I don't know if you received the colorful enlarged postcard from Lester Spell on Friday, but I did. It was a doozy. It pointed out Rickey Cole is a liberal Democrat who is not fit to be the MDAC Commissioner. According to the postcard, "Rickey Cole, too Slick for Agriculture," was emblazoned on it. It went on and on how Rickey Cole was some kind of flaming commie liberal while Lester Spell was more conservative than Ronald Reagan.
Let's look at the facts. It is true Cole was a Democratic Party delegate for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. As I recall, Cole was the Democratic Party chairman of the state in 2004. Wouldn't it make sense for him to be a delegate? The postcard also stated as a delegate to those conventions he supported "Democratic ideas" like abortion, gun control and higher taxes. Now unless you are a space alien who just landed in this state, Cole has ALWAYS been opposed to abortion and gun control. I have followed Cole's campaigns and I also never have known him to advocate higher taxes. Perhaps someone can show me contrary evidence. Indeed, I've listened to him on talk radio and he sounds quite conservative to me. And I am very conservative (Sometimes that puts me at odds with the GOP and President Bush's nutty spending programs.).
Now he has advocated raising taxes when he was the Democratic Party chair. But he was a spokesman for the party, not his own man. When I was on the RCREC for twelve years, I supported candidates I could not stand. Such are the vagaries of serving on a political party committee. Did Spell expect Cole to tell the state Democratic Party he was going to speak differently than what they wanted? I'll be the first to admit there are too many turkeys in the Democratic Party who advocate raising taxes, such as Rep. John Mayo in the Delta (This gobbler wants a 6% income tax bracket. Jerk.).
I'm confused by the postcard's statement "Rickey Cole led the charge to kick conservatives out of 'his' Democratic Party." Huh? As I recall, he wanted more conservatives in the Democratic Party. He was afraid the state Democratic Party would become so liberal it would be a constant loser. Actually, the purge started AFTER he stepped down as party chair. I'd like to see evidence Cole led the charge to expel conservatives out of the Democratic Party.
I will agree with the over sized postcard on one thing: It is correct when it states labor unions, the National Education Association and trial lawyers are the three best friends of the Democratic Party. And Cole has affirmed that. But he was stating fact. They ARE the three best friends of the Democratic Party.
But on no space on that postcard did it state Spell was once a Democrat. In fact, he was a staunch Democrat until the mess on the beef plant came out. Then--voila--he switched parties and now was a tub-thumping Republican. He had no qualms about running under the Democratic Party banner in 1995, 1999, and 2003. He sure thought highly of Rickey Cole in the 2003 campaign.
In fact, he cared as much for the GOP back in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s as my cats care about being near rocking chairs. He had no use for the GOP and he let that be known in county races when Rankin County was still Democratic (That changed with the 1991 elections.). He was a good ole boy Democrat and he thought Republicans were a little bit lower than a bullfrog's belly. In his city races for mayor of Richland, he ran as a Democrat. BUT TO SAVE HIS POLITICAL TUSH HE IS NOW A FIRE-BREATHING REPUBLICAN! What principle. What political courage.
In our office, all but one of us are Republicans (One bookkeeper is a Democrat.). ALL of us are voting for Rickey Cole and so are our acquaintances. In fact, my barber is a die-hard Republican. He said he was voting for only two Democrats--Mike Sumrall for State Auditor and Rickey Cole. He is well-known in the area and is politically astute. All of us think Spell is arrogant for not taking ANY responsibility for the failure of the beef plant.
As for the beef plant failure, wasn't there a goat farm failure too? Now maybe Cole is no flaming conservative like Spell. But since when is it "conservative" to waste taxpayer dollars on frivolous and idiotic projects? At least Cole knows SOMETHING about farming. Spell has been a veterinarian until he got into politics. What does HE KNOW about farming?
Let's do the state a great service on November 6th. Let's vote in an honorable man and a knowledgeable farmer for MDAC Commissioner. Let's all vote for Rickey Cole.
Saturday, November 03, 2007
Friday, November 02, 2007
Barbour Versus Posey: What a Choice
Republican Charles Barbour is running against Democrat Lynn Posey for the PSC--Central District. I have never seen two sorrier candidates. It is not which one is the best, but which one is the least worse. Neither one of them is fit to walk in present Commissioner Nielsen Cochran's shoes. Nevertheless, you have to vote for one of them (or leave the ballot blank).
I'm voting for Posey for the following reasons:
1. Since I live in Pearl, I have followed the Hinds County Board of Supervisors meetings. I can tell you Barbour has been a poor supervisor. While it is true he has voted against tax increase twenty-three times, the financial management of Hinds County has been very poor. The only person who has any sense on that Board is Peggy Calhoun.
2. One Barbour is enough. I cannot stand family dynasties, no matter who it is (Barbour is Haley's nephew.). I'm voting for Haley Barbour. I just can't vote for another Barbour. (It's also a reason, but not THE reason, I'm not voting for Stacey Pickering for State Auditor.)
3. Barbour's wife Rosemary has gotten some sweetheart deals from FEMA and has gotten in hot water for financial improprieties. Maybe Charles Barbour had nothing to do with it, but he did benefit financially.
4. Lynn Posey is a populist. I'll bet you he'll give the utilities grief if they try to raise rates. Maybe Barbour will do likewise. But somehow I just don't trust him as much as I trust Posey.
I would have preferred Pearl Mayor Jimmy Foster, who was a far better candidate than Barbour. Also, he has managerial experience in running a city and getting along with the Board of Aldermen. But Foster did not have the money to run an effective campaign or the name recognition (A kitty cat with the name of "Barbour" could get a passel of votes.). So the GOP got stuck with Barbour.
Lynn Posey has been hit hard for voting to raise taxes 110 times. That is the main reason I'm reluctant to vote for him. But because of the above reasons, I think he'll do a much better job than Charles Barbour.
Hold your nose in the voting booth and vote for Lynn Posey.
I'm voting for Posey for the following reasons:
1. Since I live in Pearl, I have followed the Hinds County Board of Supervisors meetings. I can tell you Barbour has been a poor supervisor. While it is true he has voted against tax increase twenty-three times, the financial management of Hinds County has been very poor. The only person who has any sense on that Board is Peggy Calhoun.
2. One Barbour is enough. I cannot stand family dynasties, no matter who it is (Barbour is Haley's nephew.). I'm voting for Haley Barbour. I just can't vote for another Barbour. (It's also a reason, but not THE reason, I'm not voting for Stacey Pickering for State Auditor.)
3. Barbour's wife Rosemary has gotten some sweetheart deals from FEMA and has gotten in hot water for financial improprieties. Maybe Charles Barbour had nothing to do with it, but he did benefit financially.
4. Lynn Posey is a populist. I'll bet you he'll give the utilities grief if they try to raise rates. Maybe Barbour will do likewise. But somehow I just don't trust him as much as I trust Posey.
I would have preferred Pearl Mayor Jimmy Foster, who was a far better candidate than Barbour. Also, he has managerial experience in running a city and getting along with the Board of Aldermen. But Foster did not have the money to run an effective campaign or the name recognition (A kitty cat with the name of "Barbour" could get a passel of votes.). So the GOP got stuck with Barbour.
Lynn Posey has been hit hard for voting to raise taxes 110 times. That is the main reason I'm reluctant to vote for him. But because of the above reasons, I think he'll do a much better job than Charles Barbour.
Hold your nose in the voting booth and vote for Lynn Posey.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
We Desperately Need Mike Sumrall for State Auditor
I watched Stacey Pickering's commercial for State Auditor. I am SO glad he has a loving wife and two children. And I was impressed by his narrative on what a great guy he is and how great he looked in that sofa. I am certain that qualifies him for the job as State Auditor.
I received a large postcard from the Mississippi GOP talking about the "Liberal Team Bus." On the bus was a picture of Mike Sumrall. Now the seventh reason why your vote should be counted (to vote GOP, obviously) is Mike Sumrall "admits he couldn't even pass the test to become a certified public accountant." Now that is ONE big reason.
First of all, I don't see where Stacey Pickering has ever taken the CPA exam. Secondly, Sumrall has vowed to take the exam if he is elected. In due time, I believe he will pass it.
Since I did pass the CPA exam (the November 1983 exam), I can tell you it is a very hard exam. Few people pass it the first time. You have to put in a lot of study and study a lot of material. When I took it, you were not even allowed to use a calculator. The exam proctors would give you two sheets of legal paper and that is where you could do your calculations. Just have some pencils and some erasers. One calculation error and you could lose a lot of points on a section of the exam.
But Sumrall DOES have the experience to do a good job as State Auditor. He knows what a good audit is. He will not have to have on-the-job training to figure out what constitutes a good audit. He has had more than twenty years working in the OSA's office and other areas of financial management.
What experience does Pickering have in accounting? Indeed, does he even KNOW the difference between a debit and credit? Has he ever taken an accounting course? What makes you think he's going to stay on as State Auditor once he's elected? You can rest assured he'll be looking for another elective post after four years. Debits and credits are not a turn on for someone trying to have a political career and move up the political ladder. Pickering, like the individual who currently holds the post, will make it a political kingdom for his own political ambitions. Thanks to the current State Auditor, the OSA actually got a failing grade by a peer group of nationwide auditors. Turnover is high and the PEER Committee gave the OSA a very poor grade. Do you want to continue that? If so, Pickering is your man. Pickering can talk about what he's going to do to improve the OSA, but don't swallow it. He won't know what to do in that job from Day One.
Mike Sumrall has vowed not to seek higher office if he is elected State Auditor. I believe him. He has great ideas on how to improve the office and make it the top-notch office it was under the days of W. Hamp King. He will not make it a political satrap for him, but a top-notch professional agency which all Mississippians can be proud of.
Take it from this CPA: Mike Sumrall is the ONLY choice for State Auditor.
I received a large postcard from the Mississippi GOP talking about the "Liberal Team Bus." On the bus was a picture of Mike Sumrall. Now the seventh reason why your vote should be counted (to vote GOP, obviously) is Mike Sumrall "admits he couldn't even pass the test to become a certified public accountant." Now that is ONE big reason.
First of all, I don't see where Stacey Pickering has ever taken the CPA exam. Secondly, Sumrall has vowed to take the exam if he is elected. In due time, I believe he will pass it.
Since I did pass the CPA exam (the November 1983 exam), I can tell you it is a very hard exam. Few people pass it the first time. You have to put in a lot of study and study a lot of material. When I took it, you were not even allowed to use a calculator. The exam proctors would give you two sheets of legal paper and that is where you could do your calculations. Just have some pencils and some erasers. One calculation error and you could lose a lot of points on a section of the exam.
But Sumrall DOES have the experience to do a good job as State Auditor. He knows what a good audit is. He will not have to have on-the-job training to figure out what constitutes a good audit. He has had more than twenty years working in the OSA's office and other areas of financial management.
What experience does Pickering have in accounting? Indeed, does he even KNOW the difference between a debit and credit? Has he ever taken an accounting course? What makes you think he's going to stay on as State Auditor once he's elected? You can rest assured he'll be looking for another elective post after four years. Debits and credits are not a turn on for someone trying to have a political career and move up the political ladder. Pickering, like the individual who currently holds the post, will make it a political kingdom for his own political ambitions. Thanks to the current State Auditor, the OSA actually got a failing grade by a peer group of nationwide auditors. Turnover is high and the PEER Committee gave the OSA a very poor grade. Do you want to continue that? If so, Pickering is your man. Pickering can talk about what he's going to do to improve the OSA, but don't swallow it. He won't know what to do in that job from Day One.
Mike Sumrall has vowed not to seek higher office if he is elected State Auditor. I believe him. He has great ideas on how to improve the office and make it the top-notch office it was under the days of W. Hamp King. He will not make it a political satrap for him, but a top-notch professional agency which all Mississippians can be proud of.
Take it from this CPA: Mike Sumrall is the ONLY choice for State Auditor.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Jamie Franks' Last Chance--One Week Left
If I were to call the race today for Lt. Governor, I would predict Dewey Bryant would defeat Jamie Franks for the post. I have talked to people and the "liberal" label is beginning to take hold on Franks. Franks can deny the label all he wants, but it's perception--and not reality--that decides the election.
However, there is a week left in the campaign. And in politics, a week is an eternity. I have seen leads dissipate into deficits in just one week. You can look at state elections and Federal elections for such swings. So Franks still has time to turn it around and win.
Here is what Franks has to do:
1. Paint Bryant as a liberal. Remember, he ran as the liberal candidate for Rankin County Supervisor back in the 1988 special election.
2. For the interim vacancy on the Rankin County Board of Supervisors, he wrote a letter to then-Gov. Ray Mabus' office and stated he had always been a Democrat and he wanted the appointment. I found that out from one of Larry Swales' (The eventual winner of that race) top campaign aides.
3. Dewey Bryant started out as pro-abortion. I wrote on a previous post on how vehemently he was for a woman's "right to choose." But don't take my word for it. It was also reported he was pro-abortion in the Rankin County News of April 17, 1991. (No, I did not write a letter to the News or contact any of the reporters.)
4. He is AGAINST cutting taxes. After all, he is bitterly opposed to cutting the grocery tax on working people. Conservatives are always favoring tax cuts. Why not Dewey?
Franks has GOT to point all of this out to have a chance. If there is one issue that Mississippians feel strongly about, it is abortion. Now Dewey can talk about his pro-life credentials all he wants. But he became pro-life ONLY because he knew he would never get elected as a pro-abortion advocate. Franks has been pro-life from the start. If Franks pointed that out, Dewey's support would melt like a snowball on pavement in Key West, Fla. on a summer day.
Now Franks and his campaign staff may not think abortion is not that big of a deal. So I'll remind him about the 1991 Governor's race. Incumbent Governor Mabus was heavily favored to defeat Republican nominee Kirk Fordice. But I remember the bumper stickers that were on many a car that showed a fetus saying "Savus from Mabus." Everybody in politics knew Mabus was strongly pro-abortion. But he and his staff thought that wasn't a big deal.
The Sunday before the election there were flyers in many Baptist churches contrasting Mabus' pro-abortion stance versus Fordice's pro-life stance. On Election Day, Fordice stunned Mabus with a narrow victory. The margin was only by fifteen thousand votes. You can bet your sweet bippy the abortion issue was THE issue that defeated Mabus.
I analyzed the 1991 results versus the 1987 election results. In 1987, Mabus faced Democrat-turned-Republican Jack Reed. Mabus got 53% of the vote. In 1991, he got 49% of the vote. Mabus actually picked up black support in those four years and stayed the same in the white urban areas. It was the rural and the blue collar areas where Mabus lost heavily--in some cases losing more than 10% of the vote from his 1987 run. What was the reason? Mabus was perceived as liberal on abortion and that cost him reelection.
So Franks has a choice--go nuclear in the last week of the campaign or go down in flames. Right now, he is perceived as the liberal (His support of Kerry-Edwards in 2004 is hurting him.). But if he hits Dewey hard on the social issues and paint him as a flip-flopper who is pro-life to further his political career, he has a good chance of winning.
But the hour is getting late. What will Franks do?
However, there is a week left in the campaign. And in politics, a week is an eternity. I have seen leads dissipate into deficits in just one week. You can look at state elections and Federal elections for such swings. So Franks still has time to turn it around and win.
Here is what Franks has to do:
1. Paint Bryant as a liberal. Remember, he ran as the liberal candidate for Rankin County Supervisor back in the 1988 special election.
2. For the interim vacancy on the Rankin County Board of Supervisors, he wrote a letter to then-Gov. Ray Mabus' office and stated he had always been a Democrat and he wanted the appointment. I found that out from one of Larry Swales' (The eventual winner of that race) top campaign aides.
3. Dewey Bryant started out as pro-abortion. I wrote on a previous post on how vehemently he was for a woman's "right to choose." But don't take my word for it. It was also reported he was pro-abortion in the Rankin County News of April 17, 1991. (No, I did not write a letter to the News or contact any of the reporters.)
4. He is AGAINST cutting taxes. After all, he is bitterly opposed to cutting the grocery tax on working people. Conservatives are always favoring tax cuts. Why not Dewey?
Franks has GOT to point all of this out to have a chance. If there is one issue that Mississippians feel strongly about, it is abortion. Now Dewey can talk about his pro-life credentials all he wants. But he became pro-life ONLY because he knew he would never get elected as a pro-abortion advocate. Franks has been pro-life from the start. If Franks pointed that out, Dewey's support would melt like a snowball on pavement in Key West, Fla. on a summer day.
Now Franks and his campaign staff may not think abortion is not that big of a deal. So I'll remind him about the 1991 Governor's race. Incumbent Governor Mabus was heavily favored to defeat Republican nominee Kirk Fordice. But I remember the bumper stickers that were on many a car that showed a fetus saying "Savus from Mabus." Everybody in politics knew Mabus was strongly pro-abortion. But he and his staff thought that wasn't a big deal.
The Sunday before the election there were flyers in many Baptist churches contrasting Mabus' pro-abortion stance versus Fordice's pro-life stance. On Election Day, Fordice stunned Mabus with a narrow victory. The margin was only by fifteen thousand votes. You can bet your sweet bippy the abortion issue was THE issue that defeated Mabus.
I analyzed the 1991 results versus the 1987 election results. In 1987, Mabus faced Democrat-turned-Republican Jack Reed. Mabus got 53% of the vote. In 1991, he got 49% of the vote. Mabus actually picked up black support in those four years and stayed the same in the white urban areas. It was the rural and the blue collar areas where Mabus lost heavily--in some cases losing more than 10% of the vote from his 1987 run. What was the reason? Mabus was perceived as liberal on abortion and that cost him reelection.
So Franks has a choice--go nuclear in the last week of the campaign or go down in flames. Right now, he is perceived as the liberal (His support of Kerry-Edwards in 2004 is hurting him.). But if he hits Dewey hard on the social issues and paint him as a flip-flopper who is pro-life to further his political career, he has a good chance of winning.
But the hour is getting late. What will Franks do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)