Jump to content
Paulding.com

EagleWings

Members
  • Content Count

    6,894
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by EagleWings

  1. I've looked at all three web sites and they all seem to be for lower taxes. My question to the candidates would be in regards to commercial/industrial development. Currently, the economy here in Paulding is heavily affected by retail sales and residential construction. The market downturn has affected tax revenues and now the BOC & BOE are both in a huge budget crunch. There is very little diversification as far as industrial, manufacturing, etc.

     

    What will each candidate do to attract new types of businesses to diversify our tax base, and to bring good paying jobs to Paulding County?

    I had an hour of one on one with Todd about that very question. I will withhold my comments for now but I will say we agreed on the new approach and how past decisions can't sustain this county and its current tax burdens on homeowners. The economy may hinder short term progress but at least the vision is in the right direction.

  2. I take you don't know Paulette well.........dry.gif

     

    And Stout is another philandering theocrat.

     

    Avery appears to be the class clown.

     

    Not much to choose from at this point, not much at all.

     

    Maybe an Independent will come along.

     

    ......anything..........please..............

     

    With a choice between Stout, Braddock or a 29 year old student. I'd have to say Braddock.

    That race is shaping up like the Obama/McCain of '08.

  3. Maybe because it is not there? :rofl:

    I am not saying what you concluded earlier is right or in the scriptures, but you clearly need to do your homework and research on what true forgiveness is all about. Now you've wasted your time arguing with 50 people on here tonight and now you won't get any homework done. Get a good night's sleep and wake up to tackle your project. Good night.

  4. Now I understand where you are coming from. :wacko:

     

    Do you think it is acceptable to impose that same standard on law enforcement? Should their marriage be a question we should ask them about? How about our military leaders? Do we ask about their sexual past? If you're going to impose that standard on a candidate for public service, why don't you put it on other public servants? If it's good for the goose it is good for the gander, right? :rofl:

     

    As a citizen here in America, I can impose ANY and ALL ideas on any candidate I choose. Even the ideas that are not fair. Gotcha. :yahoo:

    The folks I vote for to represent me, means just that. They represent me. Why would I vote for someone that doesn't represent what I believe? You keep responding in the manner you do, because everyone can see how "out there" you really are. Even people with no moral values who vote for people with no moral values are still voting for people with the same values. It is a universal standard.

    • Like 1
  5. So you are imposing your religious ideas on candidates now? What if the candidate is not a christian to view that marriage as "sacred" at all? :wacko:

    Are you that dense? If a candidate doesn't hold my ideals, then I don't vote for them. As a citizen here in America, I can impose ANY and ALL ideas on any candidate I choose. Just like every other voter does for their candidate. I can't believe you would ask such a stupid question.

    • Like 1
  6. Yeah. We disagree. It is not my business what goes on in anybody's marriage but my own. :wacko:

     

     

    Job performance is the issue! If you're only giving 40% then you should be judged based on that performance. The reason is irrelevant. :wacko:

    Not in my book. Morality is a big part of people I put faith and trust in. If they are willing to cheat on a "sacred" relationship, then that means something to me. As I said earlier, I will look at the apology and move on from there.

  7. I'm saying that you can't translate the issue to the job the person will do in the elected office. I see that if you want to make moral judgements about candidates. Would you want those same subjective moral judgements to be made by an employer about you and would you want to explain all those details about your relationship with your spouse every few years? :blink:

    Folks can and do judge me all the time. I don't mind. The only think I will defend is a wrong judgment. I don't put myself in those situations and I expect others to do the same. If they fail, I will look at the apology for sincerity and make a judgment from there. I won't use it as as a "weapon" against them; instead, I use it as "protection" for me and my family.

  8. No we don't agree. I think that what a person does in the marriage is between the married people and none of anyone's business at all. The only reason it gets to be an issue is so it can call into question a person's judgement when that personal judgement is none of our business in the first place. We don't know what goes on behind those doors, what they fight about, what they agree on or what has happened to that relationship. None of our business. If they misuse the office like Richardson did, it is an issue. Newt's multiple transgressions? Who cares. John Edwards? Who cares. Clinton? Who cares/ That he lied under oath is a problem but not the cigar or the desk games. Kenndy? FDR? Any of them? Who cares? It is not a character flaw or a question of judgement because sometimes the best thing that can happen is for one of the partners to find somebody that really cares. Judgement? Character? I want to know who can do the best job and those are not issues/questions we allow employers to ask so we shouldn't ask it of candidates either. :wacko:

    I can see that "trust" "honesty" "integrity" "committed" or "faithful" really doesn't matter in politics to you. I NOW understand.

×
×
  • Create New...