Search the ArchivesNavigation Contact InformationThe Citizen Newspapers For Advertising Information Email us your news! For technical difficulties |
Janet's Talking PointsThere is a hilarious email circulating Peachtree City. Janet Dunn is sending her thought-to-be friends twelve "talking points" she wants them to print out and hand out "in their travels" - whatever that means. I wish I could share the comments that are attached to the emails but most want their comments to remain private so I will just share mine. Talking point 1: "Greg Dunn is not running against the Sheriff." - Uh... Janet, then why are all of the following talking points about the Sheriff and none are about Greg's opponent? Talking point 2: "Greg's #1 priority is and has been public safety." - Yeah Janet, all of us who have been following this have seen how pro-law enforcement Greg has been. No one can park anywhere they shouldn't in the ball parks with our fourteen Marshals but our Drug Task Force still has just six drug agents. The same amount they had eight years ago when your husband first took office. We're all parking well now but we're still fighting our drug problems. Talking point 3. "The conflict between the entire County Commission and the Sheriff is 100% about accountability of taxpayer's money." - Oh yeah there's no ego involved there. Spending $20k on a forensic audit that found virtually nothing after the money had already been audited twice? Yeah I feel good about that accounting. Talking point 4: "Greg does NOT want to take over the Sheriff's drug seizure funds." Hello Janet!! He and Linda sued the Sheriff to try and do just that, and they lost! Talking point 5: "Drug seizure dollars only equal about 2.5% of the Sheriff's funds." Janet, you wouldn't want your friends to mislead people would you? Drug seizure funds this year alone were more than $1.2 million. That's closer to 10%. I know you don't like facts to stand in the way of good spin but facts are facts. Talking point 6: "State law REQUIRES the Sheriff to procure and dispose of all equipment in accordance with county policies and procedures." - No Janet it doesn't. Read the court order. The Office of the Sheriff and all other Constitutional Officers are allowed to make their own policies. They answer to the people not your husband. Talking point 7: "No one has yet to win either of the two lawsuits between the County Commission and the Sheriff" _ I know it's hard to keep count of the number of lawsuits your husband has filed but it's a wee bit more than two. There are only two issues remaining but again, read the ruling. The Judge told the county to settle because he did not think they could win those remaining two. Talking point 8: "By not following state law and federal guidelines the Sheriff is wasting an inordinate amount of taxpayer money." - Uh Janet... the Judge ruled the county wrong, not the Sheriff. Federal guidelines prohibit the county from taking over the drug money. Talking point 9: "Greg's opponent will not insist that the Sheriff account for his taxpayer funded expenditures or be accountable for his equipment." - I don't agree. I think he will but I think he can do it without suing him. Talking point 10: " Continued failure by the current Sheriff and future Sheriff to comply with the law will eventually result in the type of problems Fulton and Clayton county have been experiencing on a regular basis with their Sheriffs." - Most citizens would not agree and the Judge obviously didn't. The Sheriff has been in office for close to thirty years and that hasn't happened. Everyone from Clayton and Fulton are trying to move here. Talking point 11: "Our relatively low crime rates and tough law enforcement are in NO way jeopardized by the Sheriff following state law, federal guidelines and local policies regarding purchasing and disposition of equipment." - No but a half-a-million dollars in frivolous law suits might be a slight distraction. Talking point 12: "In spite of the extraordinary personal and public attacks the Sheriff and a couple of his deputies have launched against Greg, he never made any personal attacks against any law enforcement personnel." - What the ...? Janet you've done nothing but make personal attacks against some of the deputies. Very personal attacks. Did you forget that your husband leaked the information that an undercover officer's wife purchased the jacket he wears undercover; described the jacket and named the undercover agent's wife? Is that not personal? The email ends with the statement; "When Greg speaks about law enforcement, drug seizure funds and accountability he knows what he is talking about because a large part of his military career dealt with exactly the same issues." - Janet, the military is not allowed to be involved in drug seizure funds. They never have been. Some things can't be spun no matter how hard you try. Tell me again who Greg is not running against? lifeinptc's blog | login to post comments
|
Copyright 2010 - Fayette Publishing, Inc. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use Policy
Server 4
