misterpolitics

I'll explain as best I can, but take this with a grain of salt, because I am no Nobel winning economist. Basically, local businesses are on some sort of "honor system" when it comes to reporting and paying sales taxes. How exactly this works, I am not precisely sure. However, what the point of sale bill does is makes the system more efficient so that all of the owed sales taxes get collected. It's not an increase in the slightest. It's just a system that ensures that the state gets the taxes that you are paying.

Hey, I've read them. But you can't condemn a candidate or a party for what their people may or may not say. Sure, some people have bad blood here, but much of what they say, at least in principle, but not in wording, I would agree with. This is the impression that I get from the disclosure (to both counts). Kinda cool, right? Now back to our scheduled political bickering.

Naturegirl, then why don't you ask specifically what you mean. You gave what could easily be the broadest question I have ever heard. It would be like asking me if I support the Republican agenda! There are parts I agree with, there are parts I do not. I'm tired of Republicans in general trying to associate a singular Democrat with some broad ranging "Democratic" idea. There is no one class of Democrats, just as there is no one class of Republicans, and to suggest otherwise is downright ignorant. It is obvious to me that you are on a witchhunt here, and nothing Will says will ever sat

Very very good news. It was worrying me for a few days, but good to know he's on his way home for some family time.

I would agree that people on BOTH SIDES have made some classless remarks. If I was one of them, I apologize, because I only mean well. That being said, let's not do some pot and kettle action here.

I'll let Will take this one, but can I just not that Obama and the PDA website have nothing to really do with one another? There are hundreds of progressive groups out there with many interests, so IMO it's a little hard to claim that one and the other are the same.

As it relates to non-district monies, it is not surprising that state leaders on both sides would give money to their chosen candidate. I quite understand the connection.

I'm sure he knows whats going on, but I've said it before that there's a difference between "clean" and "truthful." Unclean would be going around saying that Paulette Braddock is something that she is not, or claiming things about her that are not true. Would you say that her history-- two arrests, etc., should not be disclosed to the public? I believe they deserve to know, and if you do not, then IMO your priorities are out of line. I am not sure as to the exact nature of his funding. I do know that contributions under $101.00 do not have to be disclosed, so maybe people are givi

I understand, but with respect, I know Will well, and he's not one to get into this sort of trouble, nor one to lie about it. The difference in hypocracy here is who is saying it. WHITEY can say whatever he wants, but I know Whitey is not Will, however Paulette is Paulette.

You need to read more carefully. I have bolded a few words for you. A point of sale bill raises taxes exactly $0.00. What it does is creates a more efficient system by which already-owed state sales taxes can reach the coffers. It worked in Alabama to the rune of $1 billion per year. It has nothing to do with raising taxes a dime. Will has said that he wants to find new revenue streams many times over. It's not a secret because it's not raising taxes- period. EDIT:: But seriously, though, I love your diversionary tactic. Throw out a fallacious argument to cover the fact that y

@BB- I do think you are right, that people make mistakes. But, IMO, there are some mistakes that are more important to look at than others. Like I said in another thread, the real issue here is what she said in her response, as to why she has not been honest, because she "forgot." Taking that response at face value, once you forget about what you have done in the past, you cannot make yourself have a better future. If she "forgot" what she had done, how can she make sure she would never do it again? It's either that, or she lied. I'm not sure which is worse.

I will be honest. I have "forgotten" what clothes I wore yesterday, and I have "forgotten" where I have placed my shoes. Thank the Lord I have never been arrested, and all of my dealings with law enforcement have been cordial and fine, but I can insist without any question that if I were ever arrested, much less arrested TWICE, it would not be something I would forget. It is the height of irresponsibility to "forget" about your misdeeds in the past, because once you forget, you also stop learning from your mistakes to make you a better person for the future. That, in my opinion, is t

I thought I would repost in this topic:: Galloway over at the AJC interviewed Paulette about it, and I think she made this even worse on herself (http://blogs.ajc.com...wo-arrest-past/) “We had lightning damage to our home,” Braddock said Thursday. “The company didn’t want to pay the claim. They contended the receipts weren’t valid. Basically, it was a trumped-up charge.” Which begs the question, why, then did Ms. Braddock forge the receipts? As awful as it was for her home to be subjected to lightning damage, that should not necessitate committing a felony! But Braddock said s

Galloway over at the AJC interviewed Paulette about it, and I think she made this even worse on herself (http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2010/10/08/your-morning-jolt-gop-claimant-to-glenn-richardsons-house-seat-has-a-two-arrest-past/) “We had lightning damage to our home,” Braddock said Thursday. “The company didn’t want to pay the claim. They contended the receipts weren’t valid. Basically, it was a trumped-up charge.” Which begs the question, why, then did Ms. Braddock forge the receipts? As awful as it was for her home to be subjected to lightning damage, that s

That one took me for a loop. I've met Dustin through various circles, and I'm pretty sure the one that blogs on GAPolitico is the same one that wrote the article on, get this, GAPolitico.

No contention, but I just want to point out that emoticons popped up randomly. I think I know why, but it makes looking at laws MUUUUCH more interesting.

If she believed in her innocence, then she should have gone through with a trial. However, and this is the big one, in order to participate in a diversion program, one must enter a GUILTY plea. There's really no way around this one.

Let me go ahead and jump in here. You are 10000000% wrong. The person's name is Dustin Baker. He founded the blog when he was a UGA student, and is still on there today. You could not be farther from right, and I think you owe Mr. Austin an apology for your baseless rhetoric. Just to add, if she "IS going to address the issues," why has she not done so yet? We're less than a month away, folks. And, Madea, remember when I said that I've gotten word of things that Paulette's people have been spreading around out there? This is #1 on the list of things I have heard, so my suspicion

Everything here begs an obvious question... ...If people that voted for Paulette in the Primary/Runoff knew about all of this, would she still have been their choice?

Yeah, I could care less about the whole name thing. Let's look at the OTHER things, shall we?

I'm hearing that there's more stones yet unturned through the proverbial grapevines. But might we add that she has yet to propose viable solutions, but instead relies on a letter next to her name and empty rhetoric? Not to mention the fact that she refuses to publicly debate or even talk with her opponent (as I understand it, there is currently a debate going on, however Paulette could not attend because she is on vacation just as Paulding still copes with 12% unemployment). For those of you who have not yet talked to Will, please do so. As qualified as Mickey is, perhaps we should u

Will has always been open and honest about his views and proposed solutions. If you are wondering what he wants to do, visit his website, talk to him, or better yet, just read the P-com boards. Fact is that these things are important. Ms. Braddock wants to come out and represent us as an elected official, but yet she was arrested in 1999 for felony insurance fraud-- for illegally forging receipts-- a crime that can carry up to 5 years behind bars. Naturegirl, it's not even a comparison to skipping school, a youthful indiscretion that is hardly a felony. She lied in order to swindle mon

Is there a link we can go to with pictures of the two individuals? I know I'm just one person, but I always like to be on the lookout for missing persons, just in case.

I am not sure if Will has ever gotten a moving violation, but you are comparing apples and oranges. Millions of people get a moving violation--a non-violent offense, mind you. We are talking about the accusation (and arrest) on a violent crime in this particular case. naturegirl-- this may not matter to you as a voter, and that's just fine. Obviously it matters to others. Information is out there, so use it or don't. It's your vote. I've said it before that I'm friendly with Will. If I found out that he was arrested for a violent crime, though, I would have a damn hard time

I don't know *exactly* what happened, and frankly most of us do not. According to the police report, she took a "gash" out of his hair, which is technically assault. The charges were apparently dropped for one reason or another, why exactly I doubt many of us are sure. However the point stands that it was an arrest, and it is on the record of a person who wants our vote. If that sort of thing doesn't matter to you, that's okay, it doesn't have to. As much as I think it should, it's your vote. But, at the moment, all we have to work from is that police report, so I guess that's what we