? Right? So, isn’t the goal to repeal it? If that is the goal, you need the Senate and the House. If you need the Senate and House, don’t you want the most electable candidates? If you want the most electable candidates, don’t you go with Castle in Delaware? You make a Machiavellian decision to put aside ideology for a second, elect that dude so Dick Durbin (Harry Reid might be gone) is not the Majority leader and then you could push to overturn as much of the health care bill as possible.

        If health care wasn’t such a big deal, okay then, O’Donnell it is.

        • MSBassSinger says:

          The Rockefeller Republican mantra is to “repeal and replace”. Of course, they know they won’t have a veto-proof majority, so they know that is all hot air.

          What the Rockefeller Republicans won’t do is use the “power of the purse” to simply not fund any line items, whether ObamaCare, TARP, stimulus, czars, etc. They could do that, which would reduce spending much more than the token pork projects they rail against. But that takes leadership, and a willingness to be vilified by the Democrats and the mainstream media. There is nothing that Obama or the Democrats can do about the majority exercising the “power of the purse”.

          It takes anti-establishment conservatives to use that power, and then to offer sensible replacements that Obama will probably veto – making the voters reject him and the Democrats even more. So, logically, one would not want Rockefeller Republicans to win over conservatives.

          • Baker says:

            I hear ya. A couple things, I wouldnt necessarily put McConnell in the “Rockefeller” group. And the others in leadership, Jon Kyl, Cornyn, Coburn wouldn’t pull back on de-funding. If they get to 51, then it won’t matter. Less and she doesn’t win, it’s bad.

            • Baker says:

              Also, I think you have to work on building the education about what real conservatism is from the bottom level. O’Donnell kind of leapfrogged the process a bit because of Tea Party enthusiasm, which is fine, but if she did get elected, can she get re-elected?

              • MSBassSinger says:

                I think the best education, if conservatives and sensible Rockefeller Republicans will stay true to form when elected, is to start carrying out conservative changes as much as possible during 2011 and 2012.

                Exercising the power of the purse, explaining why, passing legislation to get rid of useless or overreaching laws, etc. shows a group committed to real change. That means taking care of the “character issues” before they become fodder for Democrats. It also means Congress members living in a way that doesn’t scream “privileged” or “elite”. Even if Obama vetoes their bills, they can use that to show how they are trying to do the people’s business, and Obama and the Democrats are stopping them. Portray the White House as the “administration of NO”.

                I believe people are best educated in politics by actions. They will learn principles best from seeing them in action and explained how they apply in each one.

                To paraphrase Dave Ramsey, they should live and legislate like no one else, so Americans can once again live free like no one else.

          • John Konop says:

            MSBass,

            Since you were against the TARP please help me understand what was your solution when all the banks collapsed and the tax payers were on the hook for loans, deposits, insurance…..?

    • Lady Thinker says:

      Now not voting in that space is an option I have not seriously considered. Thanks for giving me something to ponder.

    • James Fannin says:

      Handel grew up politically in the Quayle household and I’m pretty sure there weren’t any Rockefeller Republicans around. But come on people let’s be serious. Seven years after Ronald Reagan left office when Deal was 53 years old and months after Republicans took control of the House, Deal, whose district was considered one of the most Republican districts in the country, switched parties. If someone who calls themselves a Republican yet supported Walter Mondale, Al Gore, Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton isn’t a RINO, no one is a RINO. And what did Deal say 6 months before he switched? He promised that if he were to switch he would do the “honest thing” and resign and run for election which is what Phil Gramm did. And did he do that? Of course not. As Nathan Deal said himself, that would be the honest thing to do and as we are learning with each new day, when Nathan Deal signed up for the Republican Party, no one bothered to give him a class on our values like actually doing “the honest thing.”

      • Lady Thinker says:

        Which is why I have come to refer to deal as the Washington wolf in sheep’s clothing for Georgia politics. Deal is a follower who thinks about what is best for him at the expense of voters. If he really wanted to do the right thing, he would go into the private sector and pay off his bills, but he can’t give up the spotlight. Or it could be the other lawyers know he’s fond of corruptable practices?

    • CobbGOPer says:

      Deal’s double”dealing” is destroying his campaign pretty well on its own. And the latest news is his campaign has been paying $6,000 a month to a company he partly owns for access to aircraft for the campaign, totaling some $135,000 so far…

    • That gap is closing. Many of the Handel supporters I’m talking to realize this election has nothing to do with the candidate, but everything to do with the GAGOP. Barnes will stoop at anything to win as will the Dem party of Georgia. They need Barnes badly.

      • Lady Thinker says:

        If that is the case Maurice, why haven’t Jeff Chapman, Karen Handel, Eric Johnson, and John Oxendine come forward on behalf of the GAGOP, to urge party unity in the election of “shady deal” rather than keep silent? Could it be their silence indicates that deal isn’t the best person to lead the state?

        So many posters said that Karen was Sonny’s girl so they didn’t want to elect her, but clearly she wasn’t. Sonny has stated he is a “deal” supporter. Wonder what sweetheart deal shady deal promised Sonny should he be elected for his support?

  8. ZazaPachulia says:

    Great points MSBassSinger… except that you conveniently left out the fact that Miller and O’Donnell are the anti-establishment candidates who received endorsements from Sarah Palin. Mama Grizzly declined to endorse Rubio (or anyone in Florida for the Senate seat), but had Crist stayed on the GOP ballot, it’s not a stretch to assume that Palin would have thrown her weight behind Rubio as well.

    Murkowski, Castle and Crist were the establishment candidates in their races. Now, who did Palin endorse in Georgia for the governor’s race and who was the Washington establishment candidate?

    Oops…

    My previous (very reluctant) vote for Handel in the runoff (I did not vote for her nor Deal in the actual primary) has nothing at all to do with my distaste for the ethically bankrupt, truth-challenged shady businessman and career politician who we Republicans were conned into nominating for governor. Had all this stuff come out before the primary, we’d have had a runoff between Johnson and Handel. There’s no disguising that.

    I will not vote for Deal and it has nothing to do with Karen Handel.

    • MSBassSinger says:

      You are confusing Palin’s endorsement machine with conservatism. She is too focused on “elect so-and-so because she is a woman”, which is patently liberal.

      She is conservative on a lot of issues, but just because she (or her organization) says something doesn’t make it so.

      Palin’s endorsement machine foolishly endorsed a Rockefeller Republican before Palin knew the facts, and she did not have the honor to admit a mistake. Georgia Republican voters have spoken. Palin does a lot of good, but I remain unconvinced her core values are truly conservative across the board.

      • Three Jack says:

        define ‘rockefeller republican’. seems you base your definition upon one thing; the perception of a particular candidate’s position on social issues.

        so deal hates gays, ghetto grandmas and baby killers but votes for big spending bills like prescription drugs and nclb. yet you consider him to be a ‘real republican’?

        • MSBassSinger says:

          define ‘Rockefeller republican’
          Modern Rockefeller Republicans are typically fiscally conservative or centrist and socially liberal. Still others espouse government and private investments in environmentalism, infrastructure, farms and higher education as necessities for the nation’s survival, in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton and Theodore Roosevelt. In general, Rockefeller Republicans oppose socialism and the redistribution of wealth while supporting some regulation of business and federal social programs in matters pertaining to the public good.”

          From:
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican

          • kyleinatl says:

            Sounds like the perfect kind of candidate to me. If a Republican got out there and said, I’m about fiscal responsibility and cutting spending, but I have no desire to tell you what you can or can’t do in your private life and I don’t think the government should either…well damn, that’ll be the first Republican I’d ever vote for in the general.

                • kyleinatl says:

                  I can’t speak for CobbGOPer, but I know as far as the leave me alone stance on my end: I just want a politician who is socially laissez-faire…I don’t want someone’s personal sense of ethics telling me what’s right and what is wrong. As long as what I do doesn’t effect you or yours personally, it’s fair game.
                  If I wanna marry another man, please tell me how that effects our local State Rep.
                  If my significant other and I made the tough decision to terminate a pregnancy, please tell me how that effects my next door neighbor.

                  What I do inside my home should by my own personal business, and as long as it doesn’t impede your ability to seek freedom and prosperity, it should be fine and dandy.

                  But I imagine I’m probably preaching to the choir. Now I’ll let CobbGOPer answer…sorry 🙂

                • Three Jack says:

                  ‘leave me the hell alone’, defined — let me have my full paycheck then i will decide how much to contribute to government via my buying habits.

                  stay out of my personal life as long as my activities don’t harm others.

                  yes, end medicare/caid, ss and all other entitlement programs that require money be taken from one to support another.

                  that’s a basic good start to ‘leave me the hell alone’.

  9. John Konop says:

    What plan do they have?

    The GOP “Pledge”: What’s Not In It

    MJ-The House Republicans on Thursday released a manifesto outlining what they intend to do should they triumph in the coming congressional elections. The glossy document, which is adorned with photographs of the Statue of Liberty, Mt. Rushmore, and cowboys, is high-mindedly titled “A Pledge to America: A New Governing Agenda Built on the Priorities of Our Nation, the Principles We Stand For & America’s Founding Values.” And it offers few surprises: tax cuts for all (including the super-rich), slashing federal spending (without specifying actual targets), downsizing government, more money for the military (especially missile defense), and repealing the health care bill. It decries deficits—though it advocates proposals that will add trillions of dollars to the deficit. It calls for reforming Congress—but in non-significant ways (such as forcing legislators to place a sentence in every bill attesting that the legislation is connected to a principle in the Constitution). It’s full of Hallmark-style patriotism: “America is more than a country.” It’s infused with tea party anger: Washington has plotted “to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values.” It is likely to have little impact on the elections.

    You can read it yourself. Or peruse the reviews: liberal Ezra Klein dissects its internal contradictions; tea partier Erick Erickson decries the “Pledge” as a sell-out of the tea party movement; Republican curmudgeon David Frum finds it retro and short on “modern” and “affirmative” ideas for governing during a recessionary year. But here’s a short-cut for you. Below is a list of words and phrases and the number of times they are each mentioned in the 45-page “Pledge.”

    http://controlcongress.com/2008-election/2010-election/the-gop-pledge-whats-not-in-it

    • My wife graduated from Clemson. But she grew up in Alpharetta. Does that make her a Georgian or a South Carolinian?

      Just because someone lives in another state for a few years doesn’t mean they’re no longer a Georgian.

  10. John Konop says:

    Barnes wins this debate we need jobs here! A start up business in the first few years usually does not pay much in taxes ie lack of profits. And when you start making money you can carry loses forward. A new business needs capital not tax breaks.

    From the Associated Press:

    Savannah, Ga. — Democrat Roy Barnes said Friday he wants $300 million in new tax breaks for businesses that create jobs in Georgia and vowed he would deny state contracts to firms that send jobs overseas if he’s elected governor.

    “It’s time we get serious that it’s our people that need jobs,” Barnes told an economic development conference in Savannah.

    Nathan Deal, Barnes’ Republican rival in the race, said he’s largely waiting on a tax commission formed by the Legislature to study and suggest revisions to the state’s tax code. Its recommendations are due in January after the new governor takes office.

    But Deal told the same group he’s pitched an idea to defer taxes owed by small businesses in their startup years when they’re most vulnerable to failure.

    “They fail generally during the first three to five years, and taxes just become a burden on them,” Deal said. “If they fail, they don’t create any jobs and they don’t pay any taxes.”
    The tax breaks …

    http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/

    • Businesses don’t increase labor costs in order to decrease their taxes. That’s Obamanomics and idiotic. Also, how many international businesses will leave Geeorgia once we start blacklisting them for competing in the global market. Barnes doesn’t have a clue and is just playing politics.

      • John Konop says:

        Paulding Pundit,

        This is the same BS Clinton, Bush…..have been selling us since NAFTA CAFTA HAVTA FIND A JOB! Bottom line it is fools gold to think we can consume more things than we produce.

        How do we compete with slave labor, currency manipulation, no intellectual property laws……? Please no talking points tell me the REAL PLAN?

        • Three Jack says:

          i agree with barnes on the tax break, but not restrictions on state contracts. how the hell would he enforce such a measure? if one job “goes overseas”, does that disqualify an otherwise top notch contractor.

          deal has no clue. surprised he didn’t suggest relaxing loan qualifications so that other small businesses can get millions in funding like he did even though he did not have the collateral to backup the loans.

  11. Three Jack says:

    now deal can add airplanegate to his growing list of controversial dealings.

    quit now nate ol boy, you are embarrassing yourself, your family, your business associates, the gop and the state of ga.

    • CobbGOPer says:

      Buh, buh, but, he’s not making any money off the airplane deal!!! Though I’m sure his business partner is certainly making money off it… Cronyism, anyone? Just as bad.

  12. Mr. Conservative II says:

    I am to the point of voting for Monds and washing my hands of this mess. I hate to see that Barnes win, but I can’t stomach Deal’s finances and ethical lapses. Looks like Oxendine Jr. got nominated.

      • AubieTurtle says:

        I’m sure Pete Randall will post a dozen times about it… you know, since he’s all about exposing cover ups no matter the race, er, party, er, shoe size of the crooks involved.

Comments are closed.