Smith Leaves Morning Forum Early
In Dothan this morning, 2nd Congressional District candidates attended the last of three debates/forums sponsored by AARP, the National Federation of Independent Business, Troy University, and WSFA-TV. The first one was televised, and State Sen. Harri Anne Smith garnered attention for missing the only televised debate in the AL-02 race. The last two forums featured questions from the audience.
The word this morning is that as soon as questions from the audience started, Sen. Smith got up and left, saying she had a prior commitment. The legislative session starts up again today, but the Senate begins an hour later than the House. She left Representatives David Grimes and Jay Love sitting there answering questions, leading Grimes to ask, “Why does it take longer for a Senator to get to Montgomery than a House Member?”
Sometimes perception and reality are the same, and sometimes they are not, but the perception that Smith may have to address is that she is ducking public appearances particularly that involve public interaction.
She can’t take a tough question, yet everyone else can. She lost my vote. It is a pattern with her.
Comment by Jacob — April 29, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
Love can take a tough question - because his answer is a lie. Give me Grimes.
Comment by Anonymous — April 29, 2008 @ 1:08 pm
Anonymous - you are ridiculous. Say something that actually contributes. This thread is about Smith walking out on a debate and how folks feel about it.
Comment by JT — April 29, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
I will not vote for someone that can’t debate the issues.
Comment by PikeCountyguy — April 29, 2008 @ 1:34 pm
I imagine the forum went something like this:
Moderator: “Senator Smith, I’s like to ask you . .”
Harri Anne: “OH NO! I have an appointment!!! I have to go - now!!!!!”
Jay Love: “Hey - I don’t mind answering the tough questions. Just like I told . . .ummm . . .CHUCK NORRIS! Yeah, like I told Chuck Norris when I was teaching him karate . . .wait . . .like I told BRUCE LEE when I was teaching him karate . . .yeah, Bruce Lee, that’s the ticket!”
David Woods: “S-s-su-su-sudio!”
Comment by Meet The Press — April 29, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
The house went into session at 1 this afternoon, it would be impossible for both of the members of the house to make it back from Dothan in time to be in chambers for the start of the session. I also believe these two house members voted for and accepted the pay raise last year. So basically they feel that advancing their political future is more important than earning their taxpayer funded (and bloated) paycheck. I would much rather have a candidate that was against the payraise, did not accept the payraise and left early to get back to Montgomery to EARN her money at her current position as a State Senator.
Grimes can show up late because he would get frustrated and just miss another vote (see the food tax bill). Seriously do we want that representing us? Wait not voting is not representing, and he missed a vote because he was frustrated!!!!!
Love is full of it anyways and its not like he would do anything in Montgomery besides try to get his name attached to some bills to garner a few headlines.
Maybe it is best that the two of them stayed in Dothan instead of getting back to REPRESENT their districts in the House of REPRESENTATIVES.
Thank you Harri Anne Smith for knowing that as a representative of the people your job is to be in the chambers representing your people.
And now I will sit back and watch you Jay Love fans (aka Democrats) tell me how horrible of a person I am for supporting Senator Harri Anne Smith.
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
I won’t attack you , Earning. I think if there is a public forum she should have stayed and it does look like a duck-out. BUT I will take that over the outright, unquestioned dishonesty of Love. I like Grimes a lot and do not know about Woods. I do like that Smith turned down the pay hike, and that is way more important to me that a dog-and-pony show forum.
Comment by Forum — April 29, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
She runs when a tough questioned is asked. I don’t want that…she is not a fighter. She is not up to the job in congress….she needs to stay in the state senate…it is all she can handle.
Comment by GOPer — April 29, 2008 @ 2:14 pm
#6, I don’t have a dog in that race, but neither Love nor Grimes voted for the payraise.
Comment by Mike Ball — April 29, 2008 @ 2:17 pm
No, they didn’t. And I would not classify an actual debate such as the 3 run by aarp, nfib, wsfa and troy univ as a dog and pony show. they actually answer relevant questions. oh wait, they actually have to shop up or stay to answer any real issue related questions. i guess smith skips out on that.
Comment by WakeupFolks — April 29, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
For Mike Ball - Mike, I don’t think the poster said Love or grimes voted for the pay raise, only that Smith didn’t and had returned the money. I think Love, Grimes, and pretty much all of the GOP voted against the raise, but only Smith has actually returned the money.
Comment by For Mike — April 29, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
Hey GOPer - in this case she ran BEFORE a tough question was asked . . .
I don’t think that is good, but I do believe she is reliably conservative and has told her constituents the truth. I don’t think Love has done either. Grimes is a solid, Real Republican who ousted a RINO (in Love’s case, HE was the RINO who ousted a Real Republican). So in terms of objectionableness (if that is a word) I still find Love the most objectionable with Grimes the least.
Comment by Anonymous — April 29, 2008 @ 2:41 pm
Hey Mike Ball - I was wrong - the previous poster DID say incorrectly that Love and Grimes voted for the pay hike. Sorry about that!
Comment by For MIke — April 29, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
Love voted against the payraise and gave an equal amount to ten charities according to a press release he put out on the one year anniversary of the vote.
Comment by Clarity — April 29, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
I like Grimes as well, but I don’t think he has a chance in this race. Glad he did speak up at the debate today, though, and called Smith out for leaving.
Comment by GOPer — April 29, 2008 @ 2:53 pm
Oh I think Grimes has a LOT better chance than Love’s people would want to admit . . .and it’s getting better all the time . . .
Comment by There's more than one David to worry about, Jay — April 29, 2008 @ 2:59 pm
How nice of Jay Love to pass out MY money to charities of HIS choice. He gets the tax break from MY money and then gets to talk about how wonderful he is in a press release!
Sounds just like LEGISLATIVE PORK doesn’t it? Except he did it with MY MONEY.
If he had given it BACK - as Smith did - then taxpayers get THIER money back. But he wanted that little press release about MY money that he used to make himself look better. . .
Comment by How nice of him — April 29, 2008 @ 3:03 pm
You Smith Kool Aid drinkers are absurd. I can’t wait until she gets beat. All you do is jump on everyone else to make your “run out the door” candidate look better.
Comment by BBB — April 29, 2008 @ 3:15 pm
#17, Harri Ann Smith did not give the money back to you, she gave it back to Roger Bedford and Hank Sanders to spend. Jay Love did the smart thing by giving the money to worthy charities.
Comment by Anonymous — April 29, 2008 @ 3:34 pm
A friend currently at the Senate there to observe the Senate gavel through the gambling bill reports Harri Anne is yet to seen.
Surely this is not true.
Does she drive as slow as she thinks on her feet?
Comment by Al Czervik — April 29, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
Dax Swinehart has to be the worst campaign consultant/manager in the state. He takes over campaigns that are 2:1 favorites to win and then systematically alienates every single person that wants to support the candidate.
Comment by Tobie — April 29, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
She has spent half she has raised on consultants that advise her to run for the door when the hard questions come. run harri run!
Comment by JohnJohn — April 29, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
She lost my vote, Now ain’t it kind of funny that Harri Anne just duped right out of the forum? Wow, she can’t take the heat so why don’t she just go ahead and get out of the race! She has become a real joke to the voters of District 02!
Comment by Skip A Vote — April 29, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
I am sorry, I was misinformed on the two house members votes on the pay raise. Thank you for correcting me Rep. Ball.
What really matters is that they accepted the raise, but are more interested in pushing their political futures than working for the people that elected them to their current positions. They then take shots at the candidate who leaves to go back and do her job (for less money) for the people of her Senate district.
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 5:19 pm
SKIP A VOTE? Are you kidding me? Which do you want a candidate that misses out on a public forum to fulfill her duty to the public in the Senate or a candidate that uses taxpayer’s time to further their own political careers. I want the candidate that earns their paycheck, not the one that uses my money to fund their own campaign for higher office and then does not show up to earn my money.
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 5:22 pm
she didnt go straight to montgomery to do state biz. stop blowing smoke up our a%# folks. she ran off.
Comment by newbie — April 29, 2008 @ 5:26 pm
#25…Harri Anne did not report to the Senate floor until 430 or shortley thereafter. Once she arrived, she talked on the phone. I assume you are one of the many paid political consultants who frequent this website on behalf of both Love & Smith whose sometimes slick websites offers the always in-demand service of “carrying a dipshoot’s water” on websites that whose comments are read by less than 500 people. I really hope you are being paid handsomely to defend a candidate who appears to be too big of a poo-nanny to answer questions from those whom she is wanting to represent in Washinton DC. If you aren’t getting paid, then please report directly back to your Dungeons & Dragons wormhole.
Comment by Al Czervik — April 29, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
Plus Grimes probably didn’t vote for it because he probably missed that vote too.
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 5:36 pm
When Senator Smith voted YES for a cell phone tax a few years ago, how much did it cost consumers? To date, I am told by a close Woods supporter that it has cost users $71MILLION.
Comment by Hiking Taxes — April 29, 2008 @ 5:41 pm
Smith would be way over her head in congress. i doubt she can find her way to DC….or any debates!
Comment by Yomez — April 29, 2008 @ 5:58 pm
Hey Earning,
Which campaign are you working for? Your comments are so far off-base and untrue that it is VERY, VERY easy to see right through them. Where do you get your facts?
Comment by Big Al — April 29, 2008 @ 6:21 pm
Bright Wins!
Comment by Real Talk — April 29, 2008 @ 6:30 pm
No way!!!
Comment by Big Al — April 29, 2008 @ 6:38 pm
If Smith is the R nominee, Bright will win.
Comment by Terry — April 29, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
Bright has a great chance to win the seat in Congress. He is very moderate and has connections to get on the Committees to make things happen in an effort to institute positive changes we need now. Not one to evade issues like Harri Anne.
Comment by USA Voter — April 29, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
MODERATE?! Bright is more conservative than (Love+Smith)/(GrimesxWoods)
Deacon in the Baptist Church, The pro-business and development candidate, wife is a former judge.
This guy is exactly what Southern Democrats used to embody, and I for one look forward to seeing what he will do as our Congressman!
Comment by Real Talk — April 29, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
I am a Republican but compared to Smith…I would vote for Bright. Sad to say…but true.
Comment by Jboner — April 29, 2008 @ 8:58 pm
First off I do not work for any campaign. I work downtown and that is the information I was given by a friend in the know.
Bright a conservative? He is a Democrat that will be starting on the bottom of the totem pole. If he wants to be a conservative Democrat he will not get very far in the House with the liberal leadership in his party. He already has assurances from the party that he will be given the Ag and Armed Services committee assignments. I doubt they make those promises that early to a conservative.
Even if Jay is a RINO he would have to at least toe the party line to advance. Same with Bobby the Dem.
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 8:59 pm
That’s a great one, Real Talk.
You’re right: Baptist(Lover of God)… pro-business (pro-Free Market Capitalism)… law and order…heterosexual marriage… and respectability in the community!
Sadly, Southern Democrats USED to embody that before their party went off the Leftist Lib end. Fortunately, the conservative ones had the good sense to bolt and join the Republicans.
Now, the Dems are left with the rabble, panty-waists, whores and crooks. If Bright subscribes to all you say and yet isn’t a Repub by now, then he’s a counterfeit and fooling no one but the idiot Dems.
Comment by Scorpius — April 29, 2008 @ 9:09 pm
is mike ball posting from his state computer? Glad to know he is working hard, ha.
Smith is ducking questions b/c she was not in the tv debate, she left her news con. about her bingo bill w/ out taking questions and now leaving this debate. She is clearly ducking out questions hoping to win b/c of her region.
If i voted in CD-2 I would vote for Woods or Grimes.
Comment by Anonymous — April 29, 2008 @ 9:11 pm
Grimes-Does not show up to vote, instead goes to pout in his office.
Woods-He wants to freeze ALL federal spending until we have a balanced budget, that idea is a great ideal to strive for, but could not work. Woods thinks it would work. He is a worse public speaker than Terry Everett (which is terrible). Should I continue?
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 9:17 pm
Earning, get your info from someone without an agenda.
Bright would beat Smith. She has ABSOLUTELY no substance.
Bright is no conservative. In 2006 Montgomery had a “HOLIDAY” parade (as opposed to a Christmas parade) because Bright dictated it so. In 2007 Montgomery was able to have a Christmas parade once again because of public response. Some Deacon.
Bright will be blown in whatever direction the Nancy Pelosi wind blows him. As evidenced by the FACT that he flopped to the Dem. side for a promise of $1.5 million to campaign with. I have not verified, but I have been told that he has already received a $5,000 contribution from Pelosi’s PAC.
Comment by Big Al — April 29, 2008 @ 9:24 pm
Can’t back up the Pelosi fact, but can say Steny Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel put in a combined $17,000
Comment by Earning their money — April 29, 2008 @ 9:29 pm
Terry Everett has been a heck of a representative for the 2nd district and he is deemed a bad public speaker. Seems like one has absolutely nothing to do with the other. Give me someone with sound, common sense approach, a desire to make a difference, and a willingness to step out and take on the challenges as opposed to being quick to judge and sit on the sidelines, complain and base major decisions on who will represent their interests in Congress on whether or not they’re a good public speaker. I say thank you Terry Everett regardless of his lack of speaking skills and I welcome the opportunity to get to know the candidates, and based on sound research decide who I wish to represent me in Congress.
Comment by ant bites sting — April 29, 2008 @ 9:33 pm
We have had enough of the Bright/Clardy/Kennedy family in Montgomery. High taxes,crime,suits against the City, inside dealing on city contracts, downtown development and grants awarded to family and friends. Most here believe Bright is good hearted, small brained oaf. Bright is simply a creature of the Clardy Family and Joe Perkins/Matrix. People should ask Perkins about his money laundering problems with elmer harris and the FEC from the early 80s. Apples dont fall far from the tree. Bright is too naive to understand the gravity of the issue. If he claims he is not that naive, then he should explain his decisions on contracts, family income and joe perkins.
This is a FEDERAL RACE, not a good ole boy circle jerk Montgomery Mayor’s Race.
Comment by Montgomery Victim — April 29, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
Post 43 is right. If you want a slick talker and a polished speaker that has zero substance and does things that only serve themselves then there are plenty of politicians to choose from in this race. But give me a person with strong convictions that makes the right decisions and is respected any day…speaking skills be damned.
Comment by BBB — April 29, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
perceptions:
1) grimes has not been truthful in some of the house voting/rule 32/everyone is promoting jay love rhetoric
2) dickinson jr does add an interesting aspect to woods campaign - as well as his tv connection
3) jay love is a strong contender, although every other candidate is going to try and bring him down
4) schmidtke doesn’t play well with double breasted suits in elmore county, but isn’t establishment, which could be viewed as a positive
5) john martin - hell i don’t know
6) Smith’s mistakes give her the appearance of being bush league, and flaking out on debates/forums hurt - however, heavy hitters in wiregrass are diehard supporters
definitely shaping up to be an interesting primary
Comment by observations — April 29, 2008 @ 10:33 pm
Indeed, the addition of Bill Dickinson Jr. to the Woods’ team does add an interesting aspect to his campaign. Here you have the son of a great, 28 year representative of the 2nd District, who is held in high regard, helping a candidate. It speaks volumes and certainly gives pause for thought. Yes, a very interesting primary.
Comment by ant bites sting — April 29, 2008 @ 10:47 pm
Post 43,I can give you a person ,His name is BOBBY BRIGHT.I’am here to tell you he is a great man ,and that’s all I will say.I,ve known him for years and can’t think of any better to repersent us in Washington .Some of these on here don’t know what they are talking about ,but I do.
Comment by Tips — April 29, 2008 @ 11:10 pm
I know for a Fact that Smith was there for Role call I was sitting in the media room when she spoke up……
Comment by Difter — April 30, 2008 @ 8:11 am
Observations - you are not “observing” this:
1) Jay Love is a fraud whose central campaign theme is a lie (he takes credit - in his ads - for a tax cut passed by JOHN KNIGHT - as David Grimes INDISPUTIBLY points out, Love’s bill died in committee)
2) Jay Love voted AT LEAST 9 separate times for the biggest tax hike in US history,then dares to call himself a “tax-cutter” in his advertising(liar!)
3) Jay Love broadcast a BALD-FACED LIE against Bob McKee in his 2002 campaign that enabled him to win - by only 100 votes - against a true conservative Republican
4) Jay Love was overwhelmingly financed in that campaign by LIBERAL DEMOCRAT SPECIAL INTERESTS (AEA, the state employees union, JERE BEASLEY)
5) Jay Love HID his donors from his district until after the election (liar!)
Those are some pertinent “observations”
Comment by Fact observations — April 30, 2008 @ 9:16 am
Say whatever you wish about Love. Smith is the worst of the group. Voted for higher cellular phone taxes, she voted for higher property taxes, she took money from AEA and the list goes on. It does not surprise anyone on this board that Smith does not like to answer questions.
Comment by VoteWoods! — April 30, 2008 @ 9:58 am
Tips, you do not know Bright as well as you think you do, or you are simply out of touch with reality. Everything posted above about him is indisputable. His buddies profited tremendously in the development of the ball park downtown. He has refused to face the fact that every Montgomerian knows - crime is through the roof. He pushed hard for an occupational tax. (You think the people who live in Elmore, Autauga and other surrounding counties and work in Montgomery are going to vote for him?) He would not stand up for a simple thing as a Christmas parade. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Comment by Big Al — April 30, 2008 @ 9:58 am
I agree that Smith is the worst of the group. And any attack on Love comes from the Smith camp. It is freakin’ ridiculous.
Comment by BBB — April 30, 2008 @ 10:00 am
Observations,
How is Grimes not being truthful on Rule 32? To my knowledge he has been very open about its use.
Comment by Big Al — April 30, 2008 @ 10:01 am
After reading all of these comments,it seems that there are only 3 serious contenders.Grimes,who says what he thinks, even if he shouldn’t,Bright,who is a mayor in good standing,but has trouble deciding if he is a liberal republican or a conservitive democrat, and Woods, who is solid on his positions and the direction he wants to lead. following the successful path of Dickinson and Everrett before him…
Comment by new voice — April 30, 2008 @ 10:04 am
New Voice,
You picked my top three. Although, it would be darn hard to vote Dem. if Bright is against Smith or Love. I truly believe one of the two Davids needs to win this raise. They have the strongest moral fiber of the group. I just don’t think Woods can pull it off in his first public contest.
Comment by Big Al — April 30, 2008 @ 10:14 am
I like woods or schmidtke. I sure as heck don’t a true back room politician like smith or love!
Comment by DavisB — April 30, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
schmidtke, seems more than a little removed from reality. I don’t think he has a clue what the “average” alabamian has to do to pay the bills, feed the kids or try to save for the future, woods seems to be a little more in touch with the day to day struggles and issues we face.
Comment by new voice — April 30, 2008 @ 4:32 pm
I think I am leaning towards Woods. If you listen to his answers in the debates, and in my case, I had the opportunity to hear him at a “coffee”, you can tell he’s done a great deal of research into the issues facing the 2ND district. He seems to have a sincere concern and a strong desire to serve and make a difference. I found him to be a very grounded, common sense kind of a guy.
Comment by white caps — April 30, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Woods wants to freeze all federal spending while we balance the budget. In a perfect world that would be great. The only problem is that in this perfect world communism would be the form of government, every one working towards the betterment of society. Sadly we don’t live in this perfect world and communism does not work in practice as it does in theory and freezing our national spending would royally screw this country. That is a worse idea than that stupid Fairtax that Martin is pushing.
Comment by Woods is a Whacko — April 30, 2008 @ 5:28 pm
I agree that as nice as it may sound, to freeze all fed spending will not happen.
Comment by Freezeme! — April 30, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
Well, after hearing all three forums I gotta say that Bright will be my pick. His attention to detail, knowledge on the various subject matter and way that he responded to all the questions posed on problems now facing the US is far better than any one of the other candidates.
I just can’t help but believe that he will be the best choice for the 2nd district, bar none. I’m going to vote my conviction and for him in June and again in November. We need a man with his experience in Congress.
Comment by I’m Voting — April 30, 2008 @ 7:06 pm
Allow me to educate you on Bright’s track record in Montgomery:
After his first year in office, spending grew so rapidly that he successfully pushed through an initiative to raise sales tax from 8% to 10%, giving Montgomery the highest sales tax in the state of Alabama
Crime is massive in Montgomery, and residents are fleeing to neighboring Prattville and Wetumpka. Montgomery had 40 murders in 2007, making it the highest per capita murder rate in the state of Alabama.
Is this the type leadership you wish for District 2?
Comment by not so bright — April 30, 2008 @ 8:02 pm
The positive for Bright being elected to Congress is that someone else would get to tackle the crime issue in Montgomery. The negative is, well Bobby Bright is in Congress.
Comment by William Wyatt Wallace — April 30, 2008 @ 9:35 pm
Bright is mafia. Smith is a moron with daddy’s money. Love is confused christian jere beasley stooge. Grimes means well but his fingers stay in the air so long by the time he figures out what to do he looks like a white alvin holmes.
Comment by springtime — April 30, 2008 @ 10:29 pm
Hey not so bright - Montgomery city taxes are 3.5%, not 10%. The rate was 2.5% when Bright took office, they had been at 2.5% since 1989. So Bright and the City Council raised city sales tax 1%, the other 1% is the result of an increase in County sales tax. You really should get your facts straight before you type.
Comment by JRay — May 1, 2008 @ 11:31 am
One more thing not so bright - Albertville, Anniston, Arab and Attalla have city sales tax of 4%. Wouldn’t that make them the highest in the state? There are probably others, I only went thru the A’s, I didn’t feel like going thru all 150 pages of current tax rates on the ADOR website. Do your homework, and please present some facts to back up your remarks.
Comment by JRay — May 1, 2008 @ 11:45 am
paint it how you want to jray - the city of Montgomery is truly the “gump” taxes are high, crime is bad, and if you can afford to send your kids to private school, believe me….you do.
huge divide between black and white and rich and poor in montgomery especially. VERY segregated. for a Dem like Bright…doesn’t look so good.
Comment by PrattvilleTommy — May 1, 2008 @ 12:48 pm
Prattville Tommy, I agree. Glad I don’t live there. Just don’t like people to make accusations without providing details. I can accept that some folks don’t like certain politicians, but there’s a difference between political “spin” and libelous accusations. Some posters may not even realize that they can be sued for libelous statements they make on these boards.
Comment by JRay — May 1, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
[This comment has been removed.]
Comment by Danny — May 1, 2008 @ 3:29 pm
JRay, saying Montgomery taxes went from 8% to 10% because Bright pushed it is no where near a libelous statement. It is the truth. In #64, Not so Bright did not say “city taxes” he said “sales tax”. He was right. You are right if you are talking just about the city’s portion. Just because the city got 1% and the county got 1%, you don’t think the mayor was in the middle of it all. Even if it weren’t true it is still not libelous. You need read up on the law.
About the Love/ Woods stuff. I know David and would find that very hard to believe. You should check that out even before mentioning it on the blog. Just mentioning it is very irresponsible. Now, if you found it to be true and substantiated, then bring it on.
Comment by You gotta be kidding — May 1, 2008 @ 3:58 pm
You gotta be kidding, “You gotta be kidding.” How do you track down a rumor without asking questions. Now who is irresponsible, the questioner or the one that would squelch democratic debate?
Comment by Smitty — May 1, 2008 @ 4:25 pm
YGBK - My libelous comment was a general statement on things I have read on this and other boards (such as # 66 mafia comment, implying illegal activities, and the moron comment, implying mental retardation, and the comment about Grimes is cruel and insensitive. Maybe the poster does not know that Grimes suffers from MS. I should have explained myself better.
And, I do not know whether or not Bright was “in the middle” of it all, but I do know it would be irresponsible to make such an assumption without facts to back up the statement. However, I do know that Bright and the Montg Cty Comm seldom see eye to eye.
Comment by JRay — May 1, 2008 @ 5:52 pm
With the increasing costs of crude oil, rising gas, groceries, building materials, diesel fuel, and transportation of all goods, wars in Afganistan, Iraq and now threatening in Iran, we need someone that we can depend on that will stand up to the ongoing political partisan infighting in Washington. Who do you think will be best to do that? Theres no doubt that I’d rather have Bright do that than anyone I know. He has proven that he can make positive decisions for change in an effort to get things done, even against odds that sometimes stack against him he presses onward. He certainly shouldn’t mind doing the same thing when he goes to D.C. He will be my choice, thats for sure.
Comment by Gased Up — May 1, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
Gased Up - I think the issues you mentioned are going to be the downfall of the Reps this year. I was reading an article on msn.com several days ago and it mentioned that Dem voter registration in PA was out-pacing Rep voter registration by 10 to 1. However, because it was a highly contested primary race, it’s hard to say if that’s indicative of a popular movement, or just Reps switching to hold back Obama or promote Clinton.
Comment by JRay — May 1, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
JR,
I think this whole darn Republican thing has turned out to be nothing but a total gosh darn disaster. I’m all for throwing them all out of office and getting some real DEMOCRATS that will promote positive change and whom will take charge and take the country back before it’s to late. They need to turn this whole mess around. It’s time for change people and you’d better wake up and understand the Repubs are not what we need anylonger, believe me when I say that! We need someone to get involved and make these changes now.
Comment by Vote Now — May 1, 2008 @ 7:43 pm
Danny needs to take down SMITTY’s comments. You should call yourself SMUTTY. A remark like that about Woods is beneath this board. You should be ashamed. Folks that know Woods, know what a fine person he is. And to add Love’s name to that thread, makes me think you must be a Smith supporter. Get a life Smitty. I hope Danny will take down your post like he did the last one. You are over the line. I hope Smith is paying you well…
Comment by GOPer — May 1, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
Thank you for removing #71. My case made SMUTTY
Comment by You gotta be kidding — May 2, 2008 @ 7:18 am
I am no shill for Harri ‘Houdini’ Smith. She was part of the bankers association that spent over $300 million lobbying to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act and that repeal led to the sub-prime mortgage financial crisis. Count me out as a Smith supporter. And if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Comment by Smitty — May 2, 2008 @ 8:25 am
She can’t stand the heat apparently. She runs out of debates or avoids them altogether. As if we need that kind of representaion in congress!!!
Comment by Jboner — May 2, 2008 @ 9:09 am
Jboner? Is that Jo Bonner???
Comment by ??? — May 2, 2008 @ 10:12 am
while each party has made it’s share of mistakes, when you vote for a canadate, you are not just voting for that person, but for that persons political partys philosophy. The dems are a tax and spend mentality, they have no sense of financial resopnsibility, so when they ” go over budget” they just raise taxes to cover it. while people like to point to the rep. president and say, “see the rep. are the reason for the deficit” it is a dem, controlled congress that has raised our deficit to what it is.
we need to send a republican to congress w/good business sense who knows how to stay in a budget, cut cost and eliminate wasteful spending, or we will continue to get what we already have, a spend and tax mentality that is out of control.
Comment by new voice — May 2, 2008 @ 10:55 am
BRIGHT IS A DEM AND WILL VOTE WITH THE DEMS. REALITY BITES FOLKS!
Comment by NOTSOBRIGHT — May 2, 2008 @ 11:02 am
New Voice, your comment that “it is a dem, controlled congress that has raised our deficit to what it is” throws doubt on everything else you say. True fiscal conservatives lament that GWBush and the Republican majority he had in both houses of Congress passed budgets that caused our deficits to soar to unimagined heights. Dems didn’t have Congress until the last election.
Comment by Clear Voice — May 2, 2008 @ 11:17 am
#83 Who would you suggest? The only Rep candidate with the strength of character to stand up to party pressure is Grimes. But, due to his limited funding, I doubt he can get the message out.
Comment by JRay — May 2, 2008 @ 11:23 am
grimes has no shot.
Comment by BBB — May 2, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
It depends on whether Grimes gets that Brinson support as to whether he has a chance. Woods is Love’s big worry now.
Comment by Sweating Combover — May 2, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
Woods will do better than Grimes.
Comment by BBB — May 2, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
I think Woods is ahead of Love. And has the momentum.
Grimes still could be a factor. Depens on the Brinson thing.
Comment by Anonymous — May 2, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
I think Harri Anne Smith is doomed. Folks are leaping off that sinking ship right and left.
Comment by Ozguy — May 2, 2008 @ 1:57 pm
Smith’s not doomed since she is from the Wiregrass. She’ll make the runoff since she has that and she hasn’t spent her money yet. The battle is between Woods, Love and Grimes, and Woods is getting a leg up.
Comment by Nope — May 2, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
I think Woods might be in for some bad press. I noticed on his April 2008 FEC Quarterly Report that his committee reimbursed Woods Communications Corporation for supplies and payroll expenses. That means his committee used a corporate treasury to fund a portion of his campaign expenses. This is clear violation of Title 2 USC, 441b.
Comment by JRay — May 2, 2008 @ 4:50 pm
Now am I hearing that both Smith and Woods have possibly violated the FEC Regulations by using funds from a private corporation to finance their Congressional campaigns? Everyone knows this is a direct violation of the FEC regulations. If they didn’t know, then they have no business even running for the office! The FEC will definitely be monitoring these actions will surely come knocking, if this is a fact. The good solid people of 02 will not forget it either, come election day!
Comment by Say What — May 2, 2008 @ 9:07 pm
If that is true about Woods, and I don’t believe it until I see a link to the FEC report, then he is a screw up and I agree should not be running. If he and H Anne Smith can’t understand the rules then take your ball and go home kids.
Comment by Say What is right — May 2, 2008 @ 9:40 pm
Grimes is going to surprise you nay-sayers. He is second in one poll and closing in toward second on another. Woods is no where close. If you do not think so, then why won’t HA Smith and Lovey Boy release any of their polls. You’ve seen David G. slay one Goliath now watch him knock out two.
Comment by Big Al — May 2, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
Why would someone release an internal poll? Big Al is off base. If Grimes is second district wide it would be a shock to everyone.
Comment by HayesH — May 3, 2008 @ 7:13 am
Here’s your link:
http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/HSRefreshContributorList.do?cand_id=H4AL02048&detailType=cand&contComeFrom=candDetail&contCategory=OPEXP&category=disH&stateName=AL&congressId=02
Comment by JRay — May 3, 2008 @ 10:36 am
I believe Woods is just paying his own company for doing work on the campaign. I do not think that is a CLEAR violation or any violation. If he did not pay, then it would be a violation. Think about it, it is just like paying ANY company for doing work on your campaign (tv stations, ad companies, etc.).
Now when HA Smith used her state campaign monies to pay for consultants and polling early on in the campaign that was a CLEAR violation. Anyone should have known that. Once again, she proves that she has NO clue about what is going on.
Comment by Big AL — May 3, 2008 @ 10:44 am
Big Al - Just double checked. Committee paid/reimbursed Woods Comm Corp for “postage, letterhead, office supplies, advertising, and payroll for Treasurer”. Sure looks like his committee allowed the corporation to purchase campaign items and then the committee reimbursed. Only item that looks like a legit purchase was $50.00 for advertising.
Comment by JRay — May 3, 2008 @ 11:07 am
That is not an FEC violation JRay. And yes, it is a far cry from what the smith campaign did - which was a violation.
Comment by JohnJohn — May 3, 2008 @ 11:33 am
JohnJohn - Guess I misread 2 USC 441b.(b)(2).
Comment by JRay — May 3, 2008 @ 12:05 pm
Again, the problem would have been if he did NOT reimburse.
Comment by Big AL — May 3, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
You did mis read Jray. Woods Comm is a company he owns. no one else. his campaign reimbursed the company and it was all reported. it is all proper. if you want to compare it to what smith did, she used an account that was not her own business (her own money) to spend on her congressional reace. she was using funds from contributors for her state senate race, to fund her run for another office…congress. what woods did is totally different and he reimbursed and reported it properly. another distinction from what smith did is that she only reimbursed and reported the activity after a violation was called to her attention.
Comment by Mickey — May 3, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
Since she bolted early, I don’t have much from Harrie Ann Smith’s performance - but here’s what I did write, the quotes are my actual notes on my observations.
Opening Statements
“Looks nervous and unsure, rambles - Needs to buy cue cards.”
Question 1 - Healthcare
“Babbles but says nothing. Typical Politician”
Question 2 - Taxes for War, Healthcare
“Quote: I Hate Taxes - Duh. Anything else? No.”
Question 3 - Brazilian Ethanol Program - Good/Bad?
“Explore Alternatives, Take Iraq’s Oil because they owe us.”
Then she left.
Now I admit, this was my first time seeing any of the candidates, but Harrie Ann Smith was one of the worst. She displayed neither leadership nor a grasp on basic logic. The only idea she put forth was to lower gas prices by taking Iraq’s oil… I’m sure the Iraqi’s will love that one - maybe when we start stealing the only thing of value in their whole country they’ll start throwing flowers at us - Right Harrie Ann?
Keep this woman out of Washington, she’s clueless.
Comment by Commentator — May 3, 2008 @ 5:29 pm
I see. i did not know that Woods was the sole stockholder in Woods Comm Corp. I should have checked.
Comment by JRay — May 3, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
You are correct that Senator Smith wants to take Iraq’s oil for our own. Talk about a nut. It sounds fine to Bubba on the street but for someone actually running for Congress to say that shows she has no true grasp of how things actually work. Such a move or even mention of it makes all those folks that say this was an imperialist war for oil on the part of America actually look like they know what they are talking about it. She would be laughed out of Congress. If she wanted to talk about Iraq paying more of their fair share for reconstruction and using their oil revenues to build up infrastructire, etc then that makes sense. But she wants to take their oil and send it over here. whacked out….
Comment by Holmes — May 3, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
I know this may be a no-no on political parlor, but guys, just give me a little liberty. This is the best forum by far. However, if any of you want to see some clueless people, go to wiregrasslive.com. There are some current debates about HA Smith’s bill and the people down there have no idea how clueless she is. I am having fun with them now and could use some help.
Comment by Take the challenge — May 3, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Hello,,,If Smith thinks she can run, hide and duck out on the issues, then she is definitely in for a rude awakening folks! 02 voters see right through that and demand representation by someone who is willing to lead, take a stand and fight for positive change. Someone who will stay the course! It appears this excludes her!
Comment by Vote Now — May 4, 2008 @ 8:21 am
That does exclude her. She runs from issues and questions…she has proven that. And in terms of taking a stand…we just saw first hand that she is not able to do that. When you have no core convictions on policy, you don’t know what to do except introduce bills then pull them. We don’t need that weakness as our member of congress
Comment by NOtoHAS — May 4, 2008 @ 9:44 am
It would appear that Love’s consultants sure want both Woods and Smith out of the race any way possible. That just confirms to me the numbers being rumored about Montgomery that show them ahead of Love are legit. Love is third and fading and not taking it well. . . .
Comment by Dr. Paul's heard them . . . — May 4, 2008 @ 10:39 am
Anyone that is looking at polls will not find Jay Love third. HA Smith maybe, but not Love. I don’t plan on voting for either one of them, but I am being realistic about what the numbers say.
Comment by Reality Bites — May 4, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
Love is not as worried about Smith as he is the two Davids now…
Comment by Jboner — May 4, 2008 @ 5:16 pm
I’m not a Love or Woods supporter but am most definitely not a Smith supporter. Haven’t seen anything she has to offer the district.
Comment by 02 voter — May 4, 2008 @ 7:23 pm
She has zero to offer the district except someone that can’t take a stand and will run from tough issues. I guess that is what being in the state legislature will do for you?
Comment by BigTime — May 5, 2008 @ 7:04 am
Smith is still first. And anyone who has seen actual numbers knows that. Love and Woods are dead even with Woods moving and Love stagnant.
Schmidtke and Grimes are out unless Grimes has secret money coming.
Comment by Real numbers — May 5, 2008 @ 8:31 am
Reality Bites, you and I both know you are full of it now. Numbers are coming out.
Comment by Real numbers — May 5, 2008 @ 8:32 am
Numbers are coming out? By who? Is there an ind. source that is doing a poll? If so, I haven’t seen it - so please fill us all in “Real numbers.” I don’t doubt Grimes and Schmidtke are out of it. Martin also. Woods, Love and Smith are the top three but I doubt Smith is polling first in any un biased district wide poll.
Comment by Holmes — May 5, 2008 @ 8:57 am
Hey Big Al, Please read this extract and explain how Woods’ use of corporate funds is exempt from FEC rules. Please remember, that Woods Communication Corp. is a separate and distinct entity. Woods, as an officer of the Corp is also prohibited from authorizing such use of Corp.funds.
§ 441b. Contributions or expenditures by national banks, corporations, or labor organizations
It is unlawful for any national bank, or any corporation organized by authority of any law of Congress, to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with any election to any political office….or for any candidate, political committee, or other person knowingly to accept or receive any contribution prohibited by this section, or any officer or any director of any corporation or any national bank or any officer of any labor organization to consent to any contribution or expenditure by the corporation, national bank, or labor organization, as the case may be, prohibited by this section.
For purposes of this section and section 79l(h) of title 15,1 the term “contribution or expenditure” includes a contribution or expenditure, as those terms are defined in section 301 (2 u.s.c. § 431), and also includes any direct or indirect payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money, or any services, or anything of value …. to any candidate, campaign committee, or political party or organization, in connection with any election to any of the offices referred to in this section or for any applicable electioneering communication….
Comment by JRay — May 5, 2008 @ 9:09 am
As far as poll numbers, they are real and they are out there. The extreme reaction by Love supporters to Woods recently shows that the numbers are out there. Love is reacting more to Woods because they now know how big a threat he actually is.
If the election were today Woods and smith make the runoff.
Comment by Anonymous — May 5, 2008 @ 9:48 am
Where have you seen Love supprters react to Woods? So if the numbers are out there…do tell.
Comment by HillaryAnneSmith — May 5, 2008 @ 9:56 am
Jray, it makes a difference in that Woods owns his company 100%. It is all his own money. He also reported it and showed the reimbursement. Wake up!
Comment by BigAl???Nope — May 5, 2008 @ 10:00 am
Re: 120. The primary is still 4 weeks away. I don’t think Smith can “hang-on” for 4 more weeks. She is keeping a very low profile, while Love and Woods are spending $$$ on TV ads. I saw a new Woods TV spot this morning on WSFA, and noticed that Love has tacked a smaller sign to many of his large 4X8’s. It reads “Christian Conservative Values”. We will most likely see a Love/Woods run-off.
Comment by JRay — May 5, 2008 @ 10:05 am
Has anyone seen a poll on how this race is shaping up? where is the best / most reliable source to see polling results?
Comment by new voice — May 5, 2008 @ 10:08 am
Big Al, It appears that Woods allowed a CORPORATION to advance or loan a political committee funds in the form of postage, supplies, and payroll. Woods does not OWN the company, he is just the principal stockholder and President. I agree that there is a fine line between ownership and stockholdership (sp), but ultimately, a corporation cannot contribute to a political committee, regardless of whether or not it is reimbursed. Just show me the FEC paragraph that supports your position.
Comment by JRay — May 5, 2008 @ 10:12 am
Woods is not in violation JRay. If you are so sure of yourself, file an FEC complaint or call them and inquire if you are correct. You are not.
Comment by Jboner — May 5, 2008 @ 10:59 am
Jboner, I’ll call tommorrow, if I’m wrong, I prefer my crow grilled with a side of onion rings.
Comment by JRay — May 5, 2008 @ 5:40 pm
Jboner - per FEC (800-424-9530, menu item 6) Use of corporate funds to support a candidate (when those funds are reimbursed by the candidates committee) is frowned upon by the FEC, but is acceptable provided all non-payroll items are reimbursed within a commercially reasonable time frame and all payroll expenses are paid for in advance. The FEC representative I spoke with seemed most interested in whether the letterhead identified on Woods’ FEC3 contained any reference to the corporation or if it was committee letterhead paid for by the corporation and subsequently reimbursed by the committee. Humbly yours, JRay
Comment by JRay — May 6, 2008 @ 10:55 am