Jump to content
Paulding.com
Sign in to follow this  
Maddox

Paulette Braddock

Recommended Posts

For what it is worth, I called Susan Breen today and she was a very nice lady and a friend of Paulette's. I conveyed to her my many, many reasons for not supporting Paulette and she was very gracious and respectful of my reasons.

 

What I truly don't understand is why there are people out there voting for her simply "because she votes the way they want her to." My opinion but I think she votes the way she is told to vote. I personally don't want a "puppet" in office, I want someone with innovative ideas and someone that will INTRODUCE significant legislation, who will listen and seek ideas from the citizens they represent.

 

I want someone who will not be distracted by her many, many, many legal issues, tax issues, etc. I want someone who I feel is simply not in the "game" because of the "power" (and I personally wouldn't call it "power"). I want someone who is truly passionate about watching out for the best interests of our citizens, not their own best interests.

 

And as I read earlier today somewhere else, I personally believe there is a good reason Paulette hasn't "yet" started with the negative campaigning and I believe it is because it would be about as hypocritical as it gets. Sure there are candidates with issues; however, Paulette has more "issues" than any political candidate that I have observed in my 32 years of living in Paulding County.

 

I do consider myself a Republcan; however, I have a brain of my own and my brain is telling me that there is no way on earth that I should cast a vote for Paulette Braddock. My opinion, of course.

 

P. S. Not that it really matters but I did give Susan Breen my real name and it is not "Beach Bum". :) It is Cecelia McMichen - wouldn't want anyone to think I am hiding behind a screen name.

Beach Bum

Thank you for posting your true feelings in this race for House District 19.

I do know that this is truly how you feel and was expressed very eloquently

We have been at odds in many political campaigns in Paulding County and probably will not have total agreement in the future, however we do have one thing in common we research the candidates records talk with them and make decisions based on things that can be verified through various different government records.

I did not talk with Susan Breen as you did, but I have talked with Mrs. Braddock on more than one occasion at the various public events concerning her position on different issues and to be quite frank she was not very truthful with me in her responses.

I also want a representative in House District 19 who can restore the dignity to that seat that Paulding County citizens deserve.

It appears that the information provided in this link http://nomorepaulette.com/ can all be verified as being factual.

As far as I am concerned facts are facts whether someone signs the document or not is immaterial to me

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is nice,people standing up for justice,vote for the person not the party. The woman is a criminal plain and simple. Melissa may not have the vast experience that others claim but she abides by the laws of the land. She is very intelegent and one of us,yes the working class citizen.

 

People it's your choice this time but please be an informed voter. Paulette is controled by the dark sides leader Virgina. And her side kick Hollinshack. Not only them but others are lurking too!

 

Just say no to criminals in office on election day.:clapping:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at most of the copies of the documents shown on the website. IF these are forgeries/photoshopped copies of court documents, whoever created them did a damn good job.

 

And you would have to ask yourself why would anyone spend the time and effort to do such a thing for an elective office as insignificant as District 19 in GA.

 

Now, if one were going to create a birth certificate for an alleged birth in Hawaii, now, THAT might take some talent and effort. :closedeyes:

 

If you believe these documents are bogus, you could always go to the courthouse and look through the files and get your own copies for comparison purposes.

 

district 19 is not insignificant - and ms braddock is the worst possible representative we could have. Melissa is a breath of fresh air

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not registered there. I'm just reading about the ones blindly supporting Paulette.

Yea I saw praise thee post there the way I interpret it he is about to be run off that site

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked at the legal document that LisaC provided and this part of the document was very revealing

 

"Defendants there and then be taken into custody and then be incarcerated until such time as they shall purge themselves of their contempt."

 

WTH how can any represemtative allow themselves to get into a situation like this where a federal Judge has to issue such order??

 

I do not want anyone that has to have a court order telling them to pay their debts representing me

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trescapas----No way Jerry Shearin will be the County Admin. I know who has been offered the job. And he has accepted.

 

Thanks for posting that.

 

And I still shake my head at the folks that continue to support her.

 

Must be her connections with the Republican party the reason they can't see past the character of the person.

 

And what is it Tony Crowe says on his website.....'It's About People, Not Politics!'

 

It's ALL about politics, dirty politics. And that includes Heath.

 

Birds of a feather............

 

My vote is going to David Austin and Bill Carruth and if Melissa were in my district, she would get my vote as well.

 

God help Paulding County if Tony Crowe is elected. Look for Shearin to be right back in the thick of things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I saw praise thee post there the way I interpret it he is about to be run off that site

 

 

I wondered if that was Ithy :rofl: He just can't help himself. He's even in some of the pictures with all of the other puppets with Nathan Deal. The republicans are going to clean up all of our morals LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does this J.K. Rogers fellow avoid any flack in this race? Is he that unknown?

 

 

I think he might be the only decent person in the race. I was really hoping Carruth would be disqualified and we could start with some fresh meat. But unfortunately I don't think JK can win with Carruth splitting the vote.

 

To be honest I haven't made up my mind between Carruth and Rodgers. You can bet your ass Bill Heath or Paulette Braddock won't be getting my vote.

 

Tony Crowe won't be getting my vote either but for entirely different reasons. I just don't think he is the best person for the job. Other than that I hear he is a fine person.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he might be the only decent person in the race. I was really hoping Carruth would be disqualified and we could start with some fresh meat. But unfortunately I don't think JK can win with Carruth splitting the vote.

 

To be honest I haven't made up my mind between Carruth and Rodgers. You can bet your ass Bill Heath or Paulette Braddock won't be getting my vote.

 

Tony Crowe won't be getting my vote either but for entirely different reasons. I just don't think he is the best person for the job. Other than that I hear he is a fine person.

 

I've met Rogers - he's a stand up guy with a lot of great ideas and he's willing to listen to more (and listen to everyone, not just those with $$ or power). He has been making a great effort to get out and meet folks, if you get the chance to talk to him, I think you will be impressed.

 

I wondered if that was Ithy :rofl: He just can't help himself. He's even in some of the pictures with all of the other puppets with Nathan Deal. The republicans are going to clean up all of our morals LOL

 

Is it the same guy? If so, I'm not impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've met Rogers - he's a stand up guy with a lot of great ideas and he's willing to listen to more (and listen to everyone, not just those with $$ or power). He has been making a great effort to get out and meet folks, if you get the chance to talk to him, I think you will be impressed.

 

 

Look, he is running against Heath and Carruth. Wouldn't take much to impress me. But if I run into him I would like to hear what he has to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, he is running against Heath and Carruth. Wouldn't take much to impress me. But if I run into him I would like to hear what he has to say.

 

:rofl: Good point!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he might be the only decent person in the race. I was really hoping Carruth would be disqualified and we could start with some fresh meat. But unfortunately I don't think JK can win with Carruth splitting the vote.

 

To be honest I haven't made up my mind between Carruth and Rodgers. You can bet your ass Bill Heath or Paulette Braddock won't be getting my vote.

 

Tony Crowe won't be getting my vote either but for entirely different reasons. I just don't think he is the best person for the job. Other than that I hear he is a fine person.

 

I believe that I agree with everything you have mentioned in this post, except I know that I am voting for JK Rodgers. He appears to me to really care about the people (all of the people), not just the wealthy.

 

Glad to know that there are some people out here in Paulding that feel exactly the way I do. :clapping:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I saw praise thee post there the way I interpret it he is about to be run off that site

 

 

Uh...NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crap I ain't got time to read this site and the other site right now. Will someone please take notes and let me know what happens before it all goes POOF?

 

BTW, I went to school with Paulette and I am friends with her on FB and I believe all of this to be true as the evidence shows it to be. She won't be getting my vote. ;)

 

Yea I saw praise thee post there the way I interpret it he is about to be run off that site

 

 

Yeah. He gets that a lot.

 

Well....he is a character.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, imagine this...I just checked J.K. Rogers' website and he has a JOB. You know, not like real estate developer or gov't contractor, but a real job with the city of Marietta. That gets my vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crap I ain't got time to read this site and the other site right now. Will someone please take notes and let me know what happens before it all goes POOF?

 

BTW, I went to school with Paulette and I am friends with her on FB and I believe all of this to be true as the evidence shows it to be. She won't be getting my vote. ;)

 

 

 

 

Yeah. He gets that a lot.

 

Well....he is a character.......

Don't be surprised if your friends list drops by one after this.... :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, imagine this...I just checked J.K. Rogers' website and he has a JOB. You know, not like real estate developer or gov't contractor, but a real job with the city of Marietta. That gets my vote.

 

 

I like that too. And his daddy didn't have to create it for him. That is impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, he is running against Heath and Carruth. Wouldn't take much to impress me. But if I run into him I would like to hear what he has to say.

 

feelip, you need to make a point of speaking to Rogers about his plans. As a businessman yourself, you will recognize the good and the bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does this J.K. Rogers fellow avoid any flack in this race? Is he that unknown?

 

You know the old saying about laying around with dogs? All you get is fleas.... I think he's trying to stay above all the nonsense and discuss the problems and issues. I don't see him as trying to impose HIS solutions and ideas onto the citizens. Rather, I see him as identifying a few problems, asking US to discuss solutions and to present other things to the open forum for discussion and consensus. I think that idea is pretty novel.

 

I know JK personally. He is a energetic, straightforward, open man. I don't for one second subscribe to Pubby's nonsensical theory that JK is in this to take a dive or as a Heath plant, or whatever the tale du jour might be.

 

Let me ask you a question: Do you think that anyone could hold a sworn LEO post with Cobb Courts, be a Major in the US Army Reserve with a responsibility for some critical staffing/recruiting issues, could have any serious personal issues nagging him? Like for example any Federal liens or arrest records or unpaid lawsuits, etc.? I think if you look at the jobs he holds and the character requirements to maintain those positions, you have your answer. I doubt you will find any skeletons in JK's closet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know the old saying about laying around with dogs? All you get is fleas.... I think he's trying to stay above all the nonsense and discuss the problems and issues. I don't see him as trying to impose HIS solutions and ideas onto the citizens. Rather, I see him as identifying a few problems, asking US to discuss solutions and to present other things to the open forum for discussion and consensus. I think that idea is pretty novel.

 

I know JK personally. He is a energetic, straightforward, open man. I don't for one second subscribe to Pubby's nonsensical theory that JK is in this to take a dive or as a Heath plant, or whatever the tale du jour might be.

 

Let me ask you a question: Do you think that anyone could hold a sworn LEO post with Cobb Courts, be a Major in the US Army Reserve with a responsibility for some critical staffing/recruiting issues, could have any serious personal issues nagging him? Like for example any Federal liens or arrest records or unpaid lawsuits, etc.? I think if you look at the jobs he holds and the character requirements to maintain those positions, you have your answer. I doubt you will find any skeletons in JK's closet.

 

Glassdogs:

 

Basically, I like JK. I do find him energetic and as straighforward as anyone in politics.

 

That innate honesty, his imposing a limit of $1 for contributions and the fact that his bright enough to know that his campaign literally has no chance - especially in a district as large as a Senate district (170,000 residents) is the proof that he's taking a dive, hoping primarily to split the Paulding vote giving Heath a better chance in a runoff.

 

The other thing is that without Rogers in the race, Heath's goose is cooked. In 2010 he lost his home county and also Polk by a factor of 2.5 to 1. Any Paulding candidate running head to head with Heath in the main primary race - assuming they even lose by a close margin, would still win because the folks in Polk and Haralson have had enough.

 

The only way for Heath to get by the main primary tally on July 31 is to have a proven vote getter split the Paulding vote ... but not do so well that it puts him out of the race.

 

If JK had made any real effort ... bought signs, bought ads and worked the campaign full time ... the runoff might well have been between Rogers and Carruth with Heath road kill.

 

But without money - and you don't get money at $1.00 a contribution - there are no yard signs, there are no newspaper ads, no website ads and NO direct mail. JK will do well with those whom he has put forth his personal charm but that is not going to make much of a dent in the 160-170,000 residents of the district. To most, he will be a virtual unknown except for that good number of folks who voted for him four years ago in the race for sheriff.

 

But a lot of them have forgotten and the race, in direct mail, online and in the newspapers and streets is framed as Carruth v Heath. Rogers will be lucky to get 8-10 percent of the vote but that slice just may be big enough to force a runoff.

 

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, Glassdogs... it is a duck. And in this race, JK is the duck put in the race to force a runoff.

 

pubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glassdogs:

 

Basically, I like JK. I do find him energetic and as straighforward as anyone in politics.

 

That innate honesty, his imposing a limit of $1 for contributions and the fact that his bright enough to know that his campaign literally has no chance - especially in a district as large as a Senate district (170,000 residents) is the proof PUBBY'S OPINION that he's taking a dive, hoping primarily to split the Paulding vote giving Heath a better chance in a runoff.

 

The other thing is that without Rogers in the race, Heath's goose is cooked. In 2010 he lost his home county and also Polk by a factor of 2.5 to 1. Any Paulding candidate running head to head with Heath in the main primary race - assuming they even lose by a close margin, would still win because the folks in Polk and Haralson have had enough.

 

The only way for Heath to get by the main primary tally on July 31 is to have a proven vote getter split the Paulding vote ... but not do so well that it puts him out of the race.

 

If JK had made any real effort ... bought signs, bought ads and worked the campaign full time ... the runoff might well have been between Rogers and Carruth with Heath road kill.

 

But without money - and you don't get money at $1.00 a contribution - there are no yard signs, there are no newspaper ads, no website ads and NO direct mail. JK will do well with those whom he has put forth his personal charm but that is not going to make much of a dent in the 160-170,000 residents of the district. To most, he will be a virtual unknown except for that good number of folks who voted for him four years ago in the race for sheriff.

 

But a lot of them have forgotten and the race, in direct mail, online and in the newspapers and streets is framed as Carruth v Heath. Rogers will be lucky to get 8-10 percent of the vote but that slice just may be big enough to force a runoff.

 

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, Glassdogs... it is a duck. And in this race, JK is the duck put in the race to force a runoff.

 

pubby

 

Fixed it for you.^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, Pat, I sincerely hope you are wrong again. As you usually are on political questions. :pardon:

 

I agree with you that his campaign finance model is a bit unconventional. I personally have spoken to JK about this and expressed the same concern about no $ that you point out. His conviction is that it's time for the people to take the government back from the special interests. I personally wouldn't undertake a campaign without financial backing, but JK is a bright guy and he has the cjhones to pull it off.

 

Jason and I are old friends. I spoke to him Monday night and asked him directly if he was in any way a shill or plant in this contest. He emphatically said he was in this to WIN, not to dilute the vote. I do not believe he would ever lie to me. If he were in the race for purposes like you suggest, he would have evaded the question or given me a non-answer.

 

Edited to add:

 

It is my understanding and belief that Mr. Rogers basically funded his 2008 Sheriff campaign personally. I think he may have had a few contributors (myself, for one), but nothing behind him like what the establishment poured into Gulledges's campaign.

 

He mentioned some upcoming advertising plans, so he's not totally shoestring-ing it.

.

Edited by Glassdogs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does this J.K. Rogers fellow avoid any flack in this race? Is he that unknown?

 

He is not totally unknown, if you have watched debates, the lack of flack is a way for other candidates to dismiss the underdog by patronizing him.

They focus on each other while placing a tolerant expression upon their faces while the underdog delivers his or her nonsense that they only have tolerate temporarily.

 

JK is more in the running now and is a very serious contender to this race, the time is now for people to scrutinize him carefully.

Sometimes an underdog is a underdog for very good reason and sometimes it is a lack of funds especially in a state where incumbents are automatically written the checks.

I suggest people use the phone and email to assess the candidates.

 

They are either available and listening to the people that vote or they are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fixed it for you.^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, Pat, I sincerely hope you are wrong again. As you usually are on political questions. :pardon:

 

I agree with you that his campaign finance model is a bit unconventional. I personally have spoken to JK about this and expressed the same concern about no $$ that you point out. His conviction is that it's time for the people to take the government back from the special interests. I personally wouldn't undertake a campaign without financial backing, but JK is a bright guy and he has the cjhones to pull it off.

 

Jason and I are old friends. I spoke to him Monday night and asked him directly if he was in any way a shill or plant in this contest. He emphatically said he was in this to WIN, not to dilute the vote. I do not believe he would ever lie to me. If he were in the race for purposes like you suggest, he would have evaded the question or given me a non-answer.

 

.

 

Actually, his answer is totally consistent with his position and like you said, he's a bright guy ... bright enough to know that the best earned media campaign will fall short of victory in a contest with well funded campaigns in a larger district (like the Senate district) 999 out of a 1000 times. If he were serious about winning, he'd have run for a house seat where the odds would be better - like falling short 994 times out of a 1000.

 

Regardless, actions speak louder than words and the almost certain result is that he will dilute the vote and will possibly force a runoff among the front-runners.

 

Obviously there is no hard evidence that he chose to do this at the prodding of another. As such, I understand your rejection of the circumstantial evidence this was a setup with a payoff. And I'll concede that he may figure the $500 filing fee and incidental expense of running the campaign, only partly offset by the $1.00 contributions he collects, represents a worthwhile investment of time and effort.

 

I would like to think that, frankly.

 

pubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, his answer is totally consistent with his position and like you said, he's a bright guy ... bright enough to know that the best earned media campaign will fall short of victory in a contest with well funded campaigns in a larger district (like the Senate district) 999 out of a 1000 times. If he were serious about winning, he'd have run for a house seat where the odds would be better - like falling short 994 times out of a 1000.

 

Regardless, actions speak louder than words and the almost certain result is that he will dilute the vote and will possibly force a runoff among the front-runners.

 

Obviously there is no hard evidence that he chose to do this at the prodding of another. As such, I understand your rejection of the circumstantial evidence this was a setup with a payoff. And I'll concede that he may figure the $500 filing fee and incidental expense of running the campaign, only partly offset by the $1.00 contributions he collects, represents a worthwhile investment of time and effort.

 

I would like to think that, frankly.

 

pubby

 

Of course, as an old advertising guy, you'd never understand the concept of social networking and personal interaction. It's natural for you to think paid advertising is the only way into a voter's consciousness. But after about the second ad in the mailbox and another annoying banner ad flashing on their monitor, the typical voter's eyes glaze over and it's done with. Hence the shock value of the "warrants" and the "website". They weren't pretty, but they went to the top of the chatter charts. It remains to be seen if the results are what the perps planned.

 

If JK pulls this low budget coup off, there's going to be a LOT of people wanting to know how it happened. Three years or so ago, all the wise political pundits were poo-pooing the Tea Party. Grover Norquist was a no-body. Remember? Now, who is one of the most powerful "endorsers" out there?

 

Just gotta wonder if the underlying anger at politicians all across the country isn't going to manifest itself in a way that will benefit candidates like JK.

 

Last election season, you ran some polls, and they (as I recall) fairly matched the actual results within a few % pts. How about doing that again for all the local contests? Let's see how representative P.com "voters" are to the districts. May I suggest that you lock the poll so that when each member of the site votes, they are locked out. One member, one vote. This ain't Chicago and toombstoones don't get to vote. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this mean that Michael James is a plant too? :pardon:

 

JK is a great guy - I've been nothing short of impressed with him. If Heath planted him, then Heath needs to be worried (as does Carruth).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, his answer is totally consistent with his position and like you said, he's a bright guy ... bright enough to know that the best earned media campaign will fall short of victory in a contest with well funded campaigns in a larger district (like the Senate district) 999 out of a 1000 times. If he were serious about winning, he'd have run for a house seat where the odds would be better - like falling short 994 times out of a 1000.

 

Regardless, actions speak louder than words and the almost certain result is that he will dilute the vote and will possibly force a runoff among the front-runners.

 

Obviously there is no hard evidence that he chose to do this at the prodding of another. As such, I understand your rejection of the circumstantial evidence this was a setup with a payoff. And I'll concede that he may figure the $500 filing fee and incidental expense of running the campaign, only partly offset by the $1.00 contributions he collects, represents a worthwhile investment of time and effort.

 

I would like to think that, frankly.

 

pubby

 

 

Dang pubby y'all had him in your office asking him questions did you ask him if this was the reason he was running? i got a phone call from him the other day... it was robo call, an i hate those things, if you can not call me and give me a chance to ask questions then do not call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, as an old advertising guy, you'd never understand the concept of social networking and personal interaction. It's natural for you to think paid advertising is the only way into a voter's consciousness. But after about the second ad in the mailbox and another annoying banner ad flashing on their monitor, the typical voter's eyes glaze over and it's done with. Hence the shock value of the "warrants" and the "website". They weren't pretty, but they went to the top of the chatter charts. It remains to be seen if the results are what the perps planned.

 

If JK pulls this low budget coup off, there's going to be a LOT of people wanting to know how it happened. Three years or so ago, all the wise political pundits were poo-pooing the Tea Party. Grover Norquist was a no-body. Remember? Now, who is one of the most powerful "endorsers" out there?

 

Just gotta wonder if the underlying anger at politicians all across the country isn't going to manifest itself in a way that will benefit candidates like JK.

 

Last election season, you ran some polls, and they (as I recall) fairly matched the actual results within a few % pts. How about doing that again for all the local contests? Let's see how representative P.com "voters" are to the districts. May I suggest that you lock the poll so that when each member of the site votes, they are locked out. One member, one vote. This ain't Chicago and toombstoones don't get to vote. LOL

 

 

Oh I know a bit about social networking and the Internet ;) ... I mean I tried to start Paulding.com on this model in 2000 but there just weren't enough folks on the Net in Paulding to make it work.

 

Beyond that, I also understand social nets and voting demographics. A social net only approach is still going to fall short if a sole media strategy. Did you know the majority of voters are older than age 49 ... and it is getting worse largely because the baby boom is getting older.

 

But as this topic is supposed to be about Paulette and not Jason, let me mention that I don't think Michael James is a plant either. (Fact is, other than some encouragement as to the senate race as opposed to another office, JK could have been unaware of the role he was playing for the benefit of the incumbent.)

 

Finally, the news... or at least a rumor that seems to have some legs.

 

It seems that the challenges to Ms. Braddock's issues has been raised to the point where her patrons in state government are concerned.

 

One of the rumors I've heard is that the Secretary of State has authority to reject the results of the challenge which was dismissed on the basis of a technicality. Indeed, it is quite possible, we understand, that the Secy. of State will order a new hearing in which evidence is reviewed, presumably with the date of qualification being the point of determining qualification.

 

The result of that would be that her candidacy would be judged invalid and if she won the election, she would be declared ineligible and a special election would be called.

 

This might be considered a silly dream by Ms. Braddock's detractors but because the violations are 'constitutional' in nature, letting the issue pass may be a bit embarrassing for those holding state-wide office.

 

Time will tell.

 

pubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I know a bit about social networking and the Internet ;) ... I mean I tried to start Paulding.com on this model in 2000 but there just weren't enough folks on the Net in Paulding to make it work.

 

Beyond that, I also understand social nets and voting demographics. A social net only approach is still going to fall short if a sole media strategy. Did you know the majority of voters are older than age 49 ... and it is getting worse largely because the baby boom is getting older.

 

But as this topic is supposed to be about Paulette and not Jason, let me mention that I don't think Michael James is a plant either. (Fact is, other than some encouragement as to the senate race as opposed to another office, JK could have been unaware of the role he was playing for the benefit of the incumbent.)

 

Finally, the news... or at least a rumor that seems to have some legs.

 

It seems that the challenges to Ms. Braddock's issues has been raised to the point where her patrons in state government are concerned.

 

One of the rumors I've heard is that the Secretary of State has authority to reject the results of the challenge which was dismissed on the basis of a technicality. Indeed, it is quite possible, we understand, that the Secy. of State will order a new hearing in which evidence is reviewed, presumably with the date of qualification being the point of determining qualification.

 

The result of that would be that her candidacy would be judged invalid and if she won the election, she would be declared ineligible and a special election would be called.

 

This might be considered a silly dream by Ms. Braddock's detractors but because the violations are 'constitutional' in nature, letting the issue pass may be a bit embarrassing for those holding state-wide office.

Time will tell.

 

pubby

 

And it should be embarrassing for those holding state-wide office and it should be embarrassing to Braddock's supporters. My opinion, of course.

 

For goodness sake people - we are talking about Braddock not paying her federal and state income taxes as well as other taxes. Not to mention the other "numerous" issues.

 

How can Braddock with a clear conscience draw a paycheck, which the tax paying citizens fund, when she has delinquent federal and state income taxes of her own? Really....how can she?

 

Can anyone out there justify why this is acceptable?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it should be embarrassing for those holding state-wide office and it should be embarrassing to Braddock's supporters. My opinion, of course.

 

For goodness sake people - we are talking about Braddock not paying her federal and state income taxes as well as other taxes. Not to mention the other "numerous" issues.

 

How can Braddock with a clear conscience draw a paycheck, which the tax paying citizens fund, when she has delinquent federal and state income taxes of her own? Really....how can she?

 

Can anyone out there justify why this is acceptable?

 

BB:

 

The best I could come up with is because, well, she's so special, you know like royalty used to be before the revolution.

 

pubby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jason Rogers has called me 3x today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard on the news tonight there will be a state level investigation into the Republican PAC.

 

Seems they set up some sort of committee to funnel the money through to the incumbent lawmakers.

You know like Heath. His name was on the list.

 

Imagine that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I know a bit about social networking and the Internet ;) ... I mean I tried to start Paulding.com on this model in 2000 but there just weren't enough folks on the Net in Paulding to make it work.

 

Beyond that, I also understand social nets and voting demographics. A social net only approach is still going to fall short if a sole media strategy. Did you know the majority of voters are older than age 49 ... and it is getting worse largely because the baby boom is getting older.

 

But as this topic is supposed to be about Paulette and not Jason, let me mention that I don't think Michael James is a plant either. (Fact is, other than some encouragement as to the senate race as opposed to another office, JK could have been unaware of the role he was playing for the benefit of the incumbent.)

 

Finally, the news... or at least a rumor that seems to have some legs.

 

It seems that the challenges to Ms. Braddock's issues has been raised to the point where her patrons in state government are concerned.

 

One of the rumors I've heard is that the Secretary of State has authority to reject the results of the challenge which was dismissed on the basis of a technicality. Indeed, it is quite possible, we understand, that the Secy. of State will order a new hearing in which evidence is reviewed, presumably with the date of qualification being the point of determining qualification.

 

The result of that would be that her candidacy would be judged invalid and if she won the election, she would be declared ineligible and a special election would be called.

 

This might be considered a silly dream by Ms. Braddock's detractors but because the violations are 'constitutional' in nature, letting the issue pass may be a bit embarrassing for those holding state-wide office.

 

Time will tell.

 

pubby

 

REALLY????

 

I have been at work all day and just got back into the loop. So there is a chance I may get to actually present my case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...