Posted on 08/19/2002 9:45:01 AM PDT by ruppertdog
Year 2002: Barr vs. Linder…A Difference of Styles
If "style" is defined as the difference between an adult and a child, then, yes, the difference between the two campaigns for Tuesday's August Primary is all a matter of style. John Linder and his supporters represent the Adults, and Bob Barr and his supporters are Children who run around making-up stories about people who won't pay attention to them.
However, the "stories" are not the usual make-believe stuff that children dream-up. No, this stuff is effluent of the worst kind. One letter being sent out to churches in the 7th District attacks John Linder for supposedly opposing a bill sponsored by Bob Barr titled "The Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act."
This Act would allow currently tax-exempt churches and the like to take active roles in supporting or opposing a candidate in a race. Bob Barr wants tax-exempt 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations to be allowed to use donations and contributions for political speech purposes.
John Linder did not oppose this legislation, and has often stated he would vote for it when it came to the floor. But he is not a sponsor of it because his Fair Tax plan would eliminate the IRS and thus take away the "501" designation completely, leaving places of worship free to speak their minds.
Another element of the hit piece on Linder is that they accuse him of being "anti-marriage." The facts are that John Linder has been married to the same woman for 39 years, while Bob Barr is on his third wife, after having cheated on his 2nd wife with his current wife, Jeri. Yeah, you tell us again, Bob, who's more "pro-marriage?" What a lying piece of putrid Cherokee County manure Bob is.
In a letter sent out late Friday evening from some Neo-Nasty named Reverend Sheldon of some organization called the Traditional Values PAC, Sheldon attacks John Linder with these statements:
"1) He apparently prefers to allow homosexuals to represent him in his office. He signed the homosexual pledge of employment.
2) He apparently does not believe and would not vote to support the right to keep and bear arms/2nd Amendment.
3) He apparently does not want tax reform, which would lower taxes.
4) He apparently does not want less IRS intrusion.
5) He apparently does not want to be associated with Judeo-Christian and conservative believing people."
To Statement #1, John Linder has now answered three times in debates with Bob Barr that he signed a statement pledging that he would not discriminate hiring someone on the basis of their sexual orientation. Apparently, to people like Sheldon and Barr, the FIRST question asked when hiring someone should be "Whom do you have sex with?" To us, there is no difference in this question to the one asked during the first-half of this century in America when employers asked, "Are you a Jew?"
To Sheldon's 2nd statement, John Linder has an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. Kinda tough to rank him alongside people like John Conyers and Tom Daschle with that kind of voting record.
To Sheldon's 3rd and 4th statements, the good Reverend must be smoking crack cocaine. John Linder has a plan put together ("The Fair Tax") that completely eliminates the IRS and changes the way people are taxed…which has been dubbed by President George W. Bush and leaders on both sides of the aisle to be "tax reform."
Finally, to Sheldon's last statement, as personal believers of the "Judeo" side of things ourselves, it greatly insults us to be lumped into having ANYTHING like the kinds of "values" this nutcase has that he claims as a "Christian." We've got news for you, Rev. Sheldon: WE don't wish to be associated with you, and we doubt anyone who is sane would either.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalvine.com ...
I'm not sure who I would vote for if I lived in that district. (Isackson is my representative) If Linder loses, I'm sure the RNC or President Bush will offer him an important position in the administration. If Barr loses, I don't think the same would hold true, but Barr would easily become a powerful talking head/voice/lobbyist for the political right. (Hey!! Maybe MSNBC could hire him to help em get some viewers.)
Dan
Linder's anti-gun vote revealed
There is a reference to the house record for the vote.
"Ralph E. Reed, Jr.
Chairman, Georgia Republican Party
Ralph Reed is Chairman of the Georgia Republican Party and is founder and president of Century Strategies, a public affairs and public relations firm.
Ralph has advised dozens of successful candidates for U.S. Senate, Congress, and Governor nationwide. Among his previous clients: the George W. Bush for President campaign, U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey, House Conference chairman J.C. Watts, Senator Richard Shelby, and Senator Paul Coverdell.
In the 1980’s he served as chairman of the College Republicans of Georgia, executive director of the College Republican National Committee, and co-chairman of the youth effort for President Ronald Reagan’s re-election campaign.
In 1994 he played a critical role in the election of the first Republican Congress in 40 years. He has worked on six presidential campaigns, most recently serving as a senior advisor to the campaign of President George W. Bush in 2000.
In the spring of 2001 Ralph was elected Chairman of the Georgia Republican Party. In his role as state party chairman, he has played an important role in grassroots organization, fundraising, and candidate recruitment.
During Ralph’s tenure, the Georgia Republican Party has increased its donor base from 12,000 active donors to over 20,000, while increasing membership in the Georgia Republican Foundation from 180 members to over 750 members. The GRP reported more contributions and funds raised since Reed’s election than at any time in the Party’s history.
In addition, Reed has led the launching of the Georgia Volunteer Leader program, which has included dozens of training seminars across the state that have graduated roughly 2,000 grassroots activists from precinct training seminars.
As executive director of the Christian Coalition in the 1990’s, he built one of the most effective grassroots organizations in modern American politics. During his tenure, the organization’s budget grew from $200,000 to $27 million, and its support base grew from two thousand to two million members and supporters in thousands of local chapters.
Acknowledged as one of the most important political strategists in America today, Ralph has been named one of the top ten political newsmakers in the nation by Newsweek, one of the fifty future leaders in the country by Time magazine, and one of the twenty most influential leaders of the baby-boom generation by Life magazine.
He received his B.A. from the University of Georgia and a Ph.D. in history from Emory University. He is the best-selling author and editor of three books, and his columns have appeared in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. He currently serves on the Board of Directors of Support Technologies. He and his wife Jo Anne live with their four children in Duluth, Georgia. They are members of Perimeter Church."
Georgians can disagree without being disagreeable, one hopes, and I for one, don't see anything Carvillian about Ralph Reed.
Ralph Reed worked hard on the energy deregulation bill for Pennsylvania which is considered a model for the entire country.
Further, I have never ever heard the man utter a negative word about others. He prefers to state his point and case without tearing down others.
Just a FYI.....I'm neither a member of the Christian Coaltion or a resident of Pennsylvania.
Yeah - like that "A" rating from the NRA means anything. RINO Jim Kolbe in Arizona District 8 is no friend to gun owners, has voted for such things as the Brady Bill, Assault Weapons Ban, etc. yet he still garners "A" ratings from the too-politicized NRA. In this Primary Election, the NRA Pols decided to endorse RINO Kolbe instead of far more conservative pro-2nd amendment challenger Jim Behnke. Local NRA members were vocally against their plan to endorse Kolbe, but their complaints fell on deaf ears. Apparently, the NRA would rather "sure thing" instead of backing the more worthy candidate in such a race. Their ratings and endorsements are meaningless, if you ask me. And the NRA hasn't found a single foundational principle that they won't back down on to appease the gun grabbers
It's a little difficult to take any of the article seriously with an opening like this. When you label your opponents as name-calling children in the opening sentence it sort of sets the tone for the rest of the "article".
Maybe he should be politically active in the Democratic party where his views were more in line with his associates. I feel that a person should follow his conscience and be with like-minded associates rather than trying to influence a different party into changing their mainstream objectives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.