As of now (6:20pm Pacific) the results in Georgia look a little too good for Hank Johnson; I doubt that we’ll see an outcome this good at the end of the night:
With 13% of precincts reporting, it’s 73.8% for Johnson and 26.2% for McKinney (UPDATE: It finished out at about 60% – 40% for Johnson, still about a 5-6% larger margin than pre-election polls had shown).
If you want to catch the buzz of the evening, check out some of the folks liveblogging this:
* Tom Baxter of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s “Political Insider” blog
* Andre Walker of “Georgia Politics Unfiltered”
* Jeff Emanuel of “Peach Pundit”
And of course, the blogger who kicked off the whole “we gotta get out of this place” push down in Geeorgia…
Will Hinton, “Dignan”
UPDATE2: Hank Johnson’s campaign called to thank us all. So… thank you, to everyone participated!
Just got the call from Hank’s campaign. it ended up being 60/40 – still better than the before polls which had Hank at 54%.
They offered a lot of thanks to us all for doing our bit to help make it so.
…Ding, dong, the witch is dead…. and may she stay dead this time!
My congratulations, gentlemen.
Now I know why WofC endorsed/fundraised for Hank Johnson.
“McKinney opponent rakes in pro-Israel cash.”:http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/080206/mckinney.html
You militant Zionists are quite a bunch. I’m starting to wonder what it is costing America to be such blind supporters of the aggressive factions in Israel while at the same time completely ignoring the substantial dissenting views that exist there (and here) who recognize that mindless aggression endangers us all even while satisfying your bloodlust.
And this coming from a Sicilian, no less.
Thank you, Andy, for doing the ceremonial “It’s the damn Joooos!” speech on behalf of the McKinney campaign.
You can go back under your sheet now.
Herr Katzman;
Screw you. I am not an anti-semite. There’s no love lost on McKinney from my point of view. I don’t think she’s cut out for public service. However, the idea that you have been supporting Hank Johnson because he’s not “crazy” seems “incomplete” me.
Of course, now I think I have the answer. It isn’t that you’re pro-Johnson, you’re Anti-McKinney because she’s perceived to be “anti-Israel” by some.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with putting your money behind the candidates who oppose those you disagree with. It’s just that I don’t think you’ve been totally honest and forthcoming about why you want to see McKinney ousted so badly. If anything, her big mouth hurts Dems, which would seem to favor your party.
So, nice job playing the “Jews as eternal victims” card again. If anything, your idiotic response and slanderous accusation only helps to support my conjecture.
Questioning the cost of our blind support for pro-war Israeli’s is something that American’s and politicians alike are too afraid to do, precisely because of the toxic and baseless types of accusations that you are attempting to use on me.
You are putting your (misguided) concern for Israeli security above America’s when you argue in this manner. My suggestion…move to Israel, join the army, fight for your people. I don’t think your dismissive attitude toward the very reasonable questioning of the cost of this military support to our young American soldiers, and America’s domestic security, is worth even a drop of my spit.
I won’t presume to speak for Joe, but might I suggest that maybe–just maybe–he’s anti-McKinney precisely because she’s not cut out for public service? Why do you need a reason to vote against a politician beyond being unfit for office? In any case, whether you view that simple logic as “incomplete” or not has more to do with your own biases and POV than with Joe’s motivations.
But hey, don’t let me distract you from the conspiracy theory angle. I just find it amusing when the trolls slash their wrists with Occam’s Razor.
Andy,
If you are not, you are doing a fine imitation. The little “herr” there being an attempt to throw us off the scent, no doubt.
Might have worked too if he hadn’t written anything after it (or before it).
I’d gladly allow all of you to label me an “anti-semite” or whatever other epithet you wish to hurl, in lieu of a substantive defense of your position, as long as there is peace in the middle east and American’s are no longer sending their sons & daughters to die in the desert for anything other than America’s interests.
Let’s get real for a moment. If I were really an anti-semite, it would be trivial to hide that here. Look how well Katzman hid his true reasons for supporting McKinney…or for that matter how many of the other visitors here hide their deep biases in their unconditional support for wars against Arab/Muslim countries. However, throwing the loaded term “Herr” out there is a great way to raise the hackles of those most predisposed to retreat into racist accusations and flee any effort at strong and reasoned argumentation. Not only does this bring them out of the woodwork, it illustrates how afraid they are of confronting the real issue.
So feel free to continue to abandon reason when having to justify your positions may bring their inherent flaws and presumptions to light….I don’t think it really fools anyone who doesn’t already think the way you do.
Oh really, this is getting funny:
Tell you what: if you can get Hezbollah, Hamas, al Qaeda, the Palestinians, Iran, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia to all stop promoting terrorism and stop killing Americans and Jews, we’ll all apologize for calling you names. If you can do it by next Tuesday, we’ll even buy you a beer.
In the meantime, perhaps you’d care to explain how your theory explaining WoC’s support of Johnson is superior to WoC’s stated reasons. (Hint: you may want to start by introducing an element of rationality into your rants, or even just a logically argued point instead of vague insinuations.)
Go to, troll!
Herr Andy L: The article you link in #3 is poorly supported.
* It states that Johnson received contributions from pro-Israel PACS, but doesn’t say how much.
* It states that “Johnson has reported $128,000 in contributions since the primary, compared with $33,300 for McKinney,” insinuating that Johnson is gaining a significant monetary advantage. But McKinney had raised $282,000 as of July 19th with $81,000 on hand, while Johnson raised $170,000 overall and had $22,000 on hand. “Open Secrets”:http://opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=GA04&cycle=2006&special=N
* It states that Johnson received money from many donors that also donated to Denise Majette and Artur Davis, insinuating that these common donors must be part of a hidden pro-Israeli cabal.
* The article doesn’t mention that Johnson’s in-state funding was 94% while McKinney’s was 35%. “Open Secrets”:http://opensecrets.org/races/instate.asp?ID=GA04&cycle=2006&special=N
* In singling out pro-Israel contributions, the article fails to mention the “anti-Israel”:http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/290 contributors to McKinney.
Why are pro-Israel PACs being singled out here? What criteria makes them particularly significant, but not “the opposite team” or other out-of-state organizations?
My Andy, how generous it is of you to “allow” others to “hurl” epithets at you … given that you started it.
What other offenses are we so generously permitted after you commit them?
Not really. My experience with encountering bigots online is that they usually can’t resist sharing their beliefs with you no matter what other people were talking about originally. For example, an anti-Semitic bigot might go into the comments section in which posters are calmly discussing the returns from a primary race and begin throwing around unprovoked accusations at the posters like “militant Zionists,” “blind supporters,” “mindless aggression,” and “bloodlust.”
I think it’s time for everyone to come clean on this thread about whether they were raised in the Jewish faith or not. These kinds of influences shape opinions.
Actually, I was raised in Canada.
Is Christianity a Jewish faith? If so, yes.
Andy, not meaning to make you look un-necessarily foolish, but I set out my reasons for supporing Johnson in my first post on the subject back “here”:http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/008844.php .
Here’s a quote:
That do it for you?
And as to my ethnic background, my father was a Jew who’d abandoned his religion long before I was born; Alan Watts would be closer to the mark for him. My mother was raised as a Catholic, and I was raised as a mutt. My most frequent religious exposure as a child was in African American Pentecostal churches where I was taken by my “uncles”:http://www.armedliberal.com/archives/2003_04.html .
So Carol – we’ve showed you ours. Your turn.
A.L.
The Proud. The Few. The Jews.
Deal with it.