Mason Rountree
-
Content Count
784 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Mason Rountree
-
-
Still waiting on a several uploadings. Absentee ballots are done (454 total) and provisional ballots are done, and the gross numbers did not change from tuesday night. Still don't know percentages. I would guess it will take another 15 minutes.
-
I am at election board right now following recount in paulding election board. Final results will be reported in about 20 minutes. The finall certified results according to deidre Holden were 2,980 for Valbuena and 2,973 for Collins, which was posted around 12:25 pm today. There were 3 accepted provisional ballots (2 went to Collins and 1 to Valbuena) which made the difference of only 7 votes between them. Both Valbuena and Collins are here along with election board and county attorney. I will report final tally as soon as the recount is done.
-
And when I didn't think the Heath campaign could get any more desperate, the same "incumbent protection program" created with heath's assistance that sent 6 mailers earlier in the race just sent another one. According to the candidate disclosures, the senate PAC which funded the program (and has now paid for 7 mailers in this race) also donated $2500 to Heath as well. But Mr. Heath proclaimed at the debate that we don't even need ethics laws for honest politicians like him.
-
JK had a lot to say about this race. Below is a condensed version of his Facebook Statement on August 15, 2012 (my emphasis supplied):
“Some people have asked me how I feel about the State Senate District 31 race. I have known Senator Heath for several years... I met with Senator Heath briefly on Saturday and met with Bill Carruth yesterday. I have friends on both sides of this race, so, I felt like the best thing for me to do is just put the facts out there, help inform the people and let them make their best decision on who to choose. That is until tonight. When I came home I received yet another set of mail outs. This set accused Carruth of being a supporter of President Obama... I was on the sideline until now. What this mailout does is take the remotest of truths and spins it to where it looks like a solid fact...Why does a Senator have to resort to this type of behavior? I don't know, but, this is very disappointing and it has really turned me off to Senator Heath...I have seen the same tactic over and over again.. the likelihood of a former candidate that ran against him a few years ago, opening sex shoppes in Dallas is like President Bush doing so. If this is Senator Heaths idea of honest and ethical I disagree and I really wonder if political power has confused his judgment. This is not the man that I met years ago... This is wrong. If you think another candidate has done something wrong put it out there in a factual manner, not a distorted way....To my friends that may get mad I am sorry, but, I had to say something. This is just not accurate.
Your friend,
JK Rogers”
-
You are so smart you can do accroynms! I would think you would be able to see through Carruths bs lets see Bull Sheez!!! Thats right!!! Good Luck with all you go for and keep drinking!!!
Not to point out the obvious, but WTH is not an "acronym".
***Edited to add that noahsdad is a good guy. I have known him for around 10 years and we often agree. Not on this one though...didn't know he was a heathen and am surprised.
-
1
-
-
Ha Ha Mason only you would think that!! Romney has much more experience than Carruth!!
If you want to get down with it Jeff has much more experience than Sam, Jeff was the Coroner here long before Sam was! So your wrong there!!
Don't get me wrong. I like Jeff. So if Carruth had experience running the county and serving as the chairman of the Georgia department of natural resources, I guess that does not provide enough experience to be a state senator? That's ridiculous Jeremy and you know it. Carruth is far more qualified to be state senator than Heath ever was before he took office.
And what did we get with heath's "experience"? I like to call it the "What The Hell?" or WTH agenda of bill heath.
W: is the Water issue. Heath lost the reservoir in Haralson and did nothing for paulding's reservoir except try to take credit with a press release. If he couldn't get the Haralson reservoir done where he lives, what makes you think he can get it done in paulding?
T: is the Tax issue. Heath sponsored the TSPLOST bill which would have been the largest tax increase in Georgia's history.
H: is Heath's opposition to the funding of the HOPE scholarship and his statement that "if given the chance" he would vote against the HOPE.
-
3
-
-
And I guess you supported Sam Clark for coroner too because the other candidate would have been a newbie. Darn, that Kool-aid must be spiked.
-
Like you added so much more? Blah blah blah that is all I read... it is like a broken record player on here with all of yall!!! ...
Carruth will be constrained by the same things that Heath is and so on and so on, in four years it will be the same old song. You folks will be on to the next big politician because Carruth will not be able to produce like you all think they should! We will repeat history again and again on here! Why? Because in your minds they can go in the Gold Dome and say heres what we want and here is what I want to change and Boom it is done! Wrong when you are a newbie you don't get crap you have to work your way up the ranks and that takes years! So go on and drink the Kool aid and believe that Carruth is going to change so much for ya!! But first he has to win and I don't see it happening!!
With that kind of reasoning, I guess you are supporting Obama for president since he has experience and Romney has never been president.
-
Was Paulette at the pep rally cheering on her hero?
No, Rep. Braddock was not there. No one from the Legislature was there, but there were a lot of Haralson County car tags there.
-
Following up on my prior post on report of the Heath pep rally last night. On the TSPLOST, will someone please ask Sen. Heath if the TSPLOST bill that he sponsored had been a 10% tax instead of 1% tax, would he have supported allowing voters to choose or would he have withheld his sponsorship of it? I have been unable to get any response from the campaign on this question.
Heath also misrepresented his prior position on the ethics pledge. First, he claimed that Common Cause is some rabid liberal organization when, in fact, it is a bipartisan organization with the Executive Director being a Republican. He also criticized the 88% of voters who supported the Republican ballot question to limit lobbyist gifts to $100 as he suggested it was some liberal Agenda 21 propaganda (my words). He claimed that he would support "meaningful" ethics reform but said that he opposed the ballot question presumably because it was meaningless. He then read and signed a pledge that he would introduce a bill at the next Legislature with almost the identical language contained in the ballot question. It is quite obvious that he read the "tea party leaves" on this issue (as it is a tea party priority) and flip-flopped on the issue, just as he flip-flopped on the TSPLOST bill.
On the stalking issue, Heath admitted again driving by Carruth's house late at night at Christmas and Easter. Didn't he have something more important to do on those days? He said he saw the lights on at Carruth's house. He also said that Carruth's daughter sent him a friend's request on FB and that he never followed her on FB except to say Happy Birthday. As a side note, I also understand that Carruth and Heath are friends on FB.
In all, Heath spent around 12 minutes defending those "false attacks" from Carruth, which actually did more to reinforce the legitimacy of the attacks than undermine them. He then spent around 5 minutes discussing the judgment and lawsuits against Carruth, along with the tax lien issues.
I do think that Heath was more articulate than I have ever heard him, and his wife was very polite to me as she always is. Overall, it is clear that this was a political gimmick and in no way was there any real attempt to negotiate the terms of the debate, venue, moderator, time, date, etc. I am sure that we will have Heathens posting photos of Carruth's empty seat with some silly comment about him not being present and ducking the public. This event was nothing more than an orchestrated charade. ONE FINAL NOTE: at the end of the debate, the moderator stated that Heath would NOT take any questions from the public but that questions could be sent to him via email. How ridiculous. Also, after the pep rally, I approached the moderator, and he admitted that he had not been asked to "moderate" until that day.
-
I attended and here is my report of the Pep Rally..er..debate. Within the first 60 seconds, Sen. Heath made his first misrepresentation. Recall that in his press release/challenge to Carruth, he stated that an AJC reporter had agreed to moderate the debate. In his opening, Heath introduced Steve Graddick as the moderator who is not associated with the AJC but rather a radio station in Carrollton. Heath then stated that Jim Galloway of the AJC had agreed to moderate the debate but then refused to attend because Carruth would not show. Contrary to Heath's press release/challenge, ACCORDING TO JIM GALLOWAY on Friday, he never agreed to moderate the debate and no one associated with the AJC did either. The entire thing was a political gimmick and not a well organized one either.
As many of you may know, it was implied that the event was hosted by the Chamber of Commerce; however, the Chamber issued a release that the event was not hosted by the Chamber but rather was hosted by the Heath Campaign. Again, the "debate" was a sham.
As for those in attendance, they were all Heath supporters with a handful of exceptions. I saw no folks there who were undecided. Many were bussed in from Haralson County. I would estimate that about 30-35 people were there.
As for the substance of Heath's comments, he once again made hypocritical comments about the HOPE Scholarship, TSPLOST, and the ethics pledge. On the HOPE, he mildly suggested this time that he was against the lottery, yet he said he voted for it 3 times. His comments were is stark contrast to previous comments that the funding was morally wrong and that "if given the chance" he would vote against it. Question for Mr. Heath: If the funding of the HOPE is morally wrong, then why did you vote for it?
On the TSPLOST, he claimed he justed wanted voters to have a choice.
More to follow later.
-
I plan to be there and will be ready and willing to discuss Heath's 2004 and 2012 misrepresentations.
Fondly,
Pigpen
-
1
-
-
I don't know who you are......but the listed things are twisted stories and I know there is a whole lot more to them. You are like the news media you film a hour of footage and use two seconds of it to get what you want!! Real cute!! Carruth is very dirty and I have seen his leadership on the local level don't think I want to see it on the State level!! Mr. Heath's number is on the attached document you can call him and issue your challange if you so choose!!
Sounds like you are a Heath supporter. How about you bring your documents, etc. to a debate that show what I have stated is "twisted" and "cute". I will certainly bring mine. Perhaps P.com can provide a video of the debate (same rules as Heath suggest) and post on the site to see who is lying. You can name the date and time (provided Pubby or LPPT is available), and I will be there.
Pubby: is that something we could organize?
-Pigpen
-
1
-
-
Interesting let's see who brings their documents and what they prove!!
Noahsdad:
I'm your huckleberry. Tell Bill Heath to meet me at each of these events and I will bring all the proof that he is a liar, that he said "if given the chance" he would vote against the funding for the Hope Scholarship, that he said we do not need ethics laws for politicians like him, that he supports unlimited gifts from lobbyists, and that he voted for the TSPLOST bill and guided its passage through the state senate as the Governor's floor leader.
Please pass along the challenge. Let's see who the liar is. If Heath does not have the guts, perhaps we could schedule similar debates with you representing the Heath campaign.
Moderator: It is no secret who Pigpen is. I have no problem disclosing my identity and would request that you reinsert my name as originally entered.
Also, edited to clarify that I thought Noahsdad is supporting Heath. If that is not correct, please accept accept my apology but the challenge remains for any Heathen who wishes to participate with the same format suggested by Sen. Heath.
--- Mason Rountree
-
1
-
-
wow. are you Valbuena? that is an interesting twist. well, you are right - it's all public record - I hope people read the record rather than your bizarre summation.
No, but i practice trial and appellate work and have reviewed all of the pleadings in the various cases.
Did you actually read the opinion from the court of appeals?
-
thanks for the link - after reading into pages 2-3 I can see that Valbuena is worse than I first suspected. As for the charges/sanctions being dropped - that is merely the result of an "out of court settlement". He was clearly wrong in the opinion of the court and had to hand over some cash to stop the printing of the public records that would be career ending. Or, maybe you're right - the appeals court spent pages on detailing how crooked Valbuena and the other guy are as judges and then stated that the complainant was going to be due damages in further court hearings - but the complainant just said out of the blue "oh, never mind, I'll just drop it".
You need to read the opinion. It says no such thing and no attorney fees were awarded. The trial court ruled in favor of mr. Valbuena's client, after which ms. Lowe appealed to the appeals court. Mr. Lowe did not have an attorney in the appeal and did not respond to any of the allegations made in the appeal. As a result, the court only had one version of events and references to the record. The appeals court ultimately ruled that paulding was not the proper jurisdiction and, based on the reversal on that ground, further ruled that the trial court should hold a hearing on the request for attorney fees. In no way did the appeals court state that attorneys fees should or should not be awarded, as it had no jurisdiction over that issue. Rather, it said that the hearing should take place, just as a hearing normally takes place even if the request is frivolous. There was no "out of court settlement" as you suggest. Ms. Lowe dismissed the case probably because she knew she would not succeed.
-
3
-
-
The news story was false, which is why you cannot find it on the news site any more. Judge Valbuena is highly intelligent having attended top notch universities for his undergraduate and law degrees. He was originally appointed to be magistrate judge around 10 years ago by then Chief Superior Court Judge Bill Foster. Glassdogs and I disagree on this one, as I have known Judge Valbuena as an attorney, judge and most importantly to him, a father to three great kids. I do not always agree with him and the other judges on their rulings, but I respect him and am confident that his decisions are made fairly and intelligently.
-
4
-
-
Mo and SG. You are absolutely correct about $100 per occurrence not per year. It is still better than nothing . Both Mr. Rogers and Mr.Carruth have pledged not to take any gifts lobbyists in contrast to Mr. Heath who wants unlimited gifts from lobbyists. We have a real choice in this election.
-
Heath's argument is it is meaningless since lobbyists will just split the gifts into chunks that are under $100 each. (Take his family out to dinner at a fancy restaurant? Pay for each persons separately)
I'd prefer a Annual cap of some kind where each lobbies can only give a certain about per year...
SD:
The $100 limit is an annual cap. We can argue whether that is too low or too high, but Heath thinks there should be no cap at all, which is not surprising since he apparently thinks the $2500 limit on campaign contributions shouldn't apply to him either by funneling around $50,000 for the benefit of his campaign through a PAC he helped set up and fund.
-
2
-
-
As it stands today, there are no limits whatsoever to lobbyist gifts. The ballot question also asks whether we should end the unlimited gifts. Sen. Heath wants to continue unlimited gifts. If you disagree with him, tell your neighbors and friends and let folks know on Facebook, twitter, etc. if voters don't say "NO" to politicians like Bill Heath, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
-
2
-
-
One of the ballot questions in the Republican primary is whether voters support a $100.00 limit on lobbyist gifts. Senator Bill Heath opposes any limit because he claims it is meaningless. He also says that we do not need ethics laws if we elect politicians like him to office.
What do you think?
-
This is fantastic for Paulding County and a testament to the hard work and commitment our County and cities have made to economic development.
-
1
-
-
I think the truth of the matter is that he is against the lottery not the Hope Scolarship program. Not sure just what I heard.
Prince4ever:
The two are inextricably linked. Without the lottery, there is no HOPE Scholarship. Sen. Heath called the Hope Scholarship morally "wrong" at the forum on June 5th, apparently because it is funded by the lottery, and proudly stated that "if given the chance" he would vote against it. As the Senate Floor Leader, Sen. Heath certainly will have the chance.
If it is morally "wrong" and, according to Mr. Heath, is a program where poor people are just paying for the education of rich kids, why would Mr. Heath issue the following statements in legislative newsletters?
"This vital program is one of the greatest things Georgia has done to advance higher education and our economy..."
"Students from across Georgia, our nation and our globe have benefited from HOPE."
"This program is a vital asset to the state and has been emulated by other states across the country... We must see that HOPE has a long lifetime in Georgia."
He went on to say that the HOPE is "the gem of our higher education system".
What a hypocrite.
-
I wonder, can you back this up with some kind of something other than a statement about the Republican Women's Forum? Reason I ask is because this is rather inflammatory.
Btw, I don't support Heath at all. I just would like some kind of substantiation so people don't question your claim.
Rockysmom:
Sen. Heath unambiguously made the statements at the Paulding Chamber of Commerce on June 5, 2012, during the Republicqn candidate forum hosted by the Paulding Republican Women. During the debate, Mr. Heath stated that the State has created a system to fund education in Georgia by taking money from "poor people" for the "education of rich kids." He went on state that "if given the chance" he would vote against the funding of the Hope Scholarship. The District 31 debate can be seen on you tube or you can search p.com for the debate and go to around the one hour and ten minute part of the debate.
Since around 30% of the kids who receive the Hope could not have attended school without it, his statement about only benefitting "rich kids"" is ignorant and/or deceptive. It also ignores the fact that around 25% of the money from Hope goes to people attending technical school, and that much of the benefit is for pre-kindergarten programs. These stats are available on-line.
Given the fact that the Hope has benefitted over 1,500,000 Georgians with billions of dollars in education assistance without the implementation of a tax, I think that the program is beneficial and should be retained. As the Republican floor leader in the State Senate, Mr. Heath has shown a disdain for the program. Given his comments, I am concerned that the program will not be around when my kids graduate from high school.
-
6
-
RECOUNT GOING ON NOW
in Paulding County NEWS
Posted
FINAL RECOUNT
Valbuena 2,980
Collins 2,972
Valbuena wins by 8 votes.