Westmoreland, McGraw stage spirited debate

Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:01pm
By: John Thompson

‘You read the Fayette Citizen too much’

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland continued his attacks on the media during a feisty debate Wednesday night with Democratic challenger Mike McGraw in Newnan.

McGraw was taking the Congressman to task over ignoring the plight of more than 700 Fayette and South Fulton residents who have become ill due to noxious odor emanating from the PSC plant on the Fayette-Fulton border.

Westmoreland’s response?

“You read the Fayette Citizen too much.”

The response was just one of the verbal jousts witnessed by more than 200 interested voters. Westmoreland also defended his position on the renewal of the Voting Rights Act by stating that he was just trying to make the act better and have it apply to every part of the country. The Congressman had received criticism that he was trying to hold up renewing the act.

But McGraw was aghast that there was even discussion on this issue, when the Congress had far bigger issues to discuss.

“Why are we even discussing this in 2006? You protect everybody’s right to vote. That shouldn’t even be a question,’ McGraw said.

Another issue raised during the debate was how best to preserve Constitutional rights during the age of terrorism.

“We have used the Patriot Act for years against organized crime, so why shouldn’t we be able to use it against people who are trying to harm us?” Westmoreland said.

McGraw said it was a challenge, but he was a Sam Nunn type Democrat and said we had to follow the “moral high ground” and preserve the Constitution and other human rights documents, such as the Geneva Convention.

“We haven’t had another attack. We’re not allowing them to bring the war to us,” said Westmoreland in his rebuttal time.

In response to the illegal immigration problem, Westmoreland said the House had just voted to appropriate money to build a 700-mile fence at the border to try and stem the flow of illegal aliens.

McGraw said he wanted the situation stopped now and advocated fining an employer $100,000 on the first offense of hiring illegal workers.

“Clinton handed out more than 5,000 fines against employers that employed illegal aliens. In the last two years, just three employers have been fined,” McGraw added.

One of the more pointed questions concerned the integrity of the current Congress.

“I look at my campaign literature about every three or four months, and make sure I’m doing the things I promised my constituents. I’m a conservative Republican and fought my own party on several issues,” Westmoreland said.

McGraw paused when he was asked the question and said he believes the integrity of Congress is an oxymoron in today’s political landscape. He said he decided to switch his party affiliation in April from republican to Democrat and challenge Westmoreland because he couldn’t tolerate what was going on in Washington.

“It’s only gotten worse since April and this is a grassroots effort. I’m running on red, white and blue issues, not red state, blue state,” McGraw added.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by Joshua Hickman on Sun, 10/22/2006 - 10:04pm.

We're looking for feedback on Taylor vs Perdue Poll, and 3rd Congressional District Poll.
Visit
www.jwhickman.com
and Vote on the Online Poll

Thanks

Submitted by jmd on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:43pm.

Congressman Westmoreland knows exactly what he is talking about. Instead of calling him names, perhaps you should spend a little more time researching the topic. Even Democrat Joe Biden had this one figured out. I quote from the Congressional Record:

Many of the tools the Act provides to law enforcement to fight terrorism have been used for decades to fight organized crime and drug dealers, and have been reviewed and approved by the courts. As Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) explained during the floor debate about the Act, "the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. To put it bluntly, that was crazy! What's good for the mob should be good for terrorists." (Cong. Rec., 10/25/01)

Mark Davis (not ashamed to sign my name)
Fayetteville

Submitted by aprilw on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:43pm.

How come this debate wasn't advertised more and/or why wasn't it on television? I would of liked to have gone to it. I guess I missed it because I knew nothing about it til a few hours before it was to take place.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:58pm.

The coverage of the debate can be found in The Times-Herald (Newnan) newspaper today (10/13/06) and on line tomorrow at www.times-herald.com. Please take a look. DVD will be available soon. Local TV station Channel 10 will televise the debate on Saturday, October 14 at 6pm.

Saturday, October 14, 2006 - Mike will appear on WSB TV2 Atlanta during the "Candidate Access 2006" being televised from 10:30am - 2:00pm.

Submitted by aprilw on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 10:26pm.

Thanks for the info. I am planning on voting for Mcgraw because I am disappointed in Westmorland.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 10:41pm.

I have never gotten involved in a political race until now. I've always tried to keep up with politics and be an informed voter, voting across party lines and independent (Libertarian, when possible) but I've never actively supported a candidate until now. It had to get this bad to get me involved. I miss the days when we had Goldwater and Nunn on the Armed Sevices Committee. Those great men put the good of the country first!

Submitted by aprilw on Sat, 10/14/2006 - 12:57am.

I wish we still had people like Nunn and all. I think McGraw will be a good change for us. I am hoping for some great things in the future with Westmorland out. Do you think word has gotten out about McGraw? I guess what I mean is do you think he will win at this point? Will enough Democrats and Republicans vote for him? I know a lot of people who say they are Republicans but will vote for McGraw. I am like you in that I vote across party lines.

Submitted by 30YearResident on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 6:48pm.

For Westmoreland, because I could NEVER vote to send another democrat to Washington.

A vote for McGraw is a vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and we should NEVER allow that to happen.

Submitted by swmbo on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 7:53pm.

Isn't that whole I-could-NEVER-vote-for-a-Democrat the same as when some minorities say "I could NEVER vote for a Republican"? We criticize them for being so blind to the candidate that they vote for a party that has exploited them for years.

This is an HONEST question.

What is the difference? There is no guarantee that Pelosi is going to be speaker and, even if she is, all she will be able to do is cause gridlock (in which case, we neither lose, nor do we win). BUT, if we re-elect the guy who takes our votes and then represents everybody BUT us, even with Hastert as speaker, we lose.

-------------------------------
If you and I are always in agreement, one of us is likely armed and dangerous.

Spear Road Guy's picture
Submitted by Spear Road Guy on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:19pm.

It's amazing how Westmoreland stutters when his opponent is leaving him on the moral low road. Westmoreland ran out of gas a long time ago.

Vote Republican (except Westmoreland)


KraftyFla's picture
Submitted by KraftyFla on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 7:35pm.

At least Forest Gump wasn't crooked....

When I read the news story in which Wastemoron is quoted as attributing the use of the Patriot Act to fight organized crime for years I thought "What a dunce". And if you go on line and see, the Patriot Act was adopted as H.R. 3162 on October 24, 2001, signed into law by President Bush on October 26. He knows zip about history.

Wastemoron is a thoroughly uneducated, ignorant boob. This Congressional district is the laughing stock of America.

Hey, where are you Lynn supporters who claimed the Colbert tape was doctored?


Submitted by jmd on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:45pm.

Congressman Westmoreland knows exactly what he is talking about. Instead of calling him names, perhaps you should spend a little more time researching the topic. Even Democrat Joe Biden had this one figured out. I quote from the Congressional Record:

Many of the tools the Act provides to law enforcement to fight terrorism have been used for decades to fight organized crime and drug dealers, and have been reviewed and approved by the courts. As Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) explained during the floor debate about the Act, "the FBI could get a wiretap to investigate the mafia, but they could not get one to investigate terrorists. To put it bluntly, that was crazy! What's good for the mob should be good for terrorists." (Cong. Rec., 10/25/01)

Mark Davis (not ashamed to sign my name)
Fayetteville

Basmati's picture
Submitted by Basmati on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:23pm.

"We have used the Patriot Act for years against organized crime, so why shouldn’t we be able to use it against people who are trying to harm us?

We have? I thought we used it against terra-ists?

Maybe that's why the FBI used the Patriot Act to get the credit card records of everyone who stayed in a Las Vegas casino last year?

Maybe the terra-ists haven't attacked us lately, but Westmoreland and his Republican cronies continue their never-ending assault on American civil liberties.


bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Thu, 10/12/2006 - 5:54pm.

My is it that my grandmother and grandfather didn’t have to “give up their rights” so they could fight in WWI. (Roosevelt had dinner with them)

My mother and father didn’t give up their rights so they could fight in WWII.

My brothers and sisters didn’t have to “give up their rights” during the Korean conflict or Vietnam conflict. (McNamara used to have dinner with us.)

So why is it that I must surrender my rights now?


mostconsiderate's picture
Submitted by mostconsiderate on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 3:02pm.

I was there. Where has McGraw been all these years? He was intelligent, well-informed, and boy was he on the attack! He layed into Wastemoron! McGraw really stood up for Fayette county. Somebody told me this was McGraw's first political debate ever and he's not even a lawyer. He totally tore up our so-called experienced Congressman.


mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 6:34pm.

But he is a Democrat, don't you know.
A rookie Democrat representing a 90% Republican district? How does that work for us?
Or do you just want to elect a Democrat because you are one? 'Splain that Lucy.
meow


Submitted by miker1369 on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:45pm.

You made a misleading statement, while it may have been a majority republican district in the past the 8th district has never been a 90% republican district. Neither is the new 3rd district, in fact we have picked up a few counties that are more democrat than republican.

You ask how does it work for us, you tell me mudcat, how has it worked for us the last couple of years?

You should vote for the person not the party. Mr. Westmoreland has brought nothing but embarrassment to this district. Mr. McGraw is just a true American that sees both Democrat and Republican and has had enough and wants to bring change from the bottom of his heart, just like many others in this country.

So mudcat, the real question is are you just voting for Westmoreland because you are republican?

I am a republican and I am voting for McGraw.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 9:36pm.

Hey, Mudcat- Do you believe in Magic? Do you think that the USDA "magic meat fairies" can wave a wand over your pack of hamburger meat and keep you safe from Mad Democrat Disease?
RRRRRUFF !
P.S.- 90% of Republicans are fed up with Westmoreland

Submitted by aprilw on Sat, 10/14/2006 - 3:02am.

How do you know what cats taste like? Smiling

mostconsiderate's picture
Submitted by mostconsiderate on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 10:25pm.

When "Yellowdog" Democrats were the huge majority of Georgians; when Dixiecrats were more "truly" conservative than Republicans and Nixon was giving tax rebates to the middle class; Eisenhower, by today's standards would be a liberal. Then came a time when Republicans thought it was ok to give everything to the rich and pretend they were helping the poor. For a while, Georgians believed it. Now, they are coming back to their roots, a party of the people, that by my count have no scandals other than one getting a BJ (a bit personal) but certainly not enough to overshadow an otherwise very successful Presidency.

We have to make up our minds whether we are going to listen to people who serve the rich lying about helping the poor and middle class or are we going to vote for a change after the most scandalous period in either party's history.

I don't know about you, but I don't have another house to give rich men and I sure as hell don't wanna give my grandkid's house to them. I don't wanna lose another brother, uncle or son to protect Halliburton's profits. Frankly, I don't even wanna kill another Iraqi pretending that our God is better than theirs because we've got more guns and money for the moment.

I am especially sick of people telling me that there's a great economy when it's one guy out of a hundred who is getting super rich while everybody else is worse off. By the current Republican measure of a "good economy", if 1 guy in a 1000 had a billion dollars and a the rest had nothing, we'd all be millionaires...so much for averages.

Well, this Eisenhower Republican is voting for a Democrat this time and getting my soul back. Maybe some day the Republican party will get it's soul back when we fire all of the one's who have sold us a dog that can't hunt!


Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 10:00pm.

Halliburton's profits don't mean a thing to me. I'm middle class and I need someone to look out for me and my pension.

I also don't need to live next to another poison recycling plant. This Republican is also voting Democrat. My future retirement depends on it.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 10:34pm.

I remember my parents, both wage-earners, sitting down at the kitchen table on Pay Day, after supper (while we kids washed the dishes) and hammering out the family budget with pencil and paper. It was a lesson in arithmetic, plannning, priorities, compromise, and so much more. If they couldn't pay cash for something- either forget about it or save up for it. The house was the only thing bought on credit. If they only had five dollars left to put into the Savings Account that month, that is where it went. How many couples do you know who have that teamwork today? I would love to see our government act so responsibly. I think Mike McGraw is much closer to that type of middle-class wisdom than any incumbent you could name.

Submitted by dollaradayandfound on Thu, 11/02/2006 - 8:47am.

I also remember those days of budgeting. It was necessary because banks would not loan you a single dollar for anything except land. Also, no one would extend credit except script to be spent at their store and withheld from the next check.
Banks thens discovered credit cards and predator lending. We now shore up this fragile economy with debt to Asia.

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 10:38pm.

My family life sounds very familiar to yours. The last stats that I saw published somewhere, said that only 1-2% of us are saving right now.
That is so scary. What is going to happen, when the economy takes a big stumble? Most people will have nothing to fall back on.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 11:06pm.

There has always been rich and poor. The Middle Class is a recent experiment. We are apparently slated for extinction. The average C.E.O. makes 431 times the median wage. If you are a median wage earner, you have to work two years to equal what he makes in a DAY.

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 11:12pm.

It makes me sick. They just sent another big CEO to prison last week.

Hopefully one of his fellow inmates will take care of buiseness for us.

Republicans definitly are not our friends right now. Too many companies are allowed to default on their pension funds.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 11:42pm.

It's not just the Republicans or Democrats. Each party has their wolves in sheep's clothing. We have got to start really punishing the high-level white collar criminal. A year or two at the "Club Fed" at Eglin AFB, with cellphones, internet access and fresh shellfish every day doesn't cut it.

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 11:49pm.

For white collar criminals.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Fri, 10/13/2006 - 11:06pm.

There was also a time when we had upright citizens from both the major parties in office, like Barry Goldwater and Sam Nunn- who put the good of the country first and foremost. I can't understand why the public would elect demagogues like Bill Clinton and Oily George Junior when there were actual public servants at work like Sam Nunn. He worked hard, behind the scenes, to collect the "loose nukes" - nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union so they wouldn't get into the hands of terrorists. That was long before 9-11. The public couldn't have cared less. It still doesn't. We the people are more interested in American Idol than American Government. We should be ashamed. I'm just as guilty as anyone- things had to get this bad- and they are VERY bad- to get involved.

Submitted by aprilw on Sat, 10/14/2006 - 2:57am.

Amen!

mostconsiderate's picture
Submitted by mostconsiderate on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 6:40pm.

Yes, the headline mentioned Westmoreland by name, "Oust Westmoreland" in the AJC official midterm endorsements. McGraw was one of two challengers to receive endorsements in the whole state against incumbents!


ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 8:30pm.

Endorses a Dem, what EARTHBREAKING NEWS!


Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 9:38pm.

Bin Laden sent a tape to the news media endorsing w in 2004. He stated that the best thing we could do for him was to re-elect w.
If we had elected someone else they would have gone after him.

cute name for the ajc...

Submitted by abc1234 on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 10:55pm.

Bin Laden sent a tape to Al Jazeera in 2004, shortly before the election, on which he said that he would guarantee the safety of any state that voted for Kerry.

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 11:02pm.

I don't remeber that. But I do remember all 3 major networks showing the tape where he begged us to re-elect bush. The reason he gave for that was simple. Bush had not made it a priority to capture him, and he truely feared that another president would make it a priority.

Kerry was adamant about getting him, and forgetting sadam.

Submitted by abc1234 on Thu, 11/02/2006 - 4:42am.

Sorry! I just looked up the transcript from that video in 2004-- bin Laden said:
"In conclusion, I tell you in truth, that your security is not in the hands of Kerry, nor Bush, nor al-Qaida. No.
Your security is in your own hands. And every state that doesn't play with our security has automatically guaranteed its own security."
Here's a link to the transcript from Al Jazeera:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C6AF22-98FB-4A1C-B21F-2BC36E87F61F.htm
And here are transcripts from CNN and Fox as well, just to be on the 'safe' side:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/bin.laden.transcript/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137129,00.html
It's an interesting tape-- I think it's worth reading no matter how you feel about Bush.

I'm not sure what made me remember him endorsing Kerry-- I could have sworn I'd read it! Maybe a mistranslation somewhere... or I was distracted by that spangly gold outfit. Anyway, I agree with you that Bush hasn't made bin Laden much of a priority, before or after 9/11. He basically ignored Massoud's warning in April 2001 and continues to place bin Laden on a back burner to other issues.
On the other hand, I'm not convinced that catching bin Laden will solve anything anyway-- maybe Bush ought to be focusing on fixing the conditions that drive people in that area to support al Qaeda rather than killing a man who is already more of a symbol than an actual leader anyway.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 8:44pm.

... but it's not a very progressive one. Note that it only endorsed TWO challengers against incumbents, in the whole state.

Submitted by HarrisCountyGeorgia on Wed, 11/01/2006 - 7:48pm.

There's a good bit of reading in The Federalist Papers, circa late 1700's, about how Congress was designed to work. Incumbents were supposed to be easily removable, if their constituents didn't like the job they were doing. Getting in was supposed to be easier than staying in. What happened?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.