That they will vote along the land uses plan as well as the current member have in the past years. I'm hoping they don't change myself. But that's why we hold elections, to keep people on their toes.

Lynn Westmoreland endorsed Stephens? That's worth about as much as having Janet coming on here to defend her hubbies shenanigans. We all know what happens when she steps out to fight. Sorry Casey.....truth hurts even if it makes one an idiot to speak such.

Sorry Casey.....truth hurts even if it makes one an idiot to speak such.

Truth, honesty and integrity carry a lot of weight and respect.

Love and Kisses

Truth, honesty and integrity carry a lot of weight and respect.

Your statement I agree 100% with. The sarcasm and "pack" mentality you see here is THE result of folks challenging people that apparently lack truth, honesty, and integrity in their actions and representation of the peoples that elect them. Questioning questionable actions and behaviour is a means of accountability that many of the clowns representing us lack. I rather like it when proved wrong about our elected officials. I'd like to have my confidence in government restored. But the more I learn about many of the incumbents and challengers that are out there running the scarier it gets. I've placed blind trust in these characters long enough and it's time for me to Wake Up. How about you?

Show me where I'm wrong on an issue and I will alter my comments regarding that subject. But I will not stop challenging authority. If we become complacent then we will be taken advantage of.

Speaking of Wake Up. Did PTC Guy get him banned or something. Just kidding Bro.

Hey big lion. I have not been banned. I just have gotten really tired of the squabbles on here. The idiots posting as some ungrateful dead guys, etc. Where is the honesty and well thought out dialogue? It seems everyone is worried more about discussing religion or complaining about the proper use of punctuation or spelling in the posts.

OH, I still read. Every day. I am waiting on the right time and I will be back. And you are right. Everyone on here needs to wakeup (even though I know you already have.)

Talk to you soon and thanks for thinking of me.

.

Peter, your absences in these discussions is very conspicuous.

It appears that you have once again miscalculated the outcome of your actions.

With any luck Cal will unleash John on this and perhaps we’ll get an in-depth interview with Mr. & Mrs. Handel as to how and why such a error in judgment could have been committed.

Far be from me to suggest to Cal how he should run his business, but it would be interesting to see a headline like:

“Fayette Citizens demand Apology from Fulton County”

Or how about:

“Fulton County implies that Fayette Sheriff is Corrupt!”

I could see how maybe the AJC and CNN would want a piece of that one.

Peter, is that toast I smell burning, or is it your political future?

Now Casey and Dragqueen are going to come down on you for discussing a subject about what another person said. Haven't you got their point yet that people like Peter should be able to say whatever they please without being challenged. And your comment about the burning future of Peter will surely classify you as an idiot, communist, censorer, bully or even worse....yes....a Mobster. Now make them happy and go bury your bone.

Hmmmm. Not saying she is but Casey sure sounds and acts a lot like JANET.

Hmmmm. Not saying she is but Casey sure sounds and acts a lot like JANET.

For the eight time I have zero (NO) skin in this political game. I'm not a Dunn, Maxwell, Chapman, Wells and ???? I'm not a poster child for any of them.

I'll continue to read the blogs and make my decision from what I read here (with an open mind) and the newspapers.

I'm afraid you are not getting my point. absolutely, you should challenge what people write, especially if it's only part of the story or rumors and hearsay. I, like many others sitting on the sidelines want to know the truth on issues and candidates, I do have a problem with the MOB ganging up but we been through that, enough said.

There have been some very good factual information exchanged on the candidates, but there have been several posts that are all one sided and much like a pack of Dogs, these posts are actually turning (from what I have read in a few comments) people away from the direction and sponsorship they are meant for. Sometimes you get more bees with honey?

So please continue to enlighten us, I have a little more subtleness, thanks - to lifeinptc - earlier response with the history lesson on how the rage was ignited in the past.

Love and Kisses

Pack: A group of animals, such as dogs or wolves, that run and hunt together.
Mob: A disorderly crowd of people.

Lion, for some reason I just don't feel comfortable being referred to as “one of the mob”.
I would be much happier if I were referred to as “running with the pack”.

A “mob” implies that there is little or no organization or common goal. Where a “pack” implies organization and is referred to as an entity that is engaged in the “hunt”.

I definitely believe that there are those of “us” that are indeed engaged in a hunt for the truth regarding several issues that this forum addresses.

Although each poster has his or her unique hunting style, the ultimate goal is the same, getting to the truth.

While my style of hunting employees a lot of sarcasm others take a more direct or philosophical approach. Hay, if that’s what works for you, go with it.

My point being that I really don’t care if people find me or my style offensive. It has it’s advantages, it gets people talking. It prompts people to log onto the WEB and express their opinions. The free exchange of ideas and/or yelling at each other is better than doing nothing at all and letting the world go round with out participating.

Remember I said that I don’t hire “yes” people. Confrontation is GOOD! It gets ideas flowing. It will often times get people thinking “outside the box”.

I think you might agree that the Mob (Mafia) was pretty well organized although I despise them and their activities. That's another subject though.

Agree though. Confrontation can be good. It is the mechanism that gets us past the spin.

That, I assume, is the sticking point for those who would quiet us.

to appease all of the whiners is have multiple paper blogs on line. Here's a couple of suggested titles. You guys could probably come up with better ones I'm sure. A politically correct spot for each one of us. Kind of like segregating the online population.

The Citizen Right

The Citizen Left

The Citizen Identity Verified....Really It's Me - Moderated by PTC Guy

The Citizen On Sugar - Moderated by Casey

The Citizen Free For All - Moderated by Me

Bet mine would win.

You missed this one, cat with boots.
Being on the payroll, you shouldn't moderate.

-----------------------------------
Making you think twice......

Free For All translates to meaningless.

You never know how many there are on each side, who is trying to play both sides for their outcome and who is just on to stir the pot with absurdities, rendering it all pointless.

Sure, there has to be as much freedom as possible, but when certain limits are crossed everyone looses.

I have seen it destroy forums. Allow it here and it will destroy it.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

I like it just like it is here. I view it as a free for all to get after it with controls to keep us from evolving into anarchy. My point is that I get tired of everyone whining about the Citizen Online. Heck...I even enjoy the Highone, the rice guy, and Peter. If it weren't for them what would you have to talk about. Heck I hope Peter keeps coming on here to straighten us all out. Wouldn't it be cool if Greg jumped in here. My biggest fear is that The Natural Janet Just Askin gal doesn't stop defending her hubby. That's what will destroy this place.

Let everyone have their say. For sure.

But just as one poster only.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

I have just been self appointed as the unofficial chairman of the campaign for the "Anyone But Karen Handel For
Secretary of State" committee. If our grassroots campaign takes off I expect to see a poll on this next week Cal.

There are three other Republican options for Secretary of State:

Charlie Bailey, a 60 year old consultant from Marietta. Website; www.baileysos.com

Eric Martin, a 69 year old buisness man from Atlanta, Ga. Webite; www.ericmartin2006.com

Bill Stephens, a 49 year old buisnessman from Canton. Website www.billstephens.com

My research begins now on which is the preferred choice. Time is short. If we can't defeat her in the Republican primary there are tons of democrats running as well in case we have to hold our nose and vote in November.

Sen. Bill Stephens is much more qualified to be Secretary of State anyway. His web page is www.BillStephens.com.

If you want to share your displeasure with Karen Handel's husband calling our Sheriff corrupt her email is info@KarenHandel.com

P.S. The statement about holding your nose and voting democrat was just a jab at Janet's old saying. I'm hoping we won't have to do that. Sen Stephens looks like a great choice.

Thanks for digging some up.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

That is it for me too Peter. You make me so frigging mad. Why didn't you get up and walk away from the table when this guy from Atlanta comes down and calls our Sheriff corrupt. Of all the disagreements you and your Board have had with Randall none of them involved corruption. You certainly never minded coming to his political gatherings and eating his food. I know because you sat at my table at one of his events. I assume you won't be getting anymore invites so that won't happen again.

That guy from Atlanta probably assumes the whole state is like his city. Then you come here and tell the tale you told? I see you've adopted Dunn's habit of spinning stories so far they can no longer be called the truth.

I suspect Karen Handel, Dunn or you will not be able to draw even 20% in Fayette County now. You didn't exactly win by any huge mandate in the first place.

You're right, you should know appropriate behavior for a politcian but you obviously don't.

Sorry I haven't responded to Eric's comments before this. I was out and talking to several people who were also at the Breakfast this morning. I needed to check to see if my recollection of the events was correct as I couldn't rely on Eric's comments nor on the comments of "Eric's Tablemates". Also, I'm aware that I am not perfect so I wanted to make extra sure I was correct.

Here's what I found. NONE of the people I've asked recall Mr. Handel saying OUR Sheriff was corrupt! I certainly didn't recall that and they don't either! Maybe that's what Eric thought he heard or wanted to hear or whatever, I don't know.

My earlier point was that if Mr. Handel had more experience, he would not have mentioned anything at all. But he did. He was a guest and a novice so I gave the guy a break.

AND, sorry to say for many of you but I am a Bill Stevens supporter and have been for some time! So the false issue of Karen Handel is plain silly. Greg and I support different candidates! Wow! I know this is BIG NEWS for some of you!

For those of you who have some sense; Sometimes Greg and I support the same candidates and sometimes we don't!

So, like I said, an inexperienced political candidate's HUSBAND made a remark that was mis-interpreted by some. I don't know why he made it because I didn't ask him. According to what he says here, he didn't mean to imply what Eric "understood".

Eric, who should know better, leaves in a huff. Very unbecoming and very inappropriate for a candidate OR an elected official.

It doesn't surprise me that the many of you who RARELY know anything about anything you babble about would post many of the comments here. You don't know anything, you don't bother to find out anything and you don't wait for anybody to give you the correct information so you run off like a, what's the word? Oh yeah, a MOB!

That shoe seems to fit many of you.

Peter

And the Oscar for best dramatic performance goes to ... ERIC MAXWELL!

Creating a bit of controversy and buzz is an old political trick. It draws attention, and when the news is slow the reporters make stories out of this sort of incident and you get your name out. I do compliment Eric Maxwell on his cleverness.

Please note how Eric, who is not known to have ever before blessed us in these blogs with thoughtful ideas about the election, took the time to tell us that he had contributed to Karen Handel's campaign. I have voiced my concern before that Eric seems to be giving money to every politician in sight, as if money means nothing to him and he's trying to buy influence. Extravagant spending is not a desirable attribute in elected officials, and that's got me worried. (The Corvette and the ILLSUE tag don't lessen my worry.)

Another thing that worries me is that Eric seems to think that he who has the most yard signs wins. His campaign is all about yard signs. Folks who have gone to his advertised website have found nothing of substance there.

One issue I have never seen discussed is the selection and appointment of citizens to government boards and committees. After the candidates are elected, how will they go about choosing members of these boards? Do they always select cronies and campaign donors? If the answer is Yes, is that the reason Eric contributes so much money to so many candidates?

Because if what you say is true your first Blog was uncalled for. Your tone now clearly indicates the speaker was novice and said something he should not have said. If you did not support that candidate anyway why did you jump in the hornet's nest with your first blog.

You've changed Peter. There is a mean spirit to you now that use to not be there. Either Dunn and Wells, or holding office so long has changed you. There was a time you would have stayed out of this because it doesn't appear to involve you.

If your intention was to come here and share your great wisdom with us. That's not the way your coming across anymore.

I'm not an old hand at this politics stuff, so you tell me. Is that any way to talk to a bunch of voters?

Learn from George W Bush and shut up. If what you say is true then all you have to do is sit back and let the truth win the day over. The way you frantically defend yourself and your comrades actions one comes away with the notion that you really need to in an attempt to cover something up. The more you roll around with us pigs the more the mud gits on ya. And your gittin real muddy these days.

If not...just throw yourself out there some more. It's kind of entertaining you know.

Respectfully,

A member of the Mob

So after all the hairs are split we all agree that Steve Handel didn't know what the hell he was talking about and Bill Stephens is the man to vote for. Got it. I'm good with that.

This morning I had the honor of representing my wife at the Republican Breakfast. I did speak to Mr. Maxwell, who was kind enough to express his thoughts that Karen would win easily in Fayette County.

During my comments I stated that Karen had uncovered a corrupt sheriff and run her off. I did say it was my understanding that there had been some challenges with the Sheriff in Fayette. I did not state nor did I intend to imply that the Fayette County Sheriff Johnson is corrupt. I also hope that no one will hold Karen responsible for my misstatements. My sincere apologies if I offended anyone.

Steve Handel

"Karen had uncovered a corrupt sheriff and run her off." Really Marshal Handel, did ya run her off good did ya.

It is to us too. Fayette County politics was normally very clean before Greg Dunn came along. We have a Sheriff we have re-elected more than any other Sheriff in the history of our county. There is a reason for that.

Think about it. When you insinuate he is corrupt. You insinuate we are stupid. Think very long and hard on that one.

We re-elected Mr. Dunn one time. His opponent was a City Mayor we were all cautious about. We have now learned our lesson.

You have now stepped into what we would call a Dunn(g) pile. Through all of the years of change here in Fayette County we have clung to one constant. Sheriff Randall Johnson. He is the one person, the one fixture we knew was right. You are not the one to challenge that. I also believe you owe him a personal apology. He is a great man.

The emails I have received today are retracting support for Karen, which means she had much more support when she went to sleep last night than she will tonight.

Thank you ptc something-or-other. Sen. Bill Stephens does appear to be a fine candidate.

I hope all of you know that this fellow Handel isn't reading a thing you print. I suppose it may influence some to vote for someone else.

Then why was Handel logged in for a good while earlier tonight? If he wasn't reading he spent a long time logged on for nothing.

And you don't know Dunn? It has been tossed around all week that you are Steve Brown and you haven't denied it. So you do know Dunn, in fact you fought with him constantly. Now you're always, or I should say your always defending him nowadays. What's up with the turn around.

On a different note. Git Real, you're right about the Westmoreland thing. Turned my stomach too. But I'll still probably vote for Stephenson because I hear he is a sound man. Handel is the Fulton County version of Dunn.

Not the Sheriff.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

It takes courage, I think, and I don't know either the Sheriff or Mr. Dunn, to call to the taxpayer's attention the apparent misspending of moneys without a secondary approval, no matter how they are collected. It is courageous especially since the Sheriff is so well liked and apparently of the correct party here. This investigation doesn't make the Sheriff corrupt unless the investigation finds it so. The struggle for power between the marshalls, county cops, etc., is about jobs, not politics. Are we to blind ourselves for political purposes?

There was no misspending.

Dunn was making an attempted money grab that any lawyer could have told him he could not do.

This principle of law is not new nor secret concerning drug money.

The Sheriff did not need Dunn's approval. Audits are what uncover misspending and misdeeds.

There is no unsurity of who is in power in what ways. Dunn had to rightful claim, cost us a bunch of money and get a severe lecture from the court over even attempting this kind of legal action.

The Sheriff is the top dog on those issues, not Dunn. And the audits are what keeps an eye on the Sheriff.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

The audits are to check (when they feel like it) whether the money was spent, and not pocketed. Has nothing to do with local approvals and just plain good common sense. If we let all departments in the county have their own bookkeeping, just think what a mess---like we have now for the sheriff's department.

Hello! Even in PTC the Chief determines how the money is spent.

Remember the Council Meeting where one guy wanted to pull the addtional funding for 3 new cops for the Target area?

The Chief said if they cut his money he would cut cops from the schools, in example, to put cops there.

Funding comes from the county, in example, as basic funding for the Sheriff. Drug monies do not come from the county, are not given to the County, are not spent by the county and do not replace money given by the county, kicking it back to the county. They go to the Sheriffs Dept directly from the state and/or Feds. And the Sheriff spends it.

The Sheriff does not need the counties permission to spend it or guidance on how to spend it.

The audit sees if it was spent legally. The voters decide if he spent it wisely. Not the Council.

Yep. The county can squeeze the Sheriff's budget. But they cannot tell him how to be Sheriff.

There is a big different between setting policy of what a Sheriff does and how he does it.

One popular oversight mechanism is a civilian review board. They make recommendatons for changes to policy.

That coupled with annual audits, minimum, keep an eye on the department.

What you are wanting is the Council to become the Sheriff's boss in how he does his day to day work. That is a disasterous idea.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

Don't tell me no one and everybody, that doesn't fly. Even the governor can be replaced, impeached, or dismissed--no system works if those in power don't answer to someone for everything they do. Ask Clinton and Nixon.

how little you know about our system of government. The sheriff is a constitutional officer in every county in GA and does not answer to the local governing authority (board of commissioners). The voters in every county elect their sheriff and he, along with the other constitutional officers, ie, clerk of superior court, tax commissioner and probate judge, are accountable to the laws which govern their offices and the voters who elect them. None are accountable to any individual or group, at any level.

Frankly, if I were Greg Dunn I'd be taking the "findings" of that forensic audit to a prosecutor and asking him to investigate and indict the sheriff if in fact there is any wrongdoing. Of course, you and I know there is no violation of the law, elsewise Dunn would have already revealed it.

Now, if any of these constitutional officers are found to have broken the law, there are mechanisms available to address those violations.

Upon being charged with a crime, the governor may suspend the officer pending an indictment and may appoint a committee to investigate and make recommendations. Conviction of a felony is automatic cause for removal from office.

The real issue here is that Greg Dunn is motivated by an oversize ego and a drive for power. Unfortunately for him, our system of government doesn't fit his liking and his new moniker is Greg "SUE" Dunn.

The citizens of Fayette County will decide on July 18 whether the board of commissioners are allowed to continue harassing the sheriff.

I am betting the answer will be Dunn is done.

You say the Sheriff, and others, report to no one and then you proceed to say who he DOES report to. Anyone, including a sheriff, who violates a law can be canned. The question is: did his department (including his front man) violate the law by selling property of the county, building buildings without permits, harass county employees, etc.? Is it legal to peek into people's homes with a helicopter, etc.? Think a minute, we must have accountibility. Just saying the words "constitutional officer" doesn't make him immune.

You say the Sheriff, and others, report to no one and then you proceed to say who he DOES report to. Anyone, including a sheriff, who violates a law can be canned. The question is: did his department (including his front man) violate the law by selling property of the county, building buildings without permits, harass county employees, etc.? Is it legal to peek into people's homes with a helicopter, etc.? Think a minute, we must have accountibility. Just saying the words "constitutional officer" doesn't make him immune.

You say the Sheriff, and others, report to no one and then you proceed to say who he DOES report to. Anyone, including a sheriff, who violates a law can be canned. The question is: did his department (including his front man) violate the law by selling property of the county, building buildings without permits, harass county employees, etc.? Is it legal to peek into people's homes with a helicopter, etc.? Think a minute, we must have accountibility.

how bout you cut and paste the exact quote where I said "the Sheriff, and others, report to no one"!. Then re-read my post, it's clear what I said, not clear that you read it.

He does not report to anyone locally as his boss on a day to day basis. How many times do you have to be told that?

He can be removed for violations of law. But he does not report to nor get reviewed by anyone local, except the voters.

Nor does he report to the governor in a day to day or other fashion.

He is subject to the governor if he violates law, which anyone can bring such charges against him.

If he builds without a permit, he is subject to the Permits and Inspections department and their legal authority.

Harassing county employees, again, falls under the review authority of such as the EEOC.

You are now talking about him stepping outside his authority and into the domain of other departments, where they have authority.

Before you were talking about him being subject to someone else in the exercise of authority in his own department on a day to day basis. He is not.

If he steps outside his authority, he is the domain of others who can use their authority to stop him. Up to and including being removed by the governor.

If he does a bad job in his department the voters can give him the boot.

He cannot sell property held in deed by the county.

But as long as he is legal, he has no higher authority approval to report to.

He is stopped when he does something wrong. He is not subject to any sign off when he is doing things right.

How many different ways do you need to be told this?

The judge made it real clear to Dunn and chastised him for interfering with the Sheriff.

That was Dunn's overriding authority nailing him for abuse of office. Now the voters are going to have their say in his abuses by firing him.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

highgreen is "high" on something, he sure isn't reading and understanding your posts or mine. But you said virtually the same thing I did, constitutional officers answer to the law and the voters, unless they do things that are illegal, then the mechanisms to remove them from office are always available.

Agree completely.

With highgreen it does not matter how many different ways something is said to get across to him. All he wants is what he wants.

We have seen this on issue after issue.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

If he's not doing his job properly then boot him out at the voting booth. But no telling what we're going to get when Randall is gone.

Mr. Handel - You would be well-advised to learn (as we in the county have learned) that anything told to you by Greg Dunn, Linda Wells (and now Peter Pfeifer, apparently) should be put through a fact-check. Greg Dunn is the one who keeps running afoul of the court system - not Randall Johnson.

I must say that I find it difficult to believe that someone with your background would not be cognizant of the on going dispute between Sheriff Johnson and the current Fayette County Commissioners.

Your choice of topic, corrupt Sheriff, seems, on the surface, to have been not well thought out if not flat out inappropriate.

When you wrote, “I did say it was my understanding that there had been some challenges with the Sheriff in Fayette.” You had to have known that that statement was NOT going to be taken lightly.

Why for example, didn’t you say that “it was my understanding that there had been some challenges with the current Fayette County Commissioners”, instead? Why bring up the topic at all? It would seem that your working knowledge of Fayette County may be lacking.

I must say sir that I have no idea who you are or what you represent but as you can see from the blogs, that you’ve no doubt been reading, that your words were at best, ill advised.

Further, when you wrote, “My sincere apologies if I offended anyone.” What exactly do you mean by “if”? I would think by now it would be abundantly clear that Mr. Maxwell was so offended by your comment that he did the only prudent thing he could do, he left.

I would like to see you post a direct apology to both Sheriff Johnson and to Mr. Maxwell who you have greatly offended. Please try and refrain from using the word “if” in your apology.

First of all Mr. Handel, I'm sure you're a very fine person who stepped on a land mine on behalf of your wife because Mr. Dunn and Pfiefer directed your movements. Following their lead was your first mistake. It would not have taken much research to learn that Mr. Dunn may not be the preferred candidate in this race.

Secondly it would not have taken much research to learn that Sheriff Randall Johnson is a beloved icon in this community, which I assume should be very important to your wife's race.

Thirdly you had no business bringing up our internal minor political problems which are of no concern to your wife's race for Secretary of State. I expect Sen. Bill Stephens aprreciates your miscalculation. I don't.

And you offended me. Fayette County is a great place to live and we don't need that kind of negative slant to our community

Thank you for coming and telling the whole story. I'm glad to see you on the board. I cringe every time I hear the sheriff's reputation trashed solely because Greg Dunn wanted to manage that drug money (and anything else he could reach out and grab).

I have to say I'm proud of you for making a statement. I guess Peter and the others couldn't afford to stand up for the county that way because they're the ones who maligned it in the first place.

Handel bumped my comment down so that it looked like it was for him. My initial comments for you Mr. Handel would be booted by Cal if I posted them. I was thanking Mr. Maxwell for finally joining in the conversation on this web site.

Mr. Handel, Fayette County is not like your Fulton County which is soaked in corruption. Our problems between the Sheriff and Greg Dunn are a pin dot on the map compared to Fulton Counties problems. Don't come down here trying to insinuate that they are anywhere near the same. I for one would never elect anyone from Fulton to try and solve those problems throughout the State.

Your wife is not the one that uncovered the corruption so you shouldn't be trying to take the credit for it.

People familiar with how the script posts will know that.

But for those who do not, indeed ptcselect's comments were there first.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

From the perspective of an average citizen, if I were Eric Maxwell I wouldn’t want this group of bloggers defending me, openly expressing support for me, helping me with any of my campaign or inferring the remotest possibility of a connection or close affiliation. I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Maxwell, but if you people are his associates and are the slightest representation of his platform, I would not vote for him. I agree that Sheriff Johnson is an honorable man; but let’s face it, he has not run the Sheriff’s Department for quite some time. There’s nothing wrong with accountability. It keeps things above board and demonstrates responsibility when spending asset forfeiture funds and tax dollars. It sounds like Fayette's law enforcement and special interest groups (including politicians) from Peachtree City are on the attack and pushing their personal agendas to get what they want. I would caution the rest of Fayette County to be very leery of these tactics.

I agree with you that what is being said here will be a turn off for some voters who may just get tired of reading the venom and not vote for Eric. I've seen this happen before in other Fayette elections. PLEASE tone down the volume, everyone gets the message. I support Eric-yes I know him, and he will do a great job. Sheriff Johnson is a GREAT sheriff and we are very lucky to have him-I disagree with Swarzerized on one point-I believe him to be in control of his department. He'll get my vote again.

I believe what will happen is many voters will be turned off on Peter. They already have.

I believe he is Dunn as a commissioner as of next election.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

but he's not the one running.

This was never an issue of accountability. The issue is a local politician with a Napoleonic ego trying to make our elected officials report to him. I believe that would require a re-write of our Constitution.

Dunn is the one up for election. Not the Sheriff.

When he began his quest for taking over the Sheriff's department he became the issue.

If he had done his job correctly, a quiet audit would have been sufficient for him to shut up. But he say the drug money and wanted it.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

There will many "stories"coming from the Dunn campaign about "things Eric has done" during these last days before the election. These are desperate measures. First of all, Eric would never act like that (cursing and leaving the room). And, on Dunn's website he mentions the "childishness" of "his opponent's overzealous supporters" placing Maxwell signs on his car. These overzealous supporters were 12 year old kids just having fun at the parade. No maliciousness was ever intended. He also accuses Maxwell supporters of stealing Dunn signs. How ridiculous. Dunn didn't have that many signs to begin with. Eric has over 800 signs all over the county. Why would the Maxwell campaign steal signs? It is obvious to everyone in this county that Greg Dunn is going to be defeated in this election. He can only blame himself. He hasn't supported our law enforcement (ALL aspects of law enforcement). He hasn't supported county employees or county taxpayers. GO ERIC!!!!