Cal Beverly Endorsed Brown-But why?

I've pontificated upon this matter for some time. I couldn't understand how Cal's firebranded editorials against the quasi-dictator Brown over the last few years could be turned around now.

Logsden has no discernible political skills and I see no future in the Georgia House or Senate. So I trust that his goal to be mayor will be his only true "ulterior motive". Unlike Brown, who has been churning the electorate for eight years, doing his best to sow the seeds for another higher office. He can't lose his re-election because it will haunt his political future, ergo, his scorched earth policy to be re-elected.

But back to my earlier comments regarding Cal's endorsement.

Cal endorsed Brown four years ago. Cal got what he endorsed. Many of us who knew Brown, had a queasy feeling down deep in our stomach, that something was wrong with Brown. Cal and Tennant apparently thought that was butterflies of excitement, but we interpreted it as the onset of a nausea.

But why would Cal endorse him again?
Thats a hard question...
If Cal thought he had a prayer's chance, of winning, he might have come out against him. Cal needs to show that he has some authority and control over the masses. Cal, arguably, stays in touch with the historical issues of Fayette, and deserves our attention, but he makes mistakes like the rest of us.
But I think Cal saw the handwriting on the wall. He knew Brown was going down. So his backtracking to support Brown was a safe bet. (Since the other five were all long shots and his endorsement of any would have been a guess.)
If Brown won, then Cal was again successful in getting his guy elected, but if Brown was going to go down in flames, and some other candidate won, then open the floodgates, cuz Cal could go after him with impunity.

Now Cal will have 4 more years to report to the citizens of Fayette, I told you so. We've been telling him that for four years, and now he wants to do the same back to us. So essentially, he gambled with his endorsement and figured he could only go with Brown or look foolish. Instead, its a WIN/WIN bet for him.

So count on an initial honeymoon with Cal. Then once a few decisions are made that Cal has any uneasiness with, boom, the levees are opened and Cal's editorials will come pouring out. (Perhaps with Brown as a guest columnist.)

I could be very, very wrong with Harold, but I have gotten to know Brown, and my stomach is sick with how he has managed the city. His psychotic fits with the commissioners over ever issue imaginable, his constant fight with every department, his grandstanding on cable television. . . he is just pathetic in his desire to be the focus of everyone's attention, and that makes me queasy, very queasy.

Thats my take, we welcome yours.

RE: Endorsement

Submitted by PTC Guy on Mon, 12/05/2005 - 10:55am.

A lot of assumptions there.

But Cal has been accurate on Brown and Logsdon.

Brown can irritate you but just keeps getting prove right in the end in the main.

Logsdon is indeed an empty suit who has misrepresented his credentials, acted as if certain issues in work for over two years have not even been started yet and answered key issues with 'it needs to be looked into.' While at the same time promising to freeze or cut taxes.

login to post comments