Thanks for the generalizations fayco. Sure Steve Brown disagreed with Bob Lenox. Do you think Steve was right? How about his disagreement with another Ramsey supporter Doug Warner? Did Doug do us all justice on the development authority? How about Direct PAC, nice guys or not?

I've (I'll take the supporter label) been harsh on some bloggers when they try to validate Lenox, Warner, Logsdon and the bunch. What they have done to our city cannot be justified. Please don't expect us to pat them on the back for robbing us blind.

Matt Ramsey just keeps taking their money. Oh well!

Brown is not wanted by the City Fathers for whatever reasons (his marriage, his independence, or what) but, he sees how the town is run as going by the book, not by mutual protection of a gang!
That is how it is intended to be!

Which title do you prefer?

You can call Steve Brown a lot of things, but "idiot" isn't one of them. Even Brown's political enemies and the special interests have a health respect for his grasp of the issues.

Vote Republican

Most of Ramsey's huge signs are on vacant lots owned by local developers. Several of his campaign contributors are from Group VI who are helping secure those sites. Dar Thompson owns three of the sites.

There's not a developer on Ramsey's list. Just little old retired school teachers. Just as Tonto 707. I think a developer could sit on Tonto's face and he'd still deny their existence.

It's true with the big signs as most of the sites are listed properties. Mike Rossetti has plastered his holding with the small signs.

I'm not sure how effective the signs are anyway.

I also am fairly sure this turnout will be incredibly LOW.

Their impact is marginable. However, if they garner (from anuninformed and weak minded 'sign voter') you 5 votes then that may make the difference in a close election.

I have to agree with CCB as to how telling the 'sign placement locations' are, as to revealing who his true supporters are.

wdd5885 is right in saying the last time Steve Brown ran he was the butt of some of the most nasty blogs ever written. My aunt and uncle were visiting back then and my uncle he had never seen anything like it in his life. Brown was ambushed big time.

As far as comments about Mike King being called an alcoholic, I can't remember reading where someone called him an alcoholic. I do remember Cal Beverly writing about King dropping some beers with Harold Logsdon. If I'm not mistaken, Mike King admitted to that anyway. I know he drinks alcohol because I've seen him at Flat Creek.

Ouch! What a bad run for Harold Logsdon and his buddies
Submitted by Young Lover O F... on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 8:32pm.
Well once Mike King was exposed for being a drinking buddy of Harold Logsdon and Steve Boone, he was a goner for sure. We didn't need another alcoholic in the city council.

Mike Harman was booted, King got the chute and I expect Matt Ramsey who has the full backing of all the Harman, King and Logsdon supporters will meet the same fate.

Congrats Mr. Sturbaum and it's all for one and one for all in the voting booth.

This is but one. I don't have time to find the others. I believe the blogger apologized, but the allegation was made and still findable on the internet. The nastiness has gone both ways. Accusing three men of being alcholics is just wrong.

I didn't see it before. You can't read them all

I support Steve Brown, but I don't support calling someone an alcoholic without proof. Like I said before, I know Mike King is no tea sipper, but I'm not going to call him an alcoholic.

I'm sure Steve Brown or Matt Ramsey wouldn't approve of such things either.

Ramsey's contribution list is an issue.

Those people gave us the "gifts" of the illegal dump under the police station,(slipped their mind that it was there) the illegal tennis center "loan", on a building they couldn't build right so it has a leaky roof and mold. The people on his list are the "gifts" that keep raping PTC and the taxpayers.

We deserve better and so does the state of GA. We need someone to ignore the "needs" of the white collar crooks and work for the average citizen.

Strictly speaking, of course. The issues are transportation, H.R. 900, water conservation, and district voting (to name a few).

Bringing up campaign donor lists is a tactic designed to deflect attention from the real issues. Both sides have used the tactic because Ramsey and Brown aren't that far apart. It's a legitimate strategy, however it's not about the real issues.

Since the day Ramsey announced, you guys have attacked him on his backers, not any of his stances on the issues. He agrees with most of you on the issues.

The issues are transportation, H.R. 900, water conservation, and district voting (to name a few).

Bringing up campaign donor lists is a tactic designed to deflect attention from the real issues.

Ramsey's donor list and his supporters are part of the real issues. Why do you think they set him up to run in the first place. And why do they have a contribution list in the first place. Because it is proven information that is meaningful in voter decision making process. Note that we could care less as to his personal matters and his shoes size, as they are irrelevant in this election. But, rest assured the contributor list is ever so telling. Otherwise you guys wouldn't be defending it to the 'the last paid political operative is standing'.

Let's go back to what your Lawyer Ramsey said in the debates. Note again, that if the contributor list is not an important factor in this election, then why did your boss declare in the debates, that he desired that all campaign contributions be disclosed in "real time" (his words)? Personally, I think he said this as a mere smoke and mirrors tactic in an effort to portray himself as being transparent.

Now, in order to keep one of his first campaign promises, then you go get your candidate, within 24 hours, to post a blog disclosing all contributions through today and post it on his website where we can view it and link it.

If the contributors list is not important and Lawyer Ramsey desires to fulfill his promises, then this should not be a problem for you guys at all.

So pass this challenge on to your candidate and let's let him start by putting his promise into action.

24 hours is certainly an achievable goal in lieu of his 'real time' legislative proposal.

Because Lawyer Ramsey may be busy campaigning, and we want to all make this "real time' thing workable, then I will send an e-mail to Mr. Ramsey's website so won't have any excuse for not keeping this promise.

Has ramsy actually taken a stance or issued an opinion on anything??

I would love to read about it.

Politically, why would Ramsey start throwing out a lot of detailed and some controversial positions? He's going to say he's for what's best for the district, local control(always a winner), GA, God, and Country, THE CHILDREN. And now, Water. This is what perceived front-runners do: stay vague and talk in general terms. Why? Because it gets you elected.

As far as whether this strategy helps make people informed about the candidate, no, it doesn't. Ramsey's group is counting on the fact that he's got the backing of the Fayette County Repubs, most of the movers and shakers, etc. and that Steve Brown is a very polarizing figure, much like Hillary Clinton. Brown or a Clinton will cause some to turn out and vote simply to vote AGAINST them. Otherwise, they probably just sit at home.

If you notice, Logsdon used this same strategy to win easily. While some might be questioning their votes for Logsdon now, the strategy is tried and tested politically all over the country, and is proven to work.

Politically, why would Ramsey start throwing out a lot of detailed and some controversial positions?

Because Lawyer Ramsey, his 'paid handlers' and seasoned developer supporters understand that if he were to reveal the details of his positions in a truthful manner, then they're campaign would perhaps become a doomed endeavor.

stay vague and talk in general terms. Why? Because it gets you elected.

Thanks for your honesty Nuk. That's exactly summarizes who Lawyer Ramsey is and the establishment that propped him up. Just a bunch of typical misleading political hacks.

And we were told Lawyer Ramsey would be different. (eyes rolling)

H.R. 900 Opposes
District Voting Opposes
Transportation Wants to Speed Up DOT process

Need some more?

Let me make this easy for you and let's just take up one issue on your list.

Transportation Wants to Speed Up DOT process

Another freaking definition less cliché. Why don't you do the fine voters a favor and define what the hell that means?

All we have to go on is th history of Lawyer Ramsey's supporters and those they have previously placed in office. So, by using those facts and attempting to define that phrase, it interprets out to mean passing legislation that by-passes and eliminates the need for local input and zoning concerns by city and county entities".

This simply means that if a law like this gets passed then a project like TDK can be put on the fast track and constructed without the interference of local and county concerns.

Now WDD... if I (and others) are misinterpreting the intent of what Mr. Ramsey's vague campaign slogan means, then perhaps it is necessary for him to be honest and transparent on this issue by immediately posting a his policy positions on this subject.

How about it?

by now that Steve Brown has widespread grass roots support?

Tell me you've had a memory lapse! He lost to Logsdon 81+% to whatever is left, and you say he has widespread grass roots support.

WOW

Thanks. You've eloquently backed up the arguments that several of us have been trying to convey regarding our concerns about Lawyer Ramsey and his 'connections'.

However, it is a fruitless endeavor to try to reason with the Logsdon / Seabaugh / Westmoreland / Lenox / PCDC / Group VI / Chamber Hacks / GOP Butt Kissing Campaign Slogan Empty Suited Party Hacks / and the McDawg types. These guys could care less about the truth, as they simply, just want to function effortlessly and without controversy within the confines of the developer / lawyer establishment in an effort to shortcut their career and financial goals. It amazes me as to how these guys will die carrying the banner for the developers irrespective of how unethical their means may be and how negatively many of their questionable misuse of government powers prey upon the taxpayers of this county, state, and nation. And they shamelessly do this under they guise of portraying themselves as 'fiscal conservatives'.

Matt Ramsey may very well win this election. But, in no way does his possible victory diminish the importance of this debate, nor the consequences being imposed upon us.

In closing might I quote the highest authority of us all: "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" (Mark 8:36).