Posted on 11/20/2005 6:04:18 PM PST by NapkinUser
I read the article, but I don't have the slightest idea what this guy stands for, other than saying that he is anti-tax.
Regardless, the not-so-subtle message of the visit: Reed didn't want any competition.
"That's fine," Cagle remembers telling Reed. "But not only has God called me to do this, Ralph, God has confirmed me to do this."
I guess God likes a good cat fight.
And just what did you expect to learn about a conservative Republican from The Atlanta Journal Constitution?
I hope this contest for the GA Lt Gov nomination doesn't get ugly, or it jeopardizes our ability to win the general and have an heir apparent to Sonny Perdue in 2010. I like Ralph Reed, but he's just using the job as a springboard to something else. I think Sen. Cagle is the best choice as he already has experience in the chamber that he would be presiding over.
"The Atlanta =Jo=ur(i)nal (and) Consti(pa)t=u=tion?" ;-)
I was hoping maybe someone who knows this guy would chip in.
I'm familiar with Ralph Reed, and have very mixed feelings about him. He built up the Christian Coalition, but he also pretty well destroyed it when he engineered the nomination of Bob Dole.
I'm voting for Casey Cagle too.
Quit the GD MF hypocrisy and run on the GD MF issues and leave your preaching at home you GD MF hypocrites."
I can't help it. The biggest knives in my back were placed there by individuals who spouted similar platitudes, but then didn't 'walk the walk'.
I don't have a dog in this fight because I can't vote in Ga. However, after reading the article, the thought occurred to me that you thought exactly what The AJC wanted you to think. Do you not think Cagle is also using the job as a springboard? I think many politicians have high aspirations, or expectations, until they realize most everyone else does also.
Well, I'm north of the border in TN, so I can't vote, either. I can only say that Cagle (unless he turns out to be a RINO, which I've heard no charge of) has more of a better claim to the job solely because he serves in the body for which he would preside over. It seems a rather odd position for Reed to run for. I'm sure Cagle would ultimately like to be Governor, but is going about getting there in a natural succession (as with Perdue, although he never served as Lt Gov, he did serve as Senate President Pro Tempore, or Zell Miller, who previously served as Lt Gov) and would want to accomplish something while serving in the #2 position. With Reed, it seems like he would just want it "on his resume" before his real goal of Governor comes open (in which case, why not simply wait until 2010 so he can go for what he really wants ?). Why, also, did Reed wait so long to finally take the plunge into elective office, too ? I don't want to look like I'm picking on Reed, just asking some questions.
Hey, MH, what's your opinion of the Cagle-Reed contest at this point ?
I'm voting Oxendine.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has been running one hit piece after another trying to take out Ralph Reed. At the moment, I would vote for him if he were running on the Satanic Ticket and his opponent were Michael the Archangel.
Smartass. :-P
I don't mind all the injection of God/religion into politics (since I'm not one of the fooled masses who actually believes "Separation" is in the Constitution), though even with some candidates, it becomes gratuitously a wee-bit over the top. I wouldn't mind a candidate saying, "Well, God didn't ask me to run... I decided all on my own !" Somehow, I think the Lord has more important things on His mind than whom becomes the next Lieutenant-Governor of Georgia. But, I could be wrong... ;-)
Let's not go THAT far !
Happens all the time. A 'nuts and bolts' type of candidate loses out to one who is more 'flash.' Women make that choice all the time. Oliver North won the Senate primary over a hard working budget director in the Reagan administration(Miller?). Ralph Reed has earned his right to run for the office. It's like an actor getting a bug up his behind and choosing to run. Think of the times when Republicans had to turn to these types of people as their only opportunity: Think Mike Ditka and Ahnold.
Ditka may have actually been a promising candidate for us, legitimately Conservative, and viable as an Illinois resident.
As for Ah-nold, I never fell for his schtick once. I knew he was a destructive RINO before he ever declared for office.
I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing to run a "flashy" candidate if in most areas they are superior to a candidate whom has been toiling in the field, so to speak. In the case of Reed, it's not necessary to run him. Cagle is quite acceptable and carries none of Reed's baggage.
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.