Oft-topic split from Reservoir Thread

[Pigpen]

PCGOPexaminer,

I think this article should container a disclaimer that you are openly supporting Heath in a contested Republican primary runoff. The article should also mention that 10 years ago, Mr. Heath LOST $45 million in state funding dedicated to the Haralson County reservoir which would have benefited the entire district. But for Heath's lack of leadership in 2002, we would already had a reservoir in the district today. A fair and balanced article would have also pointed out that Mr. Heath's runoff competitor, Republican Bill Carruth, actually initiated the Richland Creek reservoir in 1999 and has been working with the County to secure the funding since then.

 

[PCGOPExaminer]

Re: Paulding County Reservoir a reality with State funding

So that the record is straight....this was a release from the 3 state "elected" officials mentioned in the article as they worked on this from the state legislature level.

Carruth is not an elected official and not one time did I get any press releases or whatnot from him. Only JK did one time and Heath and Paulette sent me plenty.

That's the record, Pigpen.

 

[Pigpen]

Re: Paulding County Reservoir a reality with State funding

While your comments on the first post in this thread imply it is a press release, the actual article in the Examiner does not and instead implies to me that you were the author of the article. I still believe that a disclaimer from you (or that you attribute the article to the press release with proper quotations) would lessen the appearance of bias.

 

[PCGOPExaminer]

Re: Paulding County Reservoir a reality with State funding

While your comments on the first post in this thread imply it is a press release, the actual article in the Examiner does not and instead implies to me that you were the author of the article. I still believe that a disclaimer from you (or that you attribute the article to the press release with proper quotations) would lessen the appearance of bias.

None of my articles have a disclaimer, period. It doesn't need to have one. Do you see my flashing biased-articles about Carruth or even JK when he was in the race like some other sites do? Did you see any local race banners on my page? No you do not...what come across my desk, I usually edit, modify (if needed, in keeping with the same meaning) and publish it for the masses. You do not nor will you see an endorsement from me this year in the local races. I did a few in 2010 but decided not to this time but to publish what is handed to me. Trust me...some of the things I know...I could very easily publish but I decided I will not do do. Call it what you will...but I have a bit more ethics in my publishing/journalism then some of other sites do.

 

[LisaC]

Re: Paulding County Reservoir a reality with State funding

While your comments on the first post in this thread imply it is a press release, the actual article in the Examiner does not and instead implies to me that you were the author of the article. I still believe that a disclaimer from you (or that you attribute the article to the press release with proper quotations) would lessen the appearance of bias.

None of my articles have a disclaimer, period. It doesn't need to have one. Do you see my flashing biased-articles about Carruth or even JK when he was in the race like some other sites do? Did you see any local race banners on my page? No you do not...what come across my desk, I usually edit, modify (if needed, in keeping with the same meaning) and publish it for the masses. You do not nor will you see an endorsement from me this year in the local races. I did a few in 2010 but decided not to this time but to publish what is handed to me. Trust me...some of the things I know...I could very easily publish but I decided I will not do do. Call it what you will...but I have a bit more ethics in my publishing/journalism then some of other sites do.

I don't know why you don't "officially" endorse Paulette and Heath. You spend so much time defending them that the endorsements are pretty much implied. :dunno

 

[Blazing Saddles]

I wonder how much politics played a factor against the watershed in Haralson since Heath defeated the old Oak tree at the Dome.

 

[lotstodo]

While your comments on the first post in this thread imply it is a press release, the actual article in the Examiner does not and instead implies to me that you were the author of the article. I still believe that a disclaimer from you (or that you attribute the article to the press release with proper quotations) would lessen the appearance of bias.

None of my articles have a disclaimer, period. It doesn't need to have one. Do you see my flashing biased-articles about Carruth or even JK when he was in the race like some other sites do? Did you see any local race banners on my page? No you do not...what come across my desk, I usually edit, modify (if needed, in keeping with the same meaning) and publish it for the masses. You do not nor will you see an endorsement from me this year in the local races. I did a few in 2010 but decided not to this time but to publish what is handed to me. Trust me...some of the things I know...I could very easily publish but I decided I will not do do. Call it what you will...but I have a bit more ethics in my publishing/journalism then some of other sites do.

I don't know why you don't "officially" endorse Paulette and Heath. You spend so much time defending them that the endorsements are pretty much implied. :dunno

When is an endorsement not an endorsement? When a person spends word after word praising one candidate and trashing the other without using the actual word "endorsement". It's more than implied, it's crystal clear.

 

[Blazing Saddles]

endorsement, indorsement [?n?d??sm?nt]
n
1. the act or an instance of endorsing
2. something that endorses, such as a signature or qualifying comment
3. approval or support
4. (Law) a record of a motoring offence on a driving licence
5. (Business / Insurance) Insurance a clause in or amendment to an insurance policy allowing for alteration of coverage

 

[LisaC]

While your comments on the first post in this thread imply it is a press release, the actual article in the Examiner does not and instead implies to me that you were the author of the article. I still believe that a disclaimer from you (or that you attribute the article to the press release with proper quotations) would lessen the appearance of bias.

None of my articles have a disclaimer, period. It doesn't need to have one. Do you see my flashing biased-articles about Carruth or even JK when he was in the race like some other sites do? Did you see any local race banners on my page? No you do not...what come across my desk, I usually edit, modify (if needed, in keeping with the same meaning) and publish it for the masses. You do not nor will you see an endorsement from me this year in the local races. I did a few in 2010 but decided not to this time but to publish what is handed to me. Trust me...some of the things I know...I could very easily publish but I decided I will not do do. Call it what you will...but I have a bit more ethics in my publishing/journalism then some of other sites do.

I don't know why you don't "officially" endorse Paulette and Heath. You spend so much time defending them that the endorsements are pretty much implied. :dunno

When is an endorsement not an endorsement? When a person spends word after word praising one candidate and trashing the other without using the actual word "endorsement". It's more than implied, it's crystal clear.

I said implied because perhaps he didn't realize that his actions might have given the perception that he supported the two of them. Although, I would need to look a little more closely, I'm thinking that he did continually say that Paulette was the best of the three choices in her race and that Heath is more qualified than Carruth - those sound like endorsements to me or, at a minimum, taking a pretty strong stand that people should vote for them. :dunno

 

[sadie612]

pcgop doesn't endorse ? say what.. it is storming today...be careful

 

[mei lan]

I wonder how much politics played a factor against the watershed in Haralson since Heath defeated the old Oak tree at the Dome.

What is the old oak tree at the dome business? I don't recall that.

That we do not have a reservoir in this district (Haralson, Paulding, wherever) is a complete TRAVESTY. I'm sure it can be laid at the feet of more than one person, but Heath certainly hasn't done anything for Paulding that I could tell.

 

[Winchester]

I wonder how much politics played a factor against the watershed in Haralson since Heath defeated the old Oak tree at the Dome.

What is the old oak tree at the dome business? I don't recall that.

That we do not have a reservoir in this district (Haralson, Paulding, wherever) is a complete TRAVESTY. I'm sure it can be laid at the feet of more than one person, but Heath certainly hasn't done anything for Paulding that I could tell.

So far, all the hold ups have been caused by the Army Corp of Engineers and the EPA. They have required changes several times to the whole plan, the County meets those changes and CoE and EPA add new changes. The federal govt has fought this project more then anyone in the area.

 

[naturegirl]

I wonder how much politics played a factor against the watershed in Haralson since Heath defeated the old Oak tree at the Dome.

What is the old oak tree at the dome business? I don't recall that.

That we do not have a reservoir in this district (Haralson, Paulding, wherever) is a complete TRAVESTY. I'm sure it can be laid at the feet of more than one person, but Heath certainly hasn't done anything for Paulding that I could tell.

I think the old oak tree was a reference to Tom Murphy. He was solid, stood tall and protected his constituents. He was a pretty good ole guy.

 

[lotstodo]

far be it from me to defend the EPA and EPD, but........

There is a longstanding issue regarding interbasin transfers involved with this project. These are not new, and Paulding has acknowledged that these issues exist. There will be no Federal permit until this issue is resolved, and it is a complicated issue involving the long term waste water treatment plans for the county as well as the growth patterns within the three basins in Paulding.

It is not going to happen without an Environmental Impact Study, which the county claims it doesn't need, but which it does need if it intends to ever get this project approved. Nothing will proceed within the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa basin without one. Besides, there is action pending that would require the COE and EPA to consider all of those proposed reservoirs along the ACT cumulatively as a "program level" singular Environmental Impact. The quicker we get our EIS, the less likely it will be thrown into the pot and boiled with the other ten or so proposed projects.

Then, assuming we get all of these problems resolved, there is a matter of the cost, which frankly scares me. It may be our best option to support growth, but we really need to make that decision using cost/benefit analysis.

 

[mei lan]

I wonder how much politics played a factor against the watershed in Haralson since Heath defeated the old Oak tree at the Dome.

What is the old oak tree at the dome business? I don't recall that.

That we do not have a reservoir in this district (Haralson, Paulding, wherever) is a complete TRAVESTY. I'm sure it can be laid at the feet of more than one person, but Heath certainly hasn't done anything for Paulding that I could tell.

I think the old oak tree was a reference to Tom Murphy. He was solid, stood tall and protected his constituents. He was a pretty good ole guy.

Oh, thanks! I was being a literal three-year-old thinking real oak tree and the Georgia Dome.