Democrats Hit Jason Shepherd

September 27, 2010 20:00 pm

by Buzz Brockway · 87 comments

Georgia Democrats have dug up some dirt on State House Candidate (and one time PP Front Page Poster) Jason Shepherd:

Under oath, she spoke of Shepherd “trying to strangle me with his hands and then using a rope to try to kill me. He said he would try to poison me or make it look like a suicide, and has been thinking about killing for a while.”

Said Shepherd: “That is absolutely not true. I never said or did anything like that…. She makes things up, to make herself into a victim.”

The protection ordered was issued, but the girlfriend ignored court orders to appear subsequent hearings, Shepherd said, and the charges were dropped.

Shepherd said the incident hasn’t been a secret. He informed Scott Johnson, chairman of the Cobb GOP, about the arrest when he was recruited as a candidate.

The House Republican leadership was informed, he said, as was the State Bar of Georgia – when Shepherd applied for membership.

“I have been, on a small scale, open and honest about it,” Shepherd said.

Chris September 27, 2010 at 8:04 pm

I believe killing a girl is the initiation ritual for working in the Georgia Insurance Commissioner’s office.

perimeterprogressive September 27, 2010 at 8:37 pm

Gotta learn about life insurance somehow Chris.

View from Brookhaven September 27, 2010 at 8:08 pm

Not sure that I’d leave this one open for comments, Buzz…

Erick's Mortal Enemy September 27, 2010 at 9:01 pm

Just cause he’s you’re friend, doesn’t mean that we can’t talk about it.

macho September 27, 2010 at 8:15 pm

This seems like a bunch of BS. Unless he was convicted in court, I don’t see the relevance. And the name change thing seems nefarious when linked to the arrest, but the two don’t have anything to do with each other.

ready2rumble September 27, 2010 at 8:23 pm

Didn’t McBerry use the she didn’t show up in court “defense”?

Lady Thinker September 27, 2010 at 8:35 pm

Jason,

I am sorry you are having to go through this. Many times, the other side tries to create a raging forest fire where there isn’t even a whiff of smoke. You must have a good chance of winning for the other side to bring up these painful events in hopes of smearing your name and/or to embarass you into going home. Don’t give in. Keep your chin up. You have many friends and I assume at this point, a supportive and loving wife. I hope you win your election run.

rightofcenter September 27, 2010 at 11:49 pm

LT,
What a two-bit hypocrite! Not defending Jason, that’s fine. But someone could take your words verbatim and send them to Nathan Deal as a reply to your constant bashing and namecalling of Deal, someone you don’t even know. What a joke you are.

Lady Thinker September 28, 2010 at 6:18 pm

Actually, I do know deal and his son, the Dawson County Superior Court judge appointed by Barnes as I recall. There isn’t a whiff of smoke where Jason is concerned and a raging volcano spewing lava, smoke, and ash where deal and his ethics, book-keeping practices, sweetheart deals, business practices, financial dealings, and taxes are concerned.

No man, woman, or child deserves any form of domestic violence, not even crooked deal. If Jason were guilty, the
woman would have gone to court everytime she was required to go and she chose not to go. Not only that, she let the paperwork expire when she could have renewed it, but again, chose not to do so.

So no, someone could not take my words verbatim and send them to deal because deal’s shady dealings have been in the media for months and Jason hasn’t. Again, not a whiff of smoke with Jason, a volcano with deal.

LoyaltyIsMyHonor September 28, 2010 at 12:02 am

LT, in other words, as long as he represents your view, She had it coming….right?

perimeterprogressive September 27, 2010 at 8:35 pm

Notice the pivot away from the whole “I possibly beat my girlfriend” aspect to just focusing on the name change.

drjay September 28, 2010 at 8:39 am

if you read the PI article, you will see that jason addresses the name change b/c it is presented as a piece of the article almost as signifigant as the arrest itself. jason is poised, kind and bright and will weather this storm…

Tiberius September 27, 2010 at 8:58 pm

I am sure there are many lawyers and vice presidents regretting not jumping into this race.

Let’s see if Sam Teasley continues to do joint fundraising events.

Tiberius September 27, 2010 at 9:01 pm

I’ve always wanted to know, is the bench in western Marietta this weak?

If the state GOP knew about this, surely someone at HQ knew a potential candidate.

AtlConservative September 27, 2010 at 9:15 pm

This whole thing is ridiculous. I agree with Lady Thinker.

TheFacts September 27, 2010 at 9:59 pm

It was only a matter of time before it came out. It’s been rumbling for years and now the facts are public…

Insider Mike September 27, 2010 at 10:01 pm

This will blow over in a few days, Jason. Keep your chin up.

Romegaguy September 27, 2010 at 10:08 pm

Just getting one side of the story (other than the restraining order).

Harry September 27, 2010 at 10:09 pm

The Snuggles story is more entertaining.

On this one I call BS.

Doug Grammer September 27, 2010 at 10:31 pm

I think I first met Jason in 1995. I’ve been fairly close friends with him for several years. The story is true that he had a restraining order against him, but it isn’t true that he did anything to deserve it. I’ve dated a few women and then later questioned their sanity. They agreed to go out with me, so I’ve got start questioning their choices at that point. Most of us have met someone who didn’t turn out to be what they seemed. I’m sorry that Jason had to go through that.

The Dems are panicking if they are sinking to this so soon.

LoyaltyIsMyHonor September 28, 2010 at 12:04 am

Well of course Doug…after all, she had it coming…

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 9:45 am

LIMH,

The joke isn’t funny.

polisavvy September 28, 2010 at 9:54 am

He’s always coming up with witty retorts — only thing is, no one finds them funny but him.

Maurice Atkinson September 27, 2010 at 10:35 pm

Jason Shepherd is one of the most talented and principled individuals I’ve met in Georgia politics. This doesn’t surprise me at the level of gutter the Democrat Party of Georgia will stoop to gut an individuals who get in their path.

None of this surprises me since the top of their ticket attempted to thwart an investigation of one of the most notorious pedophiles in U.S. history.

Rick Day September 27, 2010 at 11:07 pm

er, Maurice…Dick Cheney is NOT a pedophile.

Jason: Politics suck. Run Luke! Get out while you can!

Dino’s: I am disappoint you stoop to Atwater level tactics. Rise up!

Falcons: <3

Bull Moose September 27, 2010 at 10:44 pm

Jason is a top notch individual and it’s unfortunate that the desperation of his opponent resulted in this type of nonsense being dug up.

Having been the victim of a malcontent person myself, I sympathize with Jason. The voters of his district hopefully are smart enough to understand that this was a baseless matter brought by a disgruntled ex-girlfriend.

oompaloompa September 28, 2010 at 1:56 pm

Do you really want to go there Clint? Victim? I think not.

fishtail September 27, 2010 at 11:14 pm

No trial, not even an investigation. Certainly no conviction. From what we know about this, Jason deserves no unjust criticism.

LoyaltyIsMyHonor September 28, 2010 at 12:05 am

I know right? She probably had it coming anyway.

Jeff September 28, 2010 at 8:07 am

So, the McBerry defense? Because those first two sentences are almost verbatim McBerry…

No one is ever caught… until the first time they are.

I’ve lived with horror stories of domestic violence all my life (my grandfather was abusive to my grandmother and her kids, including my father), and it starts SOMEWHERE. While I’m glad Jason has apparently never repeated this (or at least never been caught repeating it), I cannot condone abuse at ALL. I’ve seen in my dad’s eyes what it can do.

Indeed, one of the things I respect most about my own dad was that he was able to break the cycle of abuse. Knowing where he came from and where he is now… I can only hope to be half the man my dad is.

Yet once again, the GAGOP HQ was aware of abuse and hid it. They are truly showing a very scary pattern here.

drjay September 28, 2010 at 8:35 am

there is no “abuse to be aware of” why are you assuming there is, i have known jason for years and he is a stand up guy, has not been secretive about this, and will persevere!

Steve September 28, 2010 at 8:36 am

I noticed something similar to this over at the Howard Dean for Georgia blog, where I probably wasted my time making a couple of posts yesterday evening. A front-pager there posted a rant, at one point referring Jason’s German wife as a “mail-order bride”.

I posted a comment basically saying that this was a wildly off-base portrayal of Jason’s wife, and a low-class move in general. To the poster’s credit, she did back down a bit on that end at least. However, her response as a whole was interesting. Long story short… from the circumstances she basically took it for granted that Mrs. Shepherd was a victim, and trashed her out of love (or something).

I notice that when people have experienced abuse in their own lives, or have a particular affinity with those who have, it severely colors their own perceptions when an accusation is raised. Guilt is presumed by reflex, while the notion than an accusation might be false is difficult or impossible to process.

However, with my law school internship, I did spend last summer in court watching a great many criminal proceedings on this issue. I assure you that QUITE often, the “victims” are not victims, the accusations are entirely without merit, and even the D.A.’s office refuses to move forward on a large number of cases. Google some statistics if you like… almost 40% of reported domestic abuse victims are actually the men. It goes undiscussed, and many cases no doubt go unreported… because there’s a higher social taboo around this, and the physical damage is usually lesser. But it is fact.

I’m truly sorry for whatever might have happened in your past, or the Blog for Democracy poster’s past, that causes either of you to read the Galloway piece and take for granted that an abuse was “hidden” here. However, this conclusion is not supported by the actual piece, and does require an additional layer of prejudice and presumption to be superimposed.

Jeff September 28, 2010 at 8:55 am

“I pushed her off” -Jason Shepherd

Pushing can be anything from a simple slight distance maker to pushing someone so hard they stumble and slam into walls. None of us were there that night, so we don’t know truly how hard that push was. We also don’t know if it was a body push (ie, torso), or if he did in fact have his hands on her neck when he pushed her off. Again, none of us were there, so none of us can truly know. We DO know that a restraining order was issued against Jason because of it though. THAT, there is documentation of.

Steve September 28, 2010 at 9:10 am

None of us were there that night, so we don’t know truly how hard that push was.

Accordingly, an abuse was definitely hidden by the upper echelon of the Republican Party. Jesus, Jeff. Once in awhile you show little flashes of being bright, but your ego exceeds your maturity level by an order of magnitude… and your cookie needs another ten years or so in the oven to be fully-baked.

BTW… I could get a TPO against **you** this very morning if I so chose. It only requires an accusation, not a trial or even so much as a hearing. Then you could conclusively be an abuser too.

Doug Deal September 29, 2010 at 12:56 am

My wife is a prosecutor and from what I hear, Perk is 100% correct.

People say a lot of things in a domestic dispute that they later regret and retract and they also say a lot of things that are clearly not true, are exaggerated and can be complete fabrications.

Jeff, a single charge made by an interested party, absent of a conviction with no pattern of behavior to back it is hard to hold against someone.

Contrast that with Nathan who seems to do nothing but “Shady” Deals. To sum up, he is a man without “convictions”.

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 9:12 am

I agree with your points. It’s a thorny issue, but there is a record of the TPO being issued (and I presume findings of fact by the judge who signed it) AND him attending pre-trial diversion. To say this should be “not open for comment” or removed from here is hypocritical at the least.

bowersville September 28, 2010 at 10:13 am

The finding of fact as you state it is not necessarily the facts that would have been determined by the court had both sides been presented.

A TPO is issued based on the testimony of one, the claimed victim. Other evidence such as police testimony, medical records and photographic evidence may also be presented to the court as evidence to substantiate the claim of domestic violence. But still it’s only one side of the story.

Having attended Prevention of Domestic Violence board meetings and witnessed these trials in court , it is my humble opinion that initially the court will err on the side of caution based on the allegations of the claimed victim and issue a TPO.

Unfortunately, there was no trial court for the findings of fact. The voters will have to decide.

Lady Thinker September 28, 2010 at 6:28 pm

bowersville,

My experience has been similar to yours in that judges seem to routinely err on the side of caution and issue a TPO based on the victim’s word. The suspect is rarely present when testimony is given

I have also seen men who wanted to get TPO’s nearly laughed out of court because there is a small segment of people who believe men can’t be abused and that just isn’t true. I’ve seen men with bitemarks on their backs, necks, arms, chest, and face out of range for them to have bitten themselves.

I have talked to women with broken bones, choke marks on their necks, belt marks on arms, legs, backs, breasts, and stomach areas as well as busted eardrums and black eyes.

Domestic violence is a horrible crime and both sides can be victims but I too have seen “victims” doing the revenge thing because the other person filed for divorce or got a new love interest, or to push for child custody. As I said, this is a horrible crime, but to claim a crime where none exist is a crime also.

macho September 28, 2010 at 9:28 am

It’s a little unfair. Jason said his fiancee abused him and he was the victim of physical abuse. Just because he didn’t choose to call the cops first, shouldn’t mean that we side with his ex-fiancee.

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 9:30 am

Why did the judge issue the TPO? Why did Jason go to (what I assume to be a) domestic violence pre-trial diversion program? Fair questions, IMO. He said he went in “good faith”? What does that mean in the context of a domestic violence restraining order?

Romegaguy September 28, 2010 at 9:42 am

“Jason said his fiancee abused him and he was the victim of physical abuse” what did his fiancee say?

When McBerry was accused of his misdeeds how many of you were willing to give him the chance even before the girl that he “abused” spoke? When Snuggles said it was consensual sex and not a rape did you believe him?

We dont know what really happened. We have read Jason’s side. And now many of us are hearing partially what his ex-fiancee had to say.

macho September 28, 2010 at 10:10 am

His fiance is out of the country to compete in an international Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Thank God for Snuggles that the 3rd party in the three-way backed up his testimony.

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 9:57 am

Jeff,

It’s kind of hard for Jason to repeat something he hasn’t done. The GAGOP was aware of an ALLEGATION of abuse and decided not to comment on it. I’ve never had a restraining order or been arrested, but I have had a psychopath ex-girlfriend say things about me that weren’t true. If that’s never happened to you, it’s happened to someone you know.

According to your logic, every candidate who has been accused of anything should come clean about it. When would they do that? On the day they announce? “Many of my friends have urged me to seek this office despite the fact that I was once arrested for DUI and the charges were dropped?” Get real.

McBerry and Jason have nothing in common unless you count they qualified under the GOP and a restraining order. The difference is McBerry followed up with a puppy offer and Jason went to court to clear his name and his psycho ex didn’t.

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 10:06 am

You don’t go to court to “clear your name” on a TPO. It dissolves after a given time period specified in the order. The time to clear your name is BEFORE the judge finds facts to issue it against you. It’s obvious you don’t mind trashing Jason’s ex by labeling her “psycho,” but your opinion here is extremely subjective and form fitting. Why did Jason attend pre-trial diversion? If there was nothing to it? Why did the Judge sign the Order?

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 10:10 am

Why did the Judge sign the Order?

Because she lied. A judge would rather err on the side of caution and keep people apart and safe than otherwise.

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 10:17 am

Okay. If you say so! I guess you know the truth.

What about him going to pre-trial diversion? Was that to keep anyone safe?

It is what it is, or was, I should say. Sugarcoating and diverting (pardon the pun) don’t make it disappear. The voters can decide.

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 10:19 am

Because I say so? A judge would keep a POSSIBLE abuse situation ongoing?

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 10:20 am

The “if you say so” was directed at your determination she was lying.

FTR, judges don’t sign EVERY request for a TPO.

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 10:30 am

But they do sign most.

Paulding Pundit September 28, 2010 at 12:43 am

Blah.

debbie0040 September 28, 2010 at 6:34 am

Anyone that knows Jason knows that this is not something he did. I hate he is going through this and believe this shows the desperation of the Dems. It sounds like the woman retaliated against Jason because she got upset and I would bet that she has made ridiculous accusations like this this before w ith a different guy. Remember the old saying, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”.

On another note:
Jason has volunteered countless hours for the Georgia GOP and has always been one of the first ones to volunteer whenever needed. I find it disappointing that when he seeks office, they will not assist him. Very disappointing…

Steve September 28, 2010 at 8:10 am

No kidding. I’ve seen the guy get completely stabbed in the back by “fellow” Republicans, receive absolutely zero open support over it… and yet still show up to events smiling, shaking the person’s hand, and carrying the team’s water like it’s nothing.

You definitely have to be a few fries short of a Happy Meal to run for political office, or to deeply love something as soulless as a political party that will never love you back. However, at least anyone who knows the Shepherds realizes that Jason’s fries are of the non-violent sort. It sucks that, right or wrong, he’ll catch stupid comments from morons (e.g. LoyaltyIsMyHonor) for awhile.

Lady Thinker September 28, 2010 at 6:43 pm

Great post Steve.

Max Power September 28, 2010 at 8:07 am

Everyone knows I’m a lefty and I disagree with Jason on 97% of policy matters, but I’ve known him for 5 years and I’m a pretty good judge of character this doesn’t ring true with me.

Having just worked on a DV case where even the DA admitted the “victim” was obviously nuts, I can tell you it does happen. And whatever happened to the presumption of innocence? No this is just a simple smear and yet another reminder of why a lot of good people won’t go into politics.

John Konop September 28, 2010 at 10:30 am

I have known Jason for over 5 years and I agree with Steve and Max. This would be a very hard story for me to believe about Jason. We all know relationships can get very complicated.

And applying logic to a relationship going soar is not fair. My father is a lawyer and many times they advise client to settle fast if you do not want to blow your money. What would of Jason won by going forward other than a large legal bill? If Jason was really an issue in most cases the person repeats the pattern. Jason has been happily married for years with no issues like this.

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 9:08 am

Here’s my problem with it. The judge did issue a temporary protective restraining order based on something. Also, the article says JS went to a pre-trial diversion program for his own reasons. If you haven’t done anything wrong, you don’t waste money and attend such a program. You’d also appeal the TPO against you, IMO. Her not showing up later could be a sign of “letting go” and moving on. I’ve known that to be the situation in similar cases where the ‘situation’ is diffused by the initial TPO and the parties never come back to court over it.

With that said, I don’t know either of these people and won’t judge one’s credibility over the other. That was the judge’s job.

It’s relevant to the ‘character’ of the candidate, and he obviously refutes it wholeheartedly. So be it.

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 10:08 am

inlime,

Let’s say you want a woman out of your house and out of your life. Sure, she can make a sworn statement and get a TPO, so it IS based on something: her word. From your perspective she’s now out of your house and she doesn’t show up for court and the whole thing is dropped. She’s now out of your life. Do you really go the extra steps of appealing a TPO from someone who you have no interest in seeing again? For myself, I would think not.

inlimine September 28, 2010 at 10:11 am

..but I attend pre-trial diversion for domestic violence offenders?

A judge doesn’t have to sign a TPO – it can be contested.

Just an observation from someone not willing to dismiss this type of thing so easily just because of who is involved. I don’t know the guy, but that’s my point.

polisavvy September 28, 2010 at 2:14 pm

In my opinion, some women are just mean, nasty, and vindictive. They will say or do anything to make themselves look better in situations than they actually are. There is nothing worse than a woman scorned. To take the words from the son ‘Polk Salad Annie,’ some women are best described as “wretched, dispiteful, straight-razor totin’ woman.” Perhaps she was one. Further, unless we saw it, how can we pass judgment? I don’t live in a glass house.

gatormathis September 28, 2010 at 10:08 am

Jason Shepherd and his wife are a very sweet and non-imposing couple. They are so huge in stature, it probably takes the two of them together to bring down their end of a see-saw. The trials and tribulations they have suffered as a married couple are amazing, yet include no animosity between them, just bad breaks they have recieved in life, that they are so undeserving of. From their extended honeymoon, to the struggles of getting through law school, while either working or looking for work, somehow when you run across them, they are still vibrantley smiling, and always release with positive comments and upbeat persona. And all the earlier trauma he has endured from his immediate family, divorced parents, name changing, and whatever, I have known nothing of until now, as he isn’t a whiner, and has never presented that as a “crutch” or stepping stone by saying, “Help me because I’m disadvantaged because of so and so.” I guess maybe he figures he isn’t the only child of parents who didn’t make it to their golden anniversary, and is mature enough to recognize that. In spite of those issues, he is goal and purpose driven, and has had more than his share of achievements.
I was introduced to him several years ago by a mutual friend, and saw him on stage when he made a speech that won him his first district chair position, a speech which I can almost recall verbatim today. In that position, some things I was working to achieve, he helped me imensly with, not only him, but his sweet wife, who was his then fiancee, also was instrumental in that endeavor to get my project off the ground. He is a tireless worker for our party, and has been involved with countless campaigns, promotions, and party functions since I have known him, now for several years.
I remember a batchlor friend saying a long time ago, “Be careful who you move into your house, cause one day you might have to “move” em back out, and that is never a pretty sight”. Everytime I see another friend go though the fussin, kickin, screamin, break-up of a relationship scenario, male or female, I think maybe my old fren needs to write a column or teach a short class on his saying.
And I had another fren, an older gentleman give me advice on campaigning one time, his words invaluble. ” As I have watched campaigns over my many years, I have noticed when the man, gets to talking about the other man, I get to thinking about the other man”, he said, “…..so my advice, is, if you are gonna spend your money, and your time, then talk about your self…..and I will be thinking about you”. So simple, yet so true. As I watch campaigns yearly, and even up to this very moment, it rings true.
Ms Kidd says the ploy was a rebuttal towards Jason for “attacking” his opponent. So be it. Both sides need to address their positive attributes, if there are any. Enough of this attack politics, from every campaign, top to bottom.
And I see people above, who have attempted to achieve polictical office, failed, and I guess now, want to attack others who are trying to achieve such, with the “scorched earth” philosphy, when as in Jason’s example, I can imagine in no way has he had an effect on them and their campaign. If you want to know why you’re not the elected one, look in the mirror, re-read your writings, it has nothing to do with Jason Shepherd. Again, Jason gets dumped on just because folks can I guess. Yet he will ride it out, and win, lose, or draw, somehow he will maintain dignity, composure, and will be the first one out the door to help someone, to move a huge cause, or to simply pick up trash, if that is the day’s challenge.
When he mentioned to me that he wanted to run for this seat, I simply told him, it is a lot different being the candidate instead of “helping” the candidate, sometimes it gets crazy out there.
He smiled and simply said, “I know that”, and I wished him well then, as I still do now.
I wish Jason and his sweet wife the best. In life, in politics, and any other endeavor they may strive to achieve.
To put it in terms they may better understand, “May the force be with you…..lol…” Carry on!!!!!

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 10:17 am

“Ms Kidd says the ploy was a rebuttal towards Jason for “attacking” his opponent.”

Do you mean pointing out that the taxpayers bought office furniture for Rep. Johnson which he leased back to the state? Or do you mean pointing out that Rep. Johnson has introduced 4 bills in six years, 2 of which were giving a pay raise to two specific county employees?

polisavvy September 28, 2010 at 10:20 am

Gator, I am so impressed. I didn’t know you had it in you. I don’t know Jason but have only heard goods things about him. I agree with you — people always want to tear into someone else because of their own shortcomings. I don’t understand that mentality, but it’s a reality with a lot of folk. Once again, a very nice tribute to Jason. I wish Jason nothing but the best.

gatormathis September 28, 2010 at 10:48 am

Doug, her words justifying her actions, not mine. Just saying, each person has their “reasons”…and try to explain away their actions. …..not for me to explain their situation, and I wasnt trying to make an excuse for it.

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 11:23 am

gatormathis,

I didn’t take issue with your post. I appreciated it. I just wanted to explain to everyone what attacks Ms, Kidd was referring to.

But I could have been wrong. It could have been Rep. Johnson using franking (mailing) privileges months after session and weeks before his primary. Nothing wrong with the tax payers paying for Rep. Johnson’s primary campaign, is there?

Romegaguy September 28, 2010 at 3:23 pm

Didnt know state legislators had franking privileges.

B Balz September 28, 2010 at 11:15 am

For some reason or another, Mr. Shepard and I don’t usually agree on how to resolve problems. He has always been civil, respectful, and intellectual in our discussions.

Notwithstanding, there is nothing about him, having met him, for me to conclude that this ‘story’ is anything more than a relationship that went toxic, being politically exploited. As Gator Mathis so eloquently describes, Mr. Shepard enjoys a stable relationship now.

Pathetic and lower than pond scum attempt by a lesser candidate. Same type of thing happened to Mr. Jason Carter.

I hope that a smart lawmaker decides to undo the anti-American Bill that allows anonymous political ads, flyers to go out days before an election.

John Konop September 28, 2010 at 11:27 am

BB,

I agree this is not freedom of speech it is exploitation.

…..I hope that a smart lawmaker decides to undo the anti-American Bill that allows anonymous political ads, flyers to go out days before an election…..

Doug Deal September 28, 2010 at 1:38 pm

So John, should we have rounded up the authors of the Federalist, and pre-Revolutionary authors.

We can all chose to ignore speech we do not like, none of us can hear speech that is censored.

B Balz September 28, 2010 at 2:25 pm

I hear you, Doug. The historical tie-in would make sense if the current outcome of the law wasn’t abused.

Recall, a flyer, distributed in a largely Jewish neighborhood, clearly misrepresenting a candidate as being sympathetic to Muslims, in NO WAY, constitutes free speech.

Was there any lack of ‘free speech’ before this? The only ones that like this law are political operatives, which means that any normal person, with a shred of decency, should hate it. (;>)

Doug Deal September 28, 2010 at 5:06 pm

Free speech is to protect the despicable, not the well loved. Otherwise, there would be no need for it.

Anyone who portends to love this country should be able to see that.;-)

B Balz September 28, 2010 at 5:33 pm

You’re absolutely right, defending free speech is a truly an American principle. Regardless of how abhorrent that speech may be, it is legal. We agree.

For example, I have the right to call you everything but a child of G’d in a public forum, with your family and professional folks present. I mean really rip you, profanity, name calling, insults, all off the chart.

And my actions have consequences. You could attack me; either physically or verbally. You could sue me. You could make it your life’s work to destroy me.

You could do any , all, or none of those things, because you KNEW I engaged in my right to ‘free speech’.

An anonymous flyer robs one of the right of recourse. Invoking US history, in this case, is irrelevant, Federalists and others had to be anonymous as they struck against perceived tyranny. Their lives were at stake.

Scurrilous pol ‘hits’ like Mr. Shepard is experiencing are obviously so different, they do not represent what is good, right, or just.

At least Mr. Shepard preempts an anonymous accuser by his actions. What if a ‘liar flyer’ to all voters in his District was sent on October 31st? Would you just say, “Well them’s the breaks of living in a place with that ol’ free speech going on?”

If ‘lies without recourse’ now define free speech, then I preferred the ‘repressed’ system we had without this new law.

Doug Deal September 28, 2010 at 6:51 pm

If we are not sophisticated enough to see these for what they are, we have no business living in a free country.

I am more afraid of a governemnt quashing anonymous speech than some unsettled people spreading things in fliers. Of course, if it is libelous, then by all means make anonymous libelous speech a felony. What in this is libelous and not just bad taste?

polisavvy September 28, 2010 at 11:46 am

Unfortunately, B Balz, this is the type of garbage that invariably comes out when the other candidate can’t find anything else to say about their opponent. It takes someone with a strong stomach to run for any office. Their opponents will try to find out how many times they were put in “time out” while they were in kindergarten and use it against them. I wholeheartedly agree with you that something should be done. It’s unfair to the candidate and terribly misleading to the voters.

Herb September 28, 2010 at 1:16 pm

This district may be the only bright spot for the GOP in the GA House. Shepherd has been open and honest about this, and that will play well with the voters(See Alexander Hamilton, who was open and honest about a sex scandal). He’ll win, while the rest of the party goes up in flames. There will be a Democratic GA House and Governor come 2011. GA State Senate is hopeless.

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 1:29 pm

If there is a Dem GA house I will agree never to post on PP again, if you agree to never post again after you realize (are proven) how foolish your prediction on the house is.

Herb September 29, 2010 at 10:14 am

It is not ridiculous. The party is collapsing from within due to mass corruption that would make the likes of Talmadge, Nixon, and Blago pale as a ghost. The GOP was good until the SoCons and NeoCons hijacked the party. If the corruption problem is not addressed, expect all statewide offices plus the GA House to be swept by Democrats and the Republican party will be headed toward political irrelevancy within 20 years.

Doug Grammer September 29, 2010 at 11:01 am

hahahaha You are a funny guy. However if you want us (me) to treat you seriously, I’ll just challenge you to back up your claims. Name 5 SoCons and 5 NeoCons who have hijacked the GOP. It would take a lot more than 10 to do so, but it’s a place to start from. And just to make sure we are on the same page, give us YOUR definition of SoCons and NeoCons.

Herb September 29, 2010 at 11:26 am

Neo Conservatives:

1. Newt Gingrich
2. Colin Powell
3. George W. Bush
4. Donald Rumsfeld
5. John McCain

Social Conservatives:

1. Randall Terry
2. Nathan Deal
3. Jim DeMint
4. Sharron Angle
5. Sarah Palin

SoCons-1. Those who believe the Federal Government has a place to enforce values that are held as traditional(eg. gay marriage, abortion, and stem cell research). Their political positions on those issues are generally pro-life, anti-gay marriage, and/or anti-stem cell research.
NeoCons- 1. Those who think they can bring democracy through nation building and war. 2. “Conservatives” comfortable with interfering with the free market system to “save” it(eg. Abandoning free market principles to save the free market)

Doug Grammer September 29, 2010 at 12:18 pm

I thought we were discussing the Georgia GOP. You said there would be a GA Dem house. Some of those names aren’t elected (anymore) or don’t hold office in the GOP. You might have well said Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh. Powell and Rumsfeld haven’t been a really involved in almost a decade except for Powell as a small blip on the radar in 2008. It’s easy to pick out the Randal Terry’s of the world, but I would disagree that he has any impact on the GA GOP, the RNC, or any of our federal candidates.

I won’t take issue with your definitions except it might be hard to apply them on a state level. I’ll help you.

SoCons: Gov. Perdue, he prayed for rain.
Rep. Martin Scott, for introducing the Human Life Amendment

Neocon: anyone who supported Certificates Of Need for hospitals.

For the record, I am OK with these and they help us keep the majority in the legislature. Care to try again?

Spacey G September 28, 2010 at 1:58 pm

I was ok with all this, on PI. Until I got to the part about a naked John Oxendine.
http://bit.ly/df9hev

Herb September 28, 2010 at 2:02 pm

THAT IS NASTY!!!

TPNoGa September 28, 2010 at 2:31 pm

Spacey,

I was hoping you would comment. I am curious to hear your opinion on this matter.

I heard this on 750AM this morning on my alarm clock. Not a very uplifting story to begin one’s day.

Glen Ross September 28, 2010 at 2:21 pm

I like how no one knows what happened here, but everyone is talking like they do.

polisavvy September 28, 2010 at 2:28 pm

Yup. So many were hiding behind the curtains and heard and saw it all. I’m amazed at those who live in glass houses. I also love those who pass judgment without the facts. (Said with great sarcasm).

Doug Grammer September 28, 2010 at 5:12 pm

I wasn’t there in the room when it happened, but I’ve talked with Jason about it. He asked for a pre-trial diversion to help get it settled, even though it might have hurt him in court. The TPO was granted ex parte, only one side there and asking for it. He wanted to get his name cleared in court but she never showed upo and it got dropped. The situation seemed to have resolved itself, so he went on with life. That’s as I recall it anyway.

polisavvy September 29, 2010 at 11:04 am

I hope that everything works out for him.

Andre September 29, 2010 at 9:47 am

Jason Shepherd isn’t taken this laying down.

The Marietta Daily Journal is reporting this morning that Shepherd’s attorney is threatening legal action if the comments over at Blog for Democracy aren’t taken down.

Comments on this entry are closed.