Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2008 > August > 13
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Westmoreland on a 2010 race for governor: ‘We’re thinking about it’
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, who has spent much of this week in Washington fomenting a Republican revolution in the House, has been much less verbal when it comes to the topic of running for governor in 2010.
He’s often mentioned as a potential candidate, but has largely managed to avoid public discussion. Until now.
After a luncheon speech at Eagle’s Landing Country Club in Stockbridge, Westmoreland said the idea of living in the Governor’s Mansion had crossed his mind.
“Politics is all about timing and two years in politics is a long time,” he told my AJC colleague Ben Smith. “We’re thinking about it.”
Westmoreland does have opposition in the general election. His district leans Republican, but even so, if he’s running for governor, the former state House minority leader will want to make a good showing.
State Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine, a fellow Republican, is the only announced candidate thus far. Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle is expected to announce next month. Westmoreland, like Secretary of State Karen Handel, expects to wait until after the November elections to make a decision.
Permalink | Comments (13) | Post your comment |
A quiet word about concealed weapons from Georgia’s revolutionary front
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Tom Crawford with Capitol Impact was at that Senate committee meeting called by Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg), which will take a look at expanding the list of locations that a licensed gun-owner should be allowed to carry concealed.
Attorney Ed Stone of Georgia Carry was one of the chief witnesses on Tuesday, and said concealed gun zones should include both universities and churches.
Crawford then writes this
Sen. George Hooks (D-Americus) said he received a petition from the North Georgia Conference of the United Methodist Church that expressed the church’s concerns about people carrying firearms into a church.
“If the United Methodist Church or other members of the left wish to exclude firearms, that’s their business,” Stone said.
This, of course, forced the Insider to contact the state’s largest Bolshevik-minded cell of revolutionaries, the Georgia Baptist Convention.
This particular left-wing group hasn’t taken a position on the guns-in-church issue, primarily because it hasn’t been asked.
After giving the secret liberal password and countersign, Ray Newman, who monitors governmental affairs for the Baptist convention, said he personally likes the idea of responsible people walking around armed — in principle.
“But I don’t see the point of people being armed at church,” Newman said.
Permalink | Comments (26) | Post your comment |
Questions from the Georgia Christian Alliance for future members of the Court of Appeals
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
So you want a seat on the Georgia Court of Appeals. One of your first decisions will be whether to fill out the questionnaire that the Georgia Christian Alliance has just sent to you by certified mail.
It’s not in your mailbox? Then download it here.
The questionnaire seeks out the opinions of judicial candidates based on past U.S. Supreme Court decisions. For instance, candidates are asked whether they agree, disagree or have no response to this portion of Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992):
“The woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy before viability is the most central principal of Roe v. Wade. It is a rule of law and a component of liberty we cannot renounce.”
There have been concerns expressed by many lawyers that, in filling out voter questionnaires, future judges violate their own code of ethics by offering opinions on legal matters.
But Christian Alliance chairman Sadie Fields tries to avoid that issue by adding this disclaimer to the questionnaire:
”By completing this survey, I intend to indicate with which judicial philosophies of United States Supreme Court justices I most agree in cases of relevance to voters. I express no opinion for or against the core policies or programs which were the subject matter of the following Supreme Court opinions….”
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment |
A word from Max Cleland about that 2002 campaign
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Former Georgia senator Max Cleland makes a rare self-reference to his 2002 defeat by Republican Saxby Chambliss in an e-mailed letter to raise money for Democratic senate campaigns.
“Our opponents put my picture next to Osama bin Laden and said I wouldn’t keep America safe. They told us to ignore John Kerry’s combat medals. And now, they’re whispering about Barack Obama,” Cleland writes, on behalf of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “You and I know this kind of garbage is coming soon to Senate races around the country. It’s despicable, but it sometimes works.”
The letter, published Wednesday, is intended to help the DSCC raise $1.1 million in August.
Cleland has kept a relatively low profile recently. He did try to attend the Barack Obama event in Cobb County last month, only to be disinvited because of his new status as a lobbyist.
Still, the Senate letter prompted an obvious question: Will Cleland take an active role in the fall campaigns?
The answer, from Cleland himself, is no. “I’m hunkered down lower than a chicken in a south Georgia hailstorm,” he said this afternoon.
Permalink | Comments (25) | Post your comment |
Democrats ready to unload on McCain, Reed over Atlanta fund-raiser
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The signs are unmistakable. Democrats are about to unload on Republican presidential candidate John McCain — and the upcoming Atlanta event that Ralph Reed is helping to boost.
Today’s The Hill, a newspaper that covers Congress, notes that McCain has thus far ignored calls to cancel the fund-raiser from “watchdog groups” who note Reed’s former association with imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
An investigation driven by McCain, as chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, uncovered much of the relationship.
But Democrats are no longer much impressed. This paragraph is from the Hill:
“Calling yourself a maverick and claiming credit for fighting corruption while raising money with one of the central figures in the Jack Abramoff corruption scandal is not what most voters have in mind when they think of ‘straight talk,’” said Damien LaVera, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee. “It is, however, one more example of why John McCain is offering more of the same failed Republican leadership.”
A statement just released this morning, again from Democratic National Committee and its chairman Howard Dean, is even stronger — and calls McCain’s 2006 investigation of corruption less than thorough.
“Despite his shady ties to Abramoff, McCain never called Reed to testify before his committee. In fact, despite acknowledging wrongdoing among his colleagues, McCain refused to investigate fellow Republicans in Congress,” the press release states.
Says Dean:
“John McCain’s decision to cozy up to one of the central figures in the Republican culture of corruption shows how far HE IS is willing to go to win. Despite all of his rhetoric about reform, McCain’s willingness to accept tainted money raised by tainted Abramoff cronies like Ralph Reed shows that McCain simply cannot be trusted to bring change to Washington politics. A maverick no more, the John McCain of 2000 wouldn’t even consider voting for the John McCain of 2008.”
In the Hill article, an RNC official noted that Reed’s name is not on the official invitation to the event, which will be held at the downtown Atlanta Marriott Marquis. But the official would not confirm whether Reed is a member of the McCain 2008 Victory Team, as Reed told supporters last week in an e-mail.
On Tuesday, Reed told my AJC colleague Aaron Sheinin:
“I’m strongly supporting Senator McCain because he’s advocating conservative positions on taxes, judges, energy, strengthening the family and common sense values. I have great respect for his service to the country.
“I sent that e-mail out in my capacity as a private citizen. I don’t hold any position or title with the McCain campaign, haven’t sought one, don’t want one.”
Update: An interview with Reed by the Wall Street Journal produced this:
“You know, I’ve had differences in the past with Sen. McCain but frankly those pale into insignificance compared with the stark differences between these two nominees and what is at stake in this election,” Reed said in a phone interview.
When asked about his past differences with McCain, Reed offered this explanation: “I take the long view of politics and I’ve found that yesterday’s opponent may well be tomorrow’s friend or ally and I’ve certainly found that to be the case with Sen. McCain.”
Photo credits: Renee’ Hannans Henry/AJC, Associated Press
Services »
