surepip

I believe you will find that Animal adopted Will Avery, not vice versa. I don't know what happened with the local Paulding GOP and Animal, but someone or some group REALLY, REALLY, REALLY must have pulled his chain to have him come roaring out of his cave and go after Beverly and now Paulette. He was, for years, the quintessential diehard Paulding Republican. You know, one that would vote for Satan over Jesus if Jesus was running as a Dem. There is a tremendous backlash and conflict within the local GOP which is in essence a power struggle of I assume the old group who has controlled

Former Speaker of the House maybe ? Who was tossed when it became blatantly obvious he had lied through his teeth about his non-relationship with the AGL lobbyist he proposed and passed a bill to build a gas line for them at our expense ? Not to mention his $72,000 lobbyist fee paid by the Paulding BOC for being our eyes and ears at the gold dome while he was also our elected legislator ? Why do you think his downfall and problems would be newsworthy ?

You need to check them out: disclosure report They are incomplete without totals, and make no sense. The amounts collected to date went down from her June 30th amended report. And I find it hard to believe she did all those mailings for the chump change she has listed. This is cranking up to be a farce.

My dad and granddad were both orthodontists [and I was supposed to follow, but I had no patience with the patients], and I am sure much has changed, but there are no 2 cases the same. Small jaw from one parent and large teeth from the other can create havoc. Thumb sucking can indeed warp the mandible [jaw] and my dad used to make some wicked looking appliances to stop the patient from thumb sucking. Generally, if it is just alignment/aesthetic issues, waiting for the permanent teeth is the most reasonable way to go. If it is a bite problem, then you have to address it sooner or fac

Paulette filed her disclosure today. 2 weeks late, and 1 week after the election. Surprised ? According to what she filed, she did not collect ANY money since the end of June, and shows very little in the way of expenditures compared to the mailings I received in July and August. And I am no accountant, but I could not get her numbers to come anywhere near balancing.

liquid sevin is your best home remedy but you may have to spray it for 4 or 5 days in a row and saturate the opening. It will kill the hornets it touches, but has a poor residual effect. These guys will come at you en-mass as well. Have an escape corridor ready to run to.

And the same Ralston who will now be endorsing Braddock and stroking her some checks. Reckon she will bother to file the disclosures showing those checks, or just choose to ignore the rules, .......again. Stout it no longer an issue, and as I stated earlier he filed his reports, in a timely manner. Thank you Daniel. Now we are talking about the current candidate who has chosen to ignore the campaign disclosure laws and just not bother filing her reports. But hey, she is a paulding republican following in the footsteps of Speaker Richardson himself. She does not HAVE to follow the r

Stout filed his disclosure. Braddock filed an amended June 30th report 6 weeks late, and has filed NOTHING for the 6 weeks since. I have to assume she is either incompetent for doing paperwork, or has serious donors she is trying to hide. Both of which bode poorly for her future success as our representative. Put whatever spin on it you want. The law states she had to file the disclosure PRIOR to the election on August 10th. She did not do it, and still has not done it a week later. What gives ? How can you even defend her for this ? What else will you be defending her

Call Diedre in the morning, but I believe she will direct you to the state ethics commission for the district 19 information. I believe her office only handles the local elected officials. I have sent and email to the ethics commission questioning Braddock's non-filing. As this is the same group who rubber stamped Speaker Richardson's denials of his liason with the AGL lobbyist, I don't expect to hear much in return. When I saw Paulette at the BOC office building Tuesday evening, and went up to congratulate her [yes, I can be gratious when needed] she was fielding a phone call from Mr Ethi

I wanted to see the disclosure AS REQUIRED BY LAW. Braddock ignored the filing deadline. Were the voters entitled to see who donated what as per the Georgia Laws, or is this another example of Paulding Republicans being above the law, as per Glenn Richardson ? The law is simply written to allow the voters to see who donated what. Stout, bless his heart, filed. Braddock chose not to. Why is she above the law ? No other motives. I stated over and over who I thought her supporters were, and many of you denied that vehemently. Yet she has chosen to avoid abiding by the law and sti

Right now, with Will Avery's available resources, do you really expect him to turn his back on a donation ? I have some severe problems with Richardson donations from a previous campaign when I investigated the donors. All of a sudden out of the blue, EVERY poultry producer in the state of Georgia was donating $2000+, to the tune of more than $50,000. I assume there was a threat of a bill with a negative impact on the chicken guys, or one they wanted passed that never happened. None the less, it showed me the power Glenn had to raise money. Will Avery does no have this kind of clout.

I emailed the ethics commission and specifically asked for a reply as to why this law was not being enforced. Stout's 8/6 disclosure is there, and nothing for Paulette. The law states they must make this disclosure in a run-off so the voters can see who has donated what. And for Paulette we got to see zero. No disclosure. Does not seem legal, or ethical to me. But then again, I had heard about Glenn and the AGL lady for almost 2 years before Dale Russell broke the story last December. Same Ethics Commission overseeing that investigation. Seems like Paulding GOP members are exempt f

Suits me fine. Beverly and Tony chose not to participate in p.com as well. If Paulette wants to hide in a hole and hope the "R" next to her name will elect her then so be it. I don't see the Obama issue as being hardly relevant on the local level at the State House. We have our current leadership bashing everything coming out of Washington, but gladly cashing the checks. What we need in District 19 is someone who will represent the taxpaying voters of this district and not just the special interests or "what the leadership wants" as Mr Maxwell has told be before. Will Avery is so

Madea, The link I posted takes you right to Paulette's only disclosures. There is nothing filed for the run-off vote. It is not rocket science. There are very clear boxes to check and her only listed filings for now are the June 30th, amended August 12th. And there is nothing shown for any money collected or spent since the end of June. She chose to hide this information from the voters, and her posse stands up for and protects her. Maybe this can be an opportunity to get the Atlanta Media involved with this race. How the Republican running for Glenn Richardson's old seat is already

At least you had the opportunity to review his contributor's and Daniel Stout's. Paulette Braddock still has not filed her disclosure and I don't understand the fact her supporters have no problems with this. The Ethic Commission is very clear about when they want it filed, and that it absolutely can be no later than the weekend prior to the run-off vote. And here we are the weekend AFTER the run-off vote and there is still no filing. What puts Braddock above the law here ? The fact she is running as a Republican and we only expect the "D"s to follow the rules ?

district 19 disclosures The rules are pretty straighforward. On the PDF the first page or so shows what the filing is for, and has a place to check off for the 6 day before the primary filing. Braddock has not filed. What she filed on August 12 was an amended June 30 with an explanation on the last page of how she could not figure out how to calculate the page totals and had to get an accountant involved. No money movements in the report since the end of june.

NOPE! What she filed on 08/12/10 was an amended 6/30/10 discloser. On the last page she apologizes and tells how she had to hand it over to an account to get it right and that is why it took another 6 weeks. She has filed NOTHING for the 08/04/10 required "6 days before run-off" filing. This should have been done no later than the Friday before the election, 08/06/10. She won, but only because the Ethics Commission in Georgia are impotent neutered groups who can't enforce anything. Same group who found no problem with Richardson and the AGL Lobbyist. Braddock has some serious e

You seem to miss the point. The law requires this discloser be made 6 days before the run-off. It is now 6 days AFTER the run-off and she still has not filed, not that it matters now. The point of the law is to let you see who did, or did not donate BEFORE the vote. Or possibly they know and are aware of what an embarassment Braddock would be for Paulding under the Gold Dome ? Not all card carrying Republicans wear the blinders and drink the cool ade. Some actually think, and realize when their local party has allowed a MAJOR mistake to happen with a candidate.

Asking where her overdue disclosure reports are and why they were not filed on time is not "Trashing" a candidate. Is there something we are all unaware of which exempts Ms Braddock from filing her reports like everyone else ? Something special ? I think it is wrong to not provide the little bit of information the State requires about a candidates finances before the election as specified by law.

And there are an awful lot of other Paulding Republicans who will be supporting as well as voting for Will Avery come November. I have spoken with very few Paulding Republicans who are going to support Braddock. Rank and file for the most part.

I find it a serious allegation to have ignored the mandated filing time to let the voters know who her donors were. It was due before the primary run-off and it seems she just chose to ignore that requirement. She has no financial transaction shown since June. I don't see that as an auspicious beginning to her campaign. And I reckon Paulette is backed by some of the same group who was backing Beverly so I can imagine you will see much of the same dogging out of most of those commenting.

Not necessarily. We have found ourselves, over the past decade, many times looking at a ballot of unopposed candidates in November, and questioned "Damn, why didn't a reasonable candidate sign up to run as a democrat?!" I know many a time I have had to write in Goofy, or Donald Duck in lieu of voting for the worthless, but un-opposed "R". In addition, our local GOP has been changed into a rather fachist organization the past couple of years. Shearin, Galloway, Kiehl and others are the shadow leadership, and they have their own agenda to push. That was very evident in the run-offs. I know s

Seems Ms Braddock is a bit behind on her campaign disclosures. She filed an amended June 30 report this past week with an explanation of how she had to get an accountant to redo the figures to make them right. And that took an additional 6 weeks She has not filed the required "6 days prior to primary" report which is supposed to be available prior to the run-off election which was last Tuesday. Daniel Stout did file his the week before the primary, not that it did him any good. At least he followed the rules. Disclosures Where's the disclosure report Paulette ? Yeah,

I have to assume you are not hands on familiar with the Paulding County GOP, Galloway, Kiehl, Shearin, et al ? That is enough to send anyone of a rational mind to seek alternatives. Running as an Independent in Georgia is virtually impossible. What options does that leave ? Many are, and will be happy to have a choice in November. Shearin and his group are ALMOST history. Don't let them get even a toe hold on the future. And if you don't think they are behind Braddock then you are not doing you homework. Check out her backers and you will find it is our same old group, and they

Isn't that a hoot I put the Animal's number in my phone today. Politics does indeed make for strange bedfellows. Having Will under the Gold Dome might motivate Howard Maxwell to start representing us, instead of the "Leadership".