Vote for Steve Allen = Vote for Mayor Haddix

13 replies [Last post]
madmike
madmike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/04/2006

(To Steve Allen, running against Incumbent Eric Imker, Peachtree City Council, Post 1)

Hello Steve:

I have read both of your "Letters to the Editor" in The Citizen announcing your candidacy. The only consistent theme you seem to have is that you disagree with anything Imker does or wants to do that is in opposition of Peachtree City's Mayor, Don Haddix. In your original announcement for running (Steve Allen: Why I'm Running Against Eric Imker for City Council, The Citizen, 9/13/11), three of your six bullet points specifically state Imker's opposition to the Mayor as your reasoning for opposing him, and at least one other bullet (DAPC) has the same implication written all over it. In the comments on these blogs to your letter, several people surmised that Haddix actually penned it.
You may have been convinced by Haddix that he has a swell of support and you could ride his coattails to victory. I suggest you watch the citizen response portion of the censure and read the editorials over the past few months in the papers. Even councilman-elect George Dienhart admitted in a recent editorial that the mayor is a loose cannon and is not re-electable (Peachtree City Needs Positive Leadership, Fayette County News, 7/23/11).
====================================================================================================================================================
"I don’t believe he is re-electable at this point. To continue to draw attention to the Mayor’s PR activities will only serve to highlight a governmental loose cannon to businesses that want to make Peachtree City their home. Let the electorate do its job. Let the voters fire the mayor when his term is up." George goes on to say, "When Mayor Haddix causes controversy, the business’ that are considering a move to our city may start to look elsewhere."
====================================================================================================================================================
Tell me Steve, how do your ideas of sustaining existing business and attracting new companies to Peachtree City align with the counter-productive activities and perception of our mayor? If new revenue growth through existing and new business is truly your goal, it can only be done in step with opposition to Haddix's continued dismantlement of our city's reputation and aggravation to the people and groups whose job it is to bring in that new business. Either you want new business for our city and therefore, denounce the activities of the mayor that prevent it, or you support the Mayor and his actions and accept the fact that, along with that support, goes the opportunity to attract new business. You can't have it both ways.

You continue to call Eric down on the tax issue, so let's get a look at the best unbiased view we have going right now, the editor of this paper, Mr. Cal Beverly. I happen to respect Cal and what he writes, you may feel differently. Cal says what he means, doesn't mince words, and never seems to let the local politicians sway his opinion. So what did Cal say about Imker and his taking on the Mayor on the budget and tax issues?
====================================================================================================================================================
"I disagree with Mayor Don Haddix that furloughs should be off the table in Peachtree City. He says the city is not like a private business, mainly because there are “citizen demands.”

"Four cheers to Councilman Eric Imker for pointing out the obvious: The emperor has no clothes. The money ain’t there, and it likely ain’t gonna be there for several years to come. Mr. Imker, you are absolutely right to confront the status quo in local government."

"I agree completely with Mr. Imker: It’s time to deal with reality. Private sector taxpayers are a lot worse off than almost all government employees at all levels."
====================================================================================================================================================
Steve, you say the things you think the people want to hear, like running the government like a business, yet you denounce the one guy who has been trying to do just that (Imker) while swooning at the mere thought of the Mayor who states that the city cannot be run like a private business. You need to make a decision Steve and we as the citizens of the city are waiting to hear it. Either firmly distance yourself from the Mayor by calling him on his actions and run on a promise to oppose the shenanigan he continues with that are running this city in the ground or go ahead and get your election signs printed with a picture on the front of you and Donnie holding hands. Which is it going to be?

Finally let me say this, as I know you read these blogs (you admitted as much in your email to me). Why do you think that most of the "citizens" who respond in support of the mayor here hide behind their monikers and never validate who they are, while most of those who oppose the mayor and/or support Eric Imker don't mind showing their real names? Is it possible that all of these supporters that come out of the woodwork privately on these blogs may be one in the same? Perhaps Haddix himself? His wife? I'm just asking. Remember, these people can't use their multiple monikers at the voting booth.

Mike LaTella
mlatella@bellsouth.net

madmike
madmike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/04/2006
Vote for Steve Allen = Vote for Mayor Haddix

***

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Dope won't get 500 votes with the attack thing.

Don't worry about a thing Mad dog, Allen is no longer a factor in this election. Silly tactics, probably encouraged by the little mayor and truly unworkable. Steve Allen will be in the small club with Anna Marie Baker, Carole Rowland, her son Scott, Phil somebody and of course Gary Rower.

madmike
madmike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/04/2006
Dead DJ... Allen = 500 votes?

I hope you are right unless of course, 500 votes is enough to win. I've heard only 20% of registered voters show up in "local only" elections. It would be a shame if the citizens elect someone who's only platform is love for a failing and unpopular Mayor.
Mad Dog? I like it! I used to drink that stuff when I was a kid. Great aperitif to a fine dinner at Waffle House at 3:00 a.m. in the morning.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
20% is good for us, mad dog

and that is 20% of registered voters and only about half of eligible are registered. I remember one election - maybe the one that gave us the brownclown, where 9% was the turnout.

My 500 votes is based on Imker getting about 1500 and that would be a huge turnout for our apathetic little city.
Now next year with Congress and President on the ballot, turnout will be much better and we will get to vote for Haddix's replacement - choosing from Learnard, Sussburg, Imker, Rowland. Mike King and Scott Bradshaw and Dar Thompson should be on that list, but won't be.

And just in case you were wondering, of course I can still vote - and do. I've even worked at the polls.

madmike
madmike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/04/2006
RWM - Replacing Haddix

Now that is fun to think about... replacing Haddix. I don't know Dar or Rowland well, but Learnard, King, Bradshaw, Imker, Sussburg would all be great candidates.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Its sort of like the 8 Republican Presidential candidates

any of them would be so much better than what we have now that it almost doesn't matter which one. I would also add Todd Strickland to that list. Russ Heil as well. The only mystery will be can Haddix's poor performance draw more opponents than Brown did at the end of his first and only term. The record is 6. I don't think that can be beaten, but we shall see.

madmike
madmike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/04/2006
RWM: RE: Allen Vote = Haddix Vote

Agreed. You could probably put the dog catcher up against Haddix and he would win. Let's just hope Brown doesn't try to get back in. What about you RWM? You seem to have your hands around the issues.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Dead can vote - can't run or serve

Sorry, but that's the way it is.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
RWM- Really?

I thought it was almost a requirement to be dead from the neck up to run?

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Funny G35

BTW, I'm looking at a G37 and I really like it except for headroom. Any comments? Ideas?

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
RWM-G37

Headroom has always been an issue with the G series. I'm 6'2" and fit into mine nicely with the seat down and slanted back just a little. Have you driven one yet? Consumer Reports gives the car high marks. You might want to read their review. I think you'll be impressed with the power and handling. I describe the G coupe as an adult sports car. Not like Mustangs and Camaros that are for the kids. One day after I win the lottery I'm going to upgrade to a G37 myself.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
G37 - Oh yes! I have test driven 3 and love them

Like you, I am 6'2" and am fine once I am inside. Getting in I bump my head - getting out no problem. I am almost willing to overlook all that because of how it drives and handles. Wonderful car. Reminds me of a BMW 635 i once had.

madmike
madmike's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/04/2006
Dead man can't run for office?

What about brain dead? Seems we have some of that not only running but already elected!

Recent Comments