Tag Archive for 'politics'

A Conversation with Jane Kidd, Chair, Democratic Party of Georgia

Published
by
Wilson
on December 18, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

It was just one of those days. This conversation with Jane Kidd, Chair of the Democratic Party of Georgia didn’t start out like I expected. My bad.

I am just tired of hearing day after day example after example of the total breach of the public trust by the Republican Party. Sorry, but these guys just don’t have any philosophy of government other than power make right. When they are in the majority, they just don’t care what anyone thinks, including the American public.

I am dealing with the news this week that the Republican child, Kevin Martin, who is Chairman of the FCC, together with his Republican cohorts, is going to ignore 100% of the imput by the public and approve further consolidation of the media in this country into the control of the very few. (It just passed.)

Everyone ought to be disgusted that they are actually debating in Congress giving corporations, the phone companies, immunity from being sued for breaking the law! The only reason they are considering that is because it was the Bush White House that broke the law with them!

It galls me even more to think there are Republicans out there who think this is just fine. Please, give them your rights, but let me keep mine! Barry Goldwater would throw up and he knew what being a Republican really meant, which isn’t something this new breed of power hungry, corrupt, hypocritical, hoodlums knows anything about. The don’t govern, they don’t attempt to govern, they pillage.

Example: An acquaintance of mine told me yesterday that he received a “Dear John” letter from Governor Purdue because he raised a question about the propriety of scheduling a press conference to announce a decision by the board on which he serves, before the board even met to consider the proposal! This is essentially the same thing our dear Governor and Tommie Williams did earlier this year when they removed Sally Bethea from the DNR Board. These boards aren’t there to rubber stamp what the Governor wants. They are there to exercise a degree of independence about what is good or not good for the people of Georgia. It isn’t just that any particular board may “kiss up” to the Governor, and do his bidding (like the Jekyll Island Authority), it is that they cannot even tolerate being asked a question!

Think that is too strong? Wake up everybody! The legislature convenes in less than 3 weeks. Jane and I discussed the probability that the ‘08 legislature is going to be one of the most contentious, and that may be saying a lot. It is going to be contentious because the Republican leadership’s idea of solving problems is that you agree with them and you vote for their proposition. Anything less than that, and you are simply ignored.

When it comes to the issues of water, property tax reform and many others, are the Republican leaders going to welcome imput from the Democrats (who happen to actually represent some Georgians) or experts who may have a different opinion? Probably not, because they have already decided they want and they believe they are right. So why bother with the opinion of others.

Are they going to protect the people of Georgia in resolving the water issue or are they going to mask their true motives and do what ever it takes make sure development in Atlanta continues? Are they going to try and gut the property tax base at the expense of every city and county in this state, because most of these guys own a lot of real estate? Are they going to ever do anything about the tort reform travesty of ‘05 when they declared that Emergency Room physicians couldn’t be sued if they negligently killed you?

Okay, enough! I will shut up and you can listen to the interview which didn’t dwell on this point nearly as long as I have in this post. I refuse to remember the $100,000 tax break Governor Perdue had snuck (or is it sneaked) into a legislative bill.

Enough!

2008 is the year! Throw the bums out!

And don’t forget that Hillary and Obama and Edwards are expected to be in Atlanta on January 30, 2008 for the Democratic Party’s Jefferson-Jackson Dinner at the World Congress Center. Get your tickets and see the next President of the United States.

If there is someone out there that would like to respond to any of these remarks, just send me an email and we will arrange an interview and you can make your case.

 
 Jane Kidd, Chair, Democratic Party of Georgia [25:11m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (523)

Campaign ‘08: Whose Electable? Obama and Giuliani!

Published
by
Wilson
on December 17, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Whose up and whose down? Who said the wrong word? Who has the right strategy. I can’t keep up!

Obama has Oprah, which makes the campaign the Story of Os.
Hillary (and Bill) can’t take cheap shots at Obama, which sounds sexist to me.
Edwards is the only Democrat talking like a Democrat, and can’t get the rest of Iowa to understand that we haven’t elected a sitting Senator (Obama and Hillary) since 1960.

Romney doesn’t think his Mormon faith should matter so that is all the man can talk about.

Giuliani probably can’t believe he is not currently the chosen one, considering his heroism on 5-28.

McCain gets the endorsement of The Des Moines Register and the Boston Globe, but is still apparently so desparate that he asks that Democrat/Independent, bi-polar, sorry excuse for a candidate in ‘00 Joe Lieberman to support him. I had rather be waterboarded. Actually, maybe this is waterboarding.

Huckabee has the faith of a preacher, but is betting on Ed Rollins to save his political soul.

And today, I find out that Ron Paul has raised another record $6 million in one day on the internet. That is like saying that someone other than Halliburton got a contract in Iraq. So what? However, I have to say go Ron Paul. By George, if nothing else, you may prove the power of the internet and people in time for ‘12.

It just seems to me that none of this makes sense. I am having a hard time keeping it straight. What I really think is this: The polls are wrong! I am betting the Iowa Caucus is having as much difficulty as I am. It’s an open race all the way to January 3, 2008. I think Edwards and McCain are the sleepers. I think Iowans are not telling the pollsters the truth. But hey, what do I know?

In this interview Bob Newman of Newman Communications, gives us his take on what is going on.

Bob thinks even though Obama is enjoying a lead in the polls, Clinton is going to edge out a victory in Iowa and New Hampshire. On the Republican side, Huckabee will win Iowa, not New Hampshire and South Carolina doesn’t matter because no preacher is going to be elected president.

The unfortunate candidates are McCain and Edwards, both of whom epitomize the core beliefs of their respective parties, but neither seem to be able to capitalize on the issues. McCain may be paying for his support of Bush and the War. Edwards should be the most electable but doesn’t seem to be captivating the electorate. But don’t count him out.

Georgia seemed to be Fred Thompson’s back yard a few months ago. Now, it appears that Fred is either lazy or old or both, but in any event he is out of it for all practical purposes.

Bob would like to see Obama get the nomination. It would make for an exciting election. His problem is trying to acheive broad appeal to whites and blacks. He is not talking about the typical black issues, so as to avoid being perceived as a Jesse Jackson. Clinton, on the other hand, has inherited Bill’s broad base of support among African Americans, which explains why Obama brought out the Oprah. For this reason, Bob wonders if Obama’s lead in the polls is legitimate and raises the possibilities that the Iowa electorate doesn’t want to say on the record that they aren’t voting for Obama.

All things said, the bottom line is who is the most electable? Bob says: Obama for the Democrats and Gulliani for the Republicans.

And the most important question: Is there any chance a Democrat won’t win in ‘08? Bob answers this question by saying that he thinks there is a chance that Giuliani could win.

If the Democrats can’t win in ‘08, I will just……

 
 Bob Newman, Newman Communications, Public Relations & Political Consultant [29:09m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (351)

What Romney Should Have Said!

Published
by
Wilson
on December 7, 2007
in Blog
. 0 Comments

If Romney’s apology for being a Mormon impressed anyone, I can only assume they don’t live in America. If they do live in America, they need remedial education in Constitution 101. I don’t know if I am more embarrassed for Romney having to make the speech or for America for needing the assurrance.

I think Obama should do the same. I want to make sure that because he is black he doesn’t let some deep-seated resentment about slavery cause him to murder me in my sleep if he becomes Commander-in-Chief.

And I sure as hell want Hillary to swear to heaven that I don’t have to worry about an executive order requiring all first born sons to be castrated. (BTW, I was not a first born.)

Since Romney is running as a Republican, maybe I should direct my disgust at a party whose support for a candidate is apparently influenced by his religious orientation. However, I have little reason to believe that a Mormon candidate would not have to do the same thing had he been born a Democrat.

My sympathy, if any, for Romney is tempered by the fact that he asked for it. I don’t recall when it was or exactly what he said, but I seem to remember some months ago he made a reference to his faith. Well, open the door and let the morons come in. Say hello to all those non-judgmental people that are going to judge what that means. Frankly, when a candidate affirms his faith, I know two things: (1) He is being handled by someone, and (2) I am being manipulated.

I want an honest man, a guy who hasn’t been indicted for taking money under the table. I would probably hold wealth against someone (because I wonder about their ability to understand what “We the People” need), before their religious orientation.

Anyone that can look at a Romney and worry about the extent to which a good, moral man would ask his church what he should do about NAFTA certainly needs to be checked for alien implants.

I am much more concerned about the quiet egomaniac who had a religious experience and now is amazed that God has chosen him to be President. That kind of guy is likely to start a war with God’s enemies. He scares me to death regardless of whether he is a Mormon, a Methodist, a Baptist or whatever.

I sincerely hope that the need for candidates to disclaim undue influence by their church or their faith is a Republican perversion, because I want to vote for a candidate who will tell some folks to go to hell. That is why I won’t vote for a preacher for president or dog catcher. If any of this offends you, …………………………….

Dale Cardwell, Candidate for U. S. Senate, Georgia

Published
by
Wilson
on December 6, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Dale Cardwell, was an investigative reporter with WSB-TV for 12 years. He broke the story about the corruption of Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell. Now, he has decided to investigate politics from the inside and is running for the Democratic nomination for US Senator from Georgia.

Although he is running as a Democrat, Dale hopes to appeal to dissatisfied Republicans as well. In fact, he said that he has received as much support from Republicans as he has from Democrats. He thinks people are feed up with politics as usual and sees ‘08 as having the potential of being a vote against incumbents, like Saxby Chambliss, and in favor of change.

And why would people, Democrats and Republicans alike, vote against Chambliss? Several reasons:

(1) Dale points out that Chambliss has been a willing participant in a Republican majority that is responsible for out of control deficit spending. Chambliss has been a key supporter of the biggest spending presidency in recent memory. For me, Chambliss is a poster child for blind loyalty. Bush could not have made the mess he has were it not for Republican Senators like Saxby Chambliss.

(2) How many people really understand Chambliss’ unrestrained support of anything Bush, such as the total waste in Iraq?

(3) Chambliss teamed up with Teddy Kennedy on “immigration reform” which was nothing more than amnesty and a refusal to secure our borders. Chambliss “saw the light” only when presented with an overwhelming public backlash. Now, Chambliss is trying to make everyone believe he was for securing our borders.

(4) Likewise, Chambliss voted against S-CHIP funding for healthcare for kids, but has no qualms about supporting programs that funnel millions to big agribusinesses, some of his biggest supporters. He voted against healthcare for kids because tobacco companies opposed it due to the fact that it was to be financed with higher taxes on cigarettes. According to Dale, Chambliss is one of the biggest recipients of tobacco money.

Of course, it takes money to run for public office, but Dale believes his name recognition as a reporter with WSB will give him an advantage. He points to the fact that Sonny Perdue was able to defeat the incumbent Roy Barnes.

But Dale is determined to run a campaign supported by everyday Georgiana, not lobbyists and PACs. Dale points out that his average contribution is about $200, while Chambliss’ is $1,600.

Dale is also trying to take advantage of the internet in getting his message out. In addition to his campaign website he has launched “DALETHETRUTH.com” where he uses his investigative abilities to publish videos explaining how Chambliss has sold his soul to giant corporations.

Dale doesn’t believe Georgia is a red state, and points to Paul Braun’s victory in the 10th District Congressional election as evidence that voters don’t want political insiders, like Jim Whitehead, in office. And then, Hank Johnson beat Cynthia McKinney in the 4th Congressional District.

Dale recognizes that the coming battle in America is not rich versus poor, but corporations versus the rest of us. All business is not good business, particularly when it does not take into due consideration the good of the customer and the stockholder. While the stock market has soared, the average American family is making $1000 a year less today than 6 years ago.

Politicians don’t tell us the truth because they want to get re-elected. Dale says he wants to change that. He wants to tell us what we need to know. I am all for that Dale, but I am reminded how fickle we are when it comes to politics. We just prefer to vote for people that tell us what we want to hear, even if they lie. Someday, someday, we will change. Maybe ‘08!

Dale says that the ordinary citizen wants three things from government:

(1) We want to be left alone.

(2) We want government to stay out of our pocket books. He considers himself to be a fiscal conservative and points out that Chambliss has been a key supporter of one of the biggest deficit spending administrations in recent memory.

(3) Illegal immigration is a giant problem. People want our borders secured. They want our laws enforced and employers held accountable for hiring illegal aliens.

 
 Dale Cardwell, Candidate, U. S. Senate GA [29:46m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (286)

Erick Discusses Huckabee and The Republican Field!

Published
by
Wilson
on December 6, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

I woke up to Mike Huckabee this morning. He is all over the place. Polls have him ahead in Iowa, and behind in New Hampshire. He was being accused of letting rapists out of prison to murder innocent people. I thought that was another Mike (Dukakis)! Apparently, some of his boost in the polls is the result of the recent “CNN/YouTube Debate” in which Huckabee correctly answered the most important political question of this campaign: “Do you believe this book?”

So, I called Erick Erickson to find out what the heck is going on with Republicans! The interesting thing is that Erick interpreted the question as being a challenge by a non-believer asking if the candidates were dumb enough to believe the Bible. Curiously, I had exactly the opposite impression: a believer challenging the candidates to state, without qualification, that they believed every word of the Bible. The difference in interpretation is fascinating to me. I wonder who heard it right.

But it really doesn’t matter. The question was one of those that is meaningless in the political arena. I wouldn’t believe a politician that gave the “religiously correct” answer. It was a set-up question, and the issue Erick and I discuss is how did we get to the point that such questions pass for political debate? I get the impression from Erick that a lot of the campaigns were not particularly happy with a lot of the questions. In fact, Erick indicates he is trying to organize another debate with the Republican candidates since the CNN/YouTube debate was such a farce.

Erick thinks CNN picked the wrong questions, wondering why questions were asked on religion, abortion and immigration. According to Erick, these are not the issues that Republicans want to know about. I am glad to hear that, but if this is true, it means two things: (1) some people, maybe a lot of them, don’t know what Republicans want, because I think these are issues a lot of Republicans here in Georgia are interested in, and (2) the evangelical branch of the Republican party is not nearly as influential as it was in previous campaigns.

The point of this discussion was simply that what is passed off as “debates” in this election cycle is pretty much nothing more than entertainment. It seems to me that a lot of the questions that get presented by these “people” moderators, are intentionally selected to make the candidates squirm and hopefully give the sound bite of the night.

Did Huckebee’s answer about religion spur his rise in the polls? Erick points out that Huckabee has a 10 member campaign staff (that’s nationwide, by the way) and in Iowa, Huckabee has spent only about $300,000, compared with Romney’s $7 million. He thinks Huckabee’s popularity is due to the fact that people are tired of insiders. That’s the reason Obama is doing well against Hillary. People want a change.

Erick sees Fred Thompson and John McCain as the only two Republican candidates who have a chance of bridging the diverse interests of the Republican Party, rather than dividing it. Rudy isn’t liked by the social conservatives, Romney isn’t trusted by the evangelicals and Huckabee is running into problems with the fiscal conservatives. Erick doesn’t think Ron Paul has a chance. So, if by the end of Super Tuesday, the nomination is not locked in, McCain or Thompson may be the go to guys for party unity. Interesting, very interesting.

Erick thinks Huckabee’s current rise will be short-lived and he sees it as Rudy-Romney contest. He also thinks people are beginning to realize that were it not for 9-11, Rudy would be just another big-city mayor.

Erick refers to Huckabee as the “passive voice.” I am not entirely sure I understand the meaning, but he gave several examples where Huckabee would make a statement about some problem (CEO compensation, for example), and yet, when asked what he would do about the issue, he seems to back off and say he didn’t mean to imply that government needed to do anything about it.

He also referred to Huckabee as a slick preacher. As for the pardon of the rapist in Arkansas, Erick points out that Huckabee, as Governor, did not have the power to pardon the felon, that was done by the Pardons and Parole Board. The issue is the extent to which Huckabee pushed the Board to take action and pardon the guy. He points out that there was apparently a lot of sympathy generated for the rapist because before he was convicted he was forcibly abducted and castrated by a vigilante group.

As for the Democrats, Erick still thinks Hillary will be the nominee. I am not so sure.

One last point about the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran that indicates Iran gave up its nuclear program several years ago. Last year it reported the opposite: Iran was increasing its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. So what is going on? As Erick points out, neither he, nor anyone else trusts the intelligence community any more. That’s a sad state of affairs, but more troubling is the idea that we went to war in Iraq as a result, at least in part, of flawed intelligence and a few weeks ago, it looked like we were going to war with Iran, again based on flawed intelligence. This is not the way to run a country!

Erick thinks heads will roll, but probably not publically I just wish the President would respond in a manner that indicates he consistently reads the newspapers, even if it is the comic page.

At the end of the interview, I spend a few minutes talking with Lisa Chesser, who won election to the Vidalia City Council on Tuesday. CONGRATULATIONS Lisa!!

 
 Erick Erickson, Republican Strategist [27:17m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (260)

Joe Seehusen, Deputy Campaign Manager, Tells Me About Ron Paul!

Published
by
Wilson
on December 3, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

He raised $4 million in campaign contributions in one day. He’s a Republican Congressman from Texas, but he would end the Iraq War quicker than any Democrat–or Republican. He carries a copy of the US Constitution in his pocket. He answers questions whether you like it or not. He thinks most of the federal agencies are illegal and should be abolished. He believes the States ought to have to fix their own problems, keep their own money and be responsible to their own people, not beholden to the money dispensers in Washington. His concept of government is not what we were taught in 10th grade civics. It is different, maybe even radical, and Ron Paul scares a lot of people because if he were elected and had his way, two things would happen: (1) all those power brokers in and out of government would experience what many average Americans experience everyday: unemployment and uncertainty about paying the mortgage by the 10th of the month, and (2) “we the people” would have to grow up and govern ourselves on a local level and could no longer blame Washington for our problems.

Or at least that is what Joe Seehusen, Deputy Campaign Manager for Ron Paul for President, told me. My thanks to Joe for the interview. While I won’t hold Ron Paul personally responsible for everything and anything Joe said, as Deputy Campaign Manager, I assume his answers reflect generally the attitude and approach of Ron Paul. For that reason, I will talk about Ron Paul, not Joe. Sorry, Joe, but I guess that just goes with the job.

While Ron Paul is elected as a Republican, he is a Libertarian if he is anything. And I don’t say that with any degree of criticism. Trained as an obstetrician, he is known as “Dr. No” because of his consistent votes against things like the “Bridge to NoWhere.”

Ron Paul (and Joe) believes in the Constitution like the religious right believes in the Bible. He is dead serious about restoring the power to the States, and in doing so, gutting the federal government. The problem with Ron Paul is he thinks we Americans are capable of governing ourselves, that instead of griping and moaning and being thankful there is someone else to blame, we could actually deal with most of our problems on a state by state basis.

While Ron Paul has recently gotten a boost, he is still in single digits in the polls. I don’t think he has a chance to win the election, but in many ways I wish he did. If he were in the lead, maybe it would prove to us that we really do want a candidate to tell us the truth, not just what we want to hear.

Take campaign finance. Most of us believe there is too much money in politics. We don’t like the power that lobbyists exert over the people that are supposed to be doing what is best for us. Most of us would probably support laws that restrict the influence of money. Ron Paul, however, thinks differently, radically different. I would say even refreshingly different. Joe would not represent himself as speaking for Ron Paul on this issue, so I have to say this is what Joe thought the answer to the problem is. The answer is to take away the power of the politicians to give the lobbyist what they want. If there are no federal agencies regulating business activities, if Congress isn’t passing budgets to spend trillions of our dollars, the things that lobbyist go to Washington for won’t exist. Now, that is a radically different way to look at the problem.

I feel about Ron Paul like I feel about ending the war in Iraq. I am ready to end the war tomorrow. I agree that I don’t know what would happen as the result of an immediate pullout, but I am willing to deal with whatever that brings rather than staying there another day. I truly wish we, as a nation, had the courage to elect someone like Ron Paul. I think he scares us because his ideas are radical, they are not what we are accustomed to. But, I know we would survive, and we just might be the better for it.

And why could Ron Paul raise $4 million in one day? Because there are a lot of people in this country that are not opposed to revolution, who are not married to the old ideas about government and how it should be run. They are growing in numbers and impatience. It is just a matter of time. It may be 2008. It may be 2012.

We may not elect Ron Paul next year, but I am confident that America is lost unless and until we grasp a radical new concept of government. That new concept may not be 100% Ron Paul or 100% Democrat or 100% Republican, but whatever it is, we need it to survive.

 
 Joe Seehusen, Deputy Campaign Manager, Ron Paul for President [30:31m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (259)

Josh Lanier, Candidate for U.S. Senator from Georgia

Published
by
Wilson
on November 30, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Josh Lanier is a native of Statesboro, GA, but has spent the last few decades in Washington and the world. Born in 1952, he served the Army in Vietnam, and then worked for Herman Talmadge. He also served as a lobbyist for organizations like Cable TV and consulted with small businesses. In 1984 he became a trustee for the Presidential Yacht Trust and helped lead the restoration of the U. S. S. Sequoia. In 1998 he went green and helped start a company that specialized in water and air treatment, through which he gained international experience and business associations. In 2006 he retired and returned home to help take care of his mother. He has been writing a screenplay in his free time, but that may change in January.

Josh recently formed an explorartory committee to help him decide sometime in mid January whether or not he will join the race to become Georgia’s next U. S. Senator. You can watch his video and find out more about what he hopes to offer the people of Georgia.

Josh thinks (and I do too) that the number one problem with politics in America is money. It takes too much to get elected. It is supplied by people who expect something in return and while this influence of money is perfectly legal, it is also perfectly corrupt. Amen brother!

Okay, Josh, so how the hell are you going to get elected? Well, maybe he isn’t, but if he does he has made a committment to do it the right way. The right way is with a “Clean Campaign.”

This is an idea that deserves our closest attention. Most of us gripe about the money in politics. We know it is bad. It corrupts just about everything it touches in Washington. It completely supplants the power of the people who can give $100 to a candidate with the lobbyist who can funnel hundreds of thousands of dollars to a candidate with a few phone calls.

This is how Josh has pledged to run his campaign:

1. Conduct an exploratory period with “seed” donations not to exceed $100.

2. If the high exploratory period objectives are met, the Committee will “qualify” the next step by receiving 500 $5 contributions for individuals in every Congressional District in Georgia, plus 2,000 additional $5 contributions for individuals throughout the state.

3. Once “qualified” the Committee will raise additional funds for the Democratic primary election solely from individuals in amounts not to exceed $100. Under the “Clean Elections Now Act,” these primary funds would be public funds and no additional fundraising would be required.

4. The Committee will abide by strict formulas in the “Fair Elections Now Act” for spending in the primary and general elections.

The “Fair Elections Now Act” isn’t law, not yet anyway. The Act (S. 1285) is a bipartisan effort by Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) to change the way elections are funded. You can find out more about it at the Common Cause website.

So how will the candidates that reject the money compete with the Saxby Chamblisses of this country? They will have a hard time until the Fair Elections Now Act and similar state legislation becomes law. But the truth is, when states require candidates to run clean campaigns, it works. It works in Arizona. And in New Jersey. We need to get it here in Georgia.

My hat is off to Josh that is going to set the example, win, lose or draw!

 
 Josh Lanier, Candidate, U. S. Senate, Georgia [29:19m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (283)

Congressman John Barrow on the Southern Border

Published
by
Wilson
on November 26, 2007
in Podcast
. 1 Comment

Congressionman John Barrow recently went to the Border (you know, the one with Mexico) to find out for himself what was going on. (BTW, this interview aired Thanksgiving Eve, but unfortunately, I just could not get it posted until today.)

John’s group visited El Paso, TX and Tucson, AR. I was encouraged by John’s report. John makes it clear that we need border security. Like most everything else that we think and believe about things we don’t experience personally, the idea that our borders are being crossed by men, women and families that just want a better life is just wrong. Sure, some may just want to come to work (and send the money to Mexico), but there is also the reality that many of these individuals are nothing more than criminals and drug smugglers. While John and his group were present, a guy with $30,000 on his person (drug money) was apprehended, as well as someone wanted for murder and a tractor trailer transporting drugs. Imagine what would be coming into this country if we had “open borders,” which is the ultimate goal of those who want to reform immigration policy, rather than enforce the law.

While John didn’t call it a war, it sure seems to be one. He said that the Border Patrol has the highest rate of fatalities of any law enforcement agency in the USA. Everyday, in border cities like El Paso, the border patrol have rocks thrown at them from the Mexican side of the border as they try to apprehend someone crossing illegally.

John explains that the purpose of a border fence is not to be an absolute barrier that can’t be crossed, but more of a “force multiplier” that increases the border patrol’s available response time. In a border city, such as El Paso, TX, law enforcement only has a few seconds before an illegal alien disappears into the crowd. A fence that takes more time to cross increases the available response time to minutes. Further out, in the middle of nowhere, motion detectors and sensors accomplish the same thing by increasing the response time to hours and even days.

The most amazing thing is that thanks to former Republican Arizona Congressman, Jim Kolbe, there were absolutely no “check points” along the Arizona border with Mexico. You’ve heard of earmarks to put pork in a congressional district, well Kolbe used earmarks to prevent any funds being spent in his district for check points. Incredible! How in the hell can the security policy of this country be controlled by one congressman? At least, Kolbe did not run for re-election in 2006! The idiot.

But, as John points out, border security is not a priority for everyone and there is a lot of feet dragging. On 9-11, there were about 10,000 border patrolmen, now, six years later there are only 15,000. That’s not a lot when you think of how much border there is.

Ultimately, this issue of border security and law enforcement is an economic one. You can continue to be in favor of amnesty and paths to citizenship if you think the issue is that simple, but illegal aliens are a work force that take American jobs. You know, the ones that Ameicans won’t do! Well, John puts that argument into perspective: Americans won’t do them, sure, because you pay a Mexican wage. Pay an American wage and Americans will do it.

They (the NAFTANS) exported our manufacturing plants in the 1990’s. The next target is to cheapen the labor that can’t be exported. Think about it! Mexico does!

 
 John Barrow, Congressman GA-12th [28:15m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (272)

The Jekyll Island Saga Is Taken Up A Notch!

Published
by
Wilson
on November 20, 2007
in Blog
. 2 Comments

If you have been following the interviews concerning the Jekyll Island controversy (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), you may be interested in this.  (BTW:  If you read the post in #3, it begins with a comment that the interview should piss you off. That reference was apparently confusing, particularly if you did not read the entire post. I was not referring to the person interviewed, Wade Shealy. Rather, I was referring to the subject of the interview, a corrupted bid selection process in which Shealy and his company did not appear to have been fairly treated.)

There was an article in the AJC last Friday about a lawsuit filed November 15th in Fulton Superior Court seeking judicial review of the process by which a politically connected developer, Linger Longer, was selected as the Revitalization Partner of the Jekyll Island Authority in the proposed development of 45 acres on Jekyll Island.

The Jekyll Island Revitalization Group (JIRG) and its related company, Jekyll Island Company are the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The defendants are:

JEKYLL ISLAND – STATE PARK AUTHORITY; BENJAMIN G. PORTER, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority; EDWARD E. BOSHEARS, Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority; HOMER DELOACH; MICHAEL D. HODGES; BECKY KELLEY; SYBIL D. LYNN; ROBERT W. KRUEGER; SAMUEL B. KELLETT; STEPHEN B. CROY, Members of the Board of Directors of the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority.

You can read a copy of the petition for judicial review, but these are the basic allegations:

COUNT I: THE PROPOSAL SELECTED BY JIA WAS NOT RESPONSIVE TO RFP 244, IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY JIA, AND IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SELECTED BY JIA.

COUNT II: JIA EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY IN CONSIDERING AND SELECTING THE LINGER LONGER COMMUNITIES PROPOSAL.

COUNT III: JIA VIOLATED ITS DUTIES AS A TRUSTEE.

COUNT IV: JIA VIOLATED THE OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT, AND JIA FAILED TO FAIRLY AND EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE ALLEGED CHANGES IN THE REQUIREMENTS OF RFP 244.

COUNT V: JIA VIOLATED JIRG’S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.

COUNT VI: JIA VIOLATED JIRG’S RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION.

COUNT VII: JIA’S ACTIONS CONSTITUTE A TAKING WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION.

COUNT VIII: INJUNCTION AGAINST FURTHER NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN DEFENDANTS AND LINGER LONGER COMMUNITIES.

In seeking an injunction, Count VIII alleges:

107. JIRG lacks an adequate remedy at law. Unless JIA and Linger Longer Communities are restrained and enjoined from conducting planning and contract negotiations concerning RFP 244, JIRG will suffer irreparable harm in it ability to not only seek and obtain effective judicial review of the Final Decisions, but also to obtain an effective and fair remedy if the Final Decision is reversed.
108. The public has a substantial interest in honest and fair bidding on public projects and decisions concerning requests for proposals. The public interest would likewise suffer immediate and irreparable injury should JIA and Linger Longer Communities not be enjoined from planning and contract negotiations.

And what does JIRG want the Superior Court to do?

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs pray:
(a) that this Court enjoin the following parties from taking any action in furtherance of negotiating a contract for RFP 244:
(i) Linger Longer Communities, including any person or entity that created or submitted any information on behalf of Linger Longer Communities in response to RFP 244, and the directors officers, members, employees, and agents of those entities; and;
(ii) Defendants, and the officers, employees, agents, and those acting in concert with the Jekyll Island – State Park Authority;
(b) that this Court order JIA to transmit the entire record in this matter before JIA to this Court;
(c) that this Court order, adjudge, declare and decree that the Final Decision is void and unenforceable in its entirety;
(i) that this Court order JIA to strike the proposal submitted by Linger Longer Communities and select the proposal submitted by JIRG;
(ii) in the alternative, that this Court order JIA to re-start the bidding process for RFP 244; and
(d) that this Court grant such other, further, plenary, and different relief as may be deemed just and proper.

Injunctions require hearings and I assume there will be a humdinger sometime in the near future.  If a temporary injunction is granted, the development projected will be on hold indefinitely.Â

Jason Pye on the Speaker’s Tax Proposal: Going Down in Flames!

Published
by
Wilson
on November 18, 2007
in Podcast
. 0 Comments

Anyone who keeps up with politics in Georgia, keeps up with JasonPye.com. It’s always a pleasure to talk to Jason and get his take on issues and people.

In this interview, Jason discusses some of the details of Speaker Richardson’s proposal to eliminate the property tax and broaden the sales tax. Jason gives credit to Travis Fain for the details of what goods and services would be taxed under the plan. Jason says there is a need for clarification as to some of the things that will be taxed. For example, the plan would tax temporary lodging over 90 days. Does this refer only to the extended motel or hotel stay, or does it include your apartment rent. For a list of what exemptions will be eliminated, go here.

If the Speaker has his way, we will be paying sales tax on water bills, phone and long distance services, dental services, and haircuts, just to name a few. The state portion of the sales tax we pay is currently 4% and, as I understand it, would remain unchanged.

Of course, one of the most important issues is whether or not enough revenue can be generated from the expansion of the sales tax to make up the revenue lost through the elimination of the property tax. Jason said there was a study by Georgia State University which indicates there would be a significant shortfall. However, the Speaker insists there won’t be a short fall. The question is whether the Speaker’s optimism is merely blind faith or reliable economic analysis.

Jason points out that one of the problems with the Speaker’s plan is the manner in which it is being revealed and promoted. For example, Speaker Richardson has made it apparent that he is not receptive to any criticism of his plan, and generally avoids discussing it in public.

Politically, the unknown consequences of this battle over the Speaker’s tax proposal is the repercussions it will have on Republicans in the ‘08 elections. The elimination of the property tax is a sticky local issue for two reasons: (1) every citizen is likely to jump up and salute the elimination of the property tax, and (2) the local city and county governments oppose its elimination since it is their main source of revenue. There is not, at least as far as Jason and I are aware, any city or county elected officials that support the Speaker’s plan. In fact, Jason said one mayor compared it to the centralized government proposed by Karl Marx. Next year in seeking re-election, Republican representatives are going to have to explain their support for the plan and that could make them vulnerable to significant criticism at home. And if they don’t support the plan, they are subject to criticism as well.

Everyone believes, thinks and assumes that Speaker Richardson controls the House Republicans with an iron rod. Jason thinks he is literally staking his political future on passing this plan. But, when all is said and done, Jason says the plan will go down in flames because it has no chance of passsing the Senate. And maybe that is part of the Speaker’s plan, too! Is this a strategy to build a platform to run for Governor in 2010? Trying to eliminate the property tax may get the vote of a lot of Georgians, regrdless of whether or not it is a bad idea. And what happens if an opponent in the Governor’s race, say one from the Senate or elsewhere, opposed eliminating the property tax?

I was disheatened when our discussion turned to the Atlanta Water Shortage. I thought Jason, smart guy that he is, would jump at my offer to rent my trailer to him when they run out of water in Atlanta. He seems oddly unconcerned, even though I was only charging two grand a week for hot water and 6 baths a day.

Jason says there is no sense of panic, at least not in the county where he lives, Newton. Its reservoir is full. Although no outside water use is allowed, he thinks people, generally, have a degree of blind faith that the problem will get resolved. No one seems to be laying blame for the situation getting this bad–other than whoever caused the drought. On top of that, the Governor is getting favorable approval ratings for the manner in which he is handling the problem.

Jason did say that if the optimism proves unfounded, he is coming to live with me. Fine Jason, but without a paid, advance reservation, the rate goes up!

We ended the interview with a few comments about Ron Paul and the libertarian philosophy. Ron Paul seems to be experiencing a spike in his campaign and support. He is one of those who says what he means and means what he says and to that extent he is refreshing. But then, you ask the next question and find out he thinks the Food and Drug Administration (or a dozen or so other federal agencies) should be eliminated, not reformed, eliminated. Jason seems to think that is a good idea and believes the drug companies and market forces will make sure dangerous drugs don’t stay on the market.

Me? I am not concerned about bad drugs staying on the market. I am concerned about them getting on the market in the first place. Apparently, Jason thinks a few deaths to test a drug out are well worth the costs savings in not having the FDA require proof a drug is safe.

Back to Ron Paul. Jason doesn’t think America is ready to support a strong, independent third party, whether Libertarian or otherwise. Neither do I–right now. But if any man can birth a viable political party, virtually overnight, its George Bush. Rarely, has one man done so much, so wrong, so faithfully.

 
 Jason Pye, Blogger [30:32m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (271)