Atlanta Metro News

By SharonH

November 14, 2006 9:58 PM | Link to this

Let me guess: Mike Jacobs plans to run for a bigger office in the future?

Apologize for the ad? I should hope not.

When will the Republican party apologize for all the inflammatory and race-baiting ads they have run over the years including this one? The answer: NEVER. Republicans know better, that is why they are currently the party in power in GA because they are ruthless. Dems could learn a little: grow a spine! And besides, the ad was right! So it wasn’t subtle, so freakin’ what.

Mike Jacobs, you can go away now.

By seeya

November 14, 2006 11:06 PM | Link to this

“And besides, the ad was right! So it wasn’t subtle, so freakin’ what.”

It’s that attitude that will ensure Republicans control the state of Georgia for a while. Keep believing the ad was justified and there was nothing wrong with it and we’ll keep winning elections.

They are going to keep cutting Fulton up until John Eaves is the Chairman of his cul-de-sac.

By RJ

November 15, 2006 8:45 AM | Link to this

As a native Georgian who grew up when it was officially segregated, the nature and extent of discussion about the Young, Franklin, Lewis campaign ad gives me optimism about the future. However, I am troubled about the lack of equal attention given to other race baiting campaign ads, subtle and not so subtle. I am equally troubled about this blog’s triple or quadruple posting on the subject, while giving scant attention to simular offensive ads that should have no place in our electoral system. Where is this blog’s balance?

By B

November 15, 2006 8:46 AM | Link to this

Number 1 - the ad is/was not right at all. Number 2 - Please tell us some of the ads that you claim Republicans have run that are inflammatory and race-baiting. Please.

The ad was inflammatory, race-baiting, and full of lies. Do you really think that Republicans want to take away your right to vote? No. All they want with the voter ID bill is to ensure that the person voting is who they say they are. What is wrong with that? Nothing. It does not stop someone from voting at all. I for one think it is a very good idea.

Republicans are in control not because they are ruthless but rather becuase they have ideas on how to govern. The Democrats only attack. Look at Taylor - all he did was attack Sonny Perdue over the land deals. We have to give Sonny the benefit of the doubt since what he did is not unethical nor wrong. Mark Taylor lied, plain and simple.

By Gracie De Luxe en Vie

November 15, 2006 9:16 AM | Link to this

The only place you can find a transcript of Mayor Franklin’s emphatic defense of her decision to participate in the ad campaign is here, if anyone even cares at this point. It (the defense)made sense at the time:

http://www.atlantamagazine.com/blogs/entry.php?id=223

By RJ

November 15, 2006 9:36 AM | Link to this

B, I share your condemnation of the ad. Based upon your statement about the matter, I believe you will agree with me that “wedge issues,” i.e., promotion of race hatred and the like, generate and prey on fears. They divide rather than connect members of the human race. Let’s argue about ideas and suggestions, not matters that seek to divide and conquer. Those kind of election strategies play us cheap because they under estimate our intelligence.

Race baiting is not limited to the Republican party. History of Georgia’s Democratic party is replete with examples of race baiting. The current discussion and debate about the matter not having a place in Georgia’s electoral system is encouraging indeed. However, the discussion and debate should not be relegated to which party shoulder’s most of the blame.

With respect to voter ID, strength of the argument for it is weakened considerably by the fact that the push for the change excluded Absentee Ballots, which are known to favor Republicans. Did you know that Absentee Ballots do not require any form of identification? If the aim of the voter ID push is to ensure that the person voting is the person claimed then why exclude Absentee Ballots from the requirement?

You are right! The people have spoken and Republicans are in control in Georgia. The Democrats will be better served by avoiding any challenges to Republican initiatives and instead, devote their energy to their much needed rebuilding process.

By Melissa

November 15, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Mike Jacobs needs to be VERY, VERY CAREFUL.

He’s sounding more and more like a Republican in an extremely Democratic district.

Maybe a Republican can’t beat him in that district, but he’s just BEGGING a qualified Democrat to replace him - someone who knows where there votes are coming from.

By Michae C

November 15, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

How would you reasonably enforce Voter ID on Absentee ballots? Impossible, thta is why is was not included in the provison.

By RJ

November 15, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this

Come on Mike C… You are either stretching the bounds of reason or arguing for arguing sake. If the aim is to ensure that the person who votes is the person claimed then why have a voting method that does not do that?

By RC

November 15, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

Jacobs couldn’t attract a quorum of snowmen of any party, even if he built them himself.

1) Saxby Chambliss flashed pictures of Senator Cleland along side Ben Laden all over the state.

2) Katrina victims are still without home and community.

3) Thousands of mother’s sons have died in a war that has been fought twice at the hands of horrible leadership by both father and son Bush. Please recall that this is the FIRST EVER prememptive strike by these United States, a precendent and scar that will never die.

Lives dependant upon it. Yessir. We, as good Democrats, don’t have to go around starting wars. But, we certainly had better continue this effective trend of shooting back hard when fired upon.

I wonder has Mikey seen the photos of Congressman Lewis in Selma. Has he ever been knocked to his knees, stared up and been struck unconcious by a towering, uniformed, armed officer?

With time generally comes experience, with experience wisdom. Politics has a way of cleansing itself of those who let their spoken words get out ahead their comprehension.

By rc

November 15, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this

P.S. I forgot to mention the Republican’s futile, desparate, unconstitutional attempt to repress the minority and senior vote via their voter i.d. initiative. Yes, in these days lives surely depend on it.

Those boys play for keeps.

By RJ

November 15, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

RC, Please examine the race baiting issue through your human rather than partisan lens. The challenge before us voters is to become broader in our examination of cynical election ploys so that we are less subject to being manipulated by them. When we reach this level of sophistication we will get the respect we’re suppose to have as citizens.

By B

November 15, 2006 1:04 PM | Link to this

As far as it not applying to absentee ballots it is because there is ample enough time to thoroughly check that the person voting is eligible. Right now on election day anyone can walk in and say they whomever they want and vote. I think that is what the Republicans are trying to prevent. It only allows those registered and eligible to vote to do so.

By B

November 15, 2006 1:11 PM | Link to this

RC - Did Germany attack us first or did we attack them first in WWII? 1998 attack on Sudanese factory? Bay of Pigs? Why are some Katrina “victims” , over a year later, still living off of the government? They could have left before the hurricane. They had 3-4 days warning at least. We have not had near the number of problems with those in Mississippi or other places that were affected. Tryin to blame Bush for Katrina is a hopeless cause for you. Much of the blame should go to the LA Gov and Ray Nagin. They did not do their jobs and are trying to blame Bush for that fact. Anyway this blog is not about Katrina so I don’t know why you choose to bring it up - maybe because you have nothing to stand on.

By B

November 15, 2006 1:13 PM | Link to this

RC - the voter ID initiative is not unconstitutional in the least. Please explain how exactly it would repress minority and senior votes? How is that possible?

By RJ

November 15, 2006 1:20 PM | Link to this

B, Time to verify Absentee Ballots is not a factor at all because they are casts before Early or In Person voting. Moreover, Early and In Person voting require one of seventeen forms of identification, whereas Absentee voting requires no identification at all.

By RJ

November 15, 2006 9:22 PM | Link to this

Today’s apology,on chanel 2,6pm news, by the Chairman of the Fulton County Republican Party, for sending out a mailer saying that all Democrats are liars and cheats hopefully put the race baiting issue surrounding the Fulton County Chair’s race to an end.

Hopefully, the good lesson for those involved, those who contemplate benefit from race baiting, and those who aspire for a better Georgia is that it has no place in our body politics.

By RC

November 16, 2006 8:41 AM | Link to this

Dear B:

The conflicts that you mention were not preemptive strikes. In fact, Hussein was fighting outside his borders when we attacked the first time under daddy Bush. Thus, that, too was not preemptive. The second attack, under Jr., was certainly preemptive.

Let me provide a little analogy. Let’s say a school bus driver is driving to school one day with a load of students. A man (or woman) pulls up, jumps out of their vehicle and procedes to shoot at the bus and students. A third party, though not having been personally attacked, intercedes by running over the perpetrator. Now, the public and courts would likely find the ‘rescuer’ here justified as he acted to defend in a situation where people killer would have been injured or killed. Even if the ‘rescuer’ had incidentally struck and injured or killed a student during his valinat attempt he likely have been vindicated.

On the other hand, let’s suppose that the the school is driving toward school one day and a rather rough, suspicious-looking character pulls up beside him. A third party sees this suspicious character. Let’s even say that this third party has knowledge that the suspicious guy has committed crimes in the past and is known to often carry weapons. The third party, having only seen the suspicious guy pull up beside the bus, rams his car into the suspicious guy, injuring him and incidentally injuring or killing a student in the process. Law enforcement later finds no weapons on the suspicious character and finds no justification that he was about to do the bus any harm.

Now, there’s your difference between preemptive and not. Bush Jr. willfully and wantonly (wrecklessly) delved into war with Iraq. To this day, no justification has surfaced. Only lies. It’s just that Jr. controls the single most powerful military force in the world, so no one has bothered to arrest him.

As for voter i.d., the courts that have reviewed it so far at least see a constitutional issue with it. Certainly, these courts contacted you to glean your keen thoughts on the matter before ruling. No? Unbelievable.

The voted i.d. initiative surpresses votes of minorities and many seniors by making their voting far more of a burden. Many minorites and seniors do not have an i.d. that would allow them to vote. They would have to obtain a special one. Further, minorities and seniors porportionatley do not drive. Thus, their obtaining a special i.d. is a burden.

Have you recently lost your drivers license and had to go to a station here in Metro Atlanta to get a replacement? If so, you know if can take a good 6 to 7 hours. Some impoverished people need to work those 6 or 7 hours so that they can feed their family. So, you might say that the Republican voter i.d. initiative asks the true working class to choose between voting and making ends meet.

Both Senator McCain and President Carter served on a panel that studied the voter i.d. matter. The panel concluded that the U.S. should move toward a voter i.d. model. The panel, though, released a special statement denouncing Georgia’s voter i.d. model becasue it places an unfair, disproportionate, biased burden on certain sects of voters.

Georgia’s voter i.d. initiative was passed for the sole purpose of surpressing a sect of the vote that is largely thought to vote Democratic. It is a classic case of the priviledged in power taking cruel, unfair advantage of the under-priviledged out-of-power.

By RC

November 16, 2006 8:49 AM | Link to this

RJ:

It’s rather difficult to win with spitballs when everyone else is launching rockets. I think I’d rather to continue to be considered a more sophisticated victor than a sophisticated citizen.

I’m all for fair. And, I’m all for voters learning more and more to see through all these barbs. But, most of all I am tired of this mess that our inept leaders have led us into over the past 8 years.

Let’s get out of this fiery abyss first. Then, let’s make the world a kinder gentler place.

By RC

November 16, 2006 9:00 AM | Link to this

Dear B:

The conflicts that you mention were not preemptive strikes. In fact, Hussein was fighting outside his borders when we first attacked Iraq under daddy Bush. Thus, that, too was not preemptive. The second attack, under Jr., was certainly preemptive.

Let me provide a little analogy. Let’s say a school bus driver is driving to school one day with a load of students. A man (or woman) pulls up, jumps out of his vehicle and procedes to shoot at the bus and students. A third party, though not having been personally attacked, intercedes by running over the perpetrator. Now, the public and courts would likely find the ‘rescuer’ here justified as he acted to defend in a situation where people would have been injured or killed. Even if the ‘rescuer’ had incidentally struck and injured or killed a student during his valinat attempt he would likely have been vindicated.

On the other hand, let’s suppose that the the bus driver is driving toward school one day and a rather rough, suspicious-looking character pulls up beside him. A third party sees this suspicious character. Let’s even say that this third party has knowledge that the suspicious guy has committed crimes in the past and is known to often carry weapons. The third party, having only seen the suspicious guy pull up beside the bus, rams his car into the suspicious guy, injuring him and incidentally injuring or killing a student in the process. Law enforcement later finds no weapons on the suspicious character and finds no justification that he was about to do the bus nor students any harm.

Now, there’s your difference between preemptive and not. Bush Jr. willfully and wantonly (wrecklessly) delved into war with Iraq. To this day, no justification has surfaced. Only lies. It’s just that Jr. controls the single most powerful military force in the world, so no one has bothered to arrest him.

As for voter i.d., the courts that have reviewed it so far at least see a constitutional issue with it. Certainly, these courts contacted you to glean your keen thoughts on the matter before ruling. No? Unbelievable.

The voter i.d. initiative surpresses the votes of minorities and many seniors by making their voting far more of a burden. Many minorites and seniors do not already possess an i.d. that would allow them to vote. They would have to obtain a special one to do so. Further, minorities and seniors porportionatley do not drive. Thus, their obtaining a special i.d. is a burden.

Have you recently lost your drivers license and had to go to a station here in Metro Atlanta to get a replacement? If so, you know if can take a good 6 to 7 hours. Some impoverished people need to work those 6 or 7 hours so that they can feed their family. So, you might say that the Republican voter i.d. initiative asks the true working class to choose between voting and making ends meet.

The Georgia voter i.d. initiative places many burdens on those less-priviledged. It is often difficult for those of us who have a little more means and education to imagine these burdens because our lives are so different. We are so busy trying to have more that we lose interest in empathizing with others.

Both Senator McCain and President Carter served on a panel that studied the voter i.d. matter. The panel concluded that the U.S. should move toward a voter i.d. model. The panel, though, released a special statement denouncing Georgia’s voter i.d. model becasue it places an unfair, disproportionate, biased burden on certain sects of voters.

Georgia’s voter i.d. initiative was passed for the sole purpose of surpressing a sect of the vote that is largely thought to vote Democratic. It is a classic case of the priviledged in power taking cruel, unfair advantage of the under-priviledged out-of-power.

By RC

November 16, 2006 9:03 AM | Link to this