Hathorn questions Halter's finance reports (UPDATE)
Democratic lieutenant governor candidate Mike Hathorn just sent a letter to his opponent Bill Halter and "cc"d the Arkansas news media via email.
He is accusing Halter of campaign finance reporting irregularities:
Dear Bill:
As you know, I am committed to running a positive campaign focused on the issues of this race. However, after reviewing your campaign financial disclosure reports, I have several serious concerns regarding the financial record keeping of your campaigns. Your public reports raise a number of questions, and seem to indicate that you have violated several provisions of the Arkansas Rules on Campaign Finance and Disclosure.
Transparency in Government and the public conduct of those who wish to serve the people as elected officials should be held in high regard. Rather than immediately filing official complaints with the State Ethics Commission, I want to extend you the opportunity to answer the following 18 questions regarding your campaign finances as a courtesy between candidates.
Hathorn goes on to say that if Halter doesn't answer his 18 questions within 24 hours, he will file official complaints with the Ethics Commission.
Read the 18 questions after the jump.
UPDATE: Here is the response from Bud Jackson, Halter's spokesman:
And the beat goes on. What tomorrow, Mike Hathorn? Bill Halter hates puppies?
If Mike Hathorn would like to file an ethics complaint rather than address the issues that Arkansans care about – such as making our schools excellent and building and attracting new jobs – then that is his business.
This is just another shameless, immature political publicity stunt being orchestrated by a desperate third-place candidate with a history of engaging in negative campaigning. It is particularly ironic given that Mike Hathorn has already been formally reprimanded by the Ethics Commission.
We will not respond to Mike Hathorn’s desperate shenanigans. Our financial disclosures are open to the public.
It is obvious to voters and the media that the closer we approach this election the more desperate Mike Hathorn grows. Bill Halter will continue to run a positive campaign focusing on his plan to make our schools excellent while building and attracting the better-paying jobs of the 21st Century.
Mike Hathorn's Questions to Bill Halter
Mr. Halter, your exploration and brief pursuit of the Democratic Nomination for Governor of Arkansas coupled with your current bid for Lt. Governor have created what is quite possibly the most convoluted campaign finance record in the history of Arkansas’s politics. To date for the 2006 election cycle, you have solicited and received contributions for seven (7) different campaigns/committees, and they are:
1.) Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Exploratory Committee
2.) Halter for Arkansas (Governor) General Exploratory Committee
3.) Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Election Campaign
4.) Halter for Arkansas (Governor) General Election Campaign
5.) Halter for Arkansas (Lt. Governor) Primary Election Campaign
6.) Halter for Arkansas (Lt. Governor) Primary Election Run-Off Campaign
7.) Halter for Arkansas (Lt. Governor) General Election Campaign
Upon reviewing the numerous reports from the each of the above mentioned campaign entities a number of legal and ethical questions have emerged. I hereby request that you offer an explanation to the voters of Arkansas for each of the following:
1.) Arkansas Campaign Finance laws require candidates to maintain separate bank accounts for each separate entity that they use to solicit campaign funds. However, all of seven of your various entities have been called “Halter for Arkansas.” Have you in fact kept seven separate bank accounts to prevent illegal co-mingling of funds? Are you willing to provide the necessary documentation to show separate accounts have been maintained (including account numbers, cancelled checks, and account balance histories) for the duration of your campaigns?
2.) On 3/29/2006, you transferred $18,050.00 from the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary election campaign account to your Lt. Governor primary campaign account. Does this not constitute a minimum of ten (10) violations of campaign finance laws, as the funds of at least ten donors to your Governor’s race are now in an account where they have/will be spent on your run for Lt. Governor? Is this not another instance of illegal co-mingling of campaign funds?
3.) On March 20, 2006, having already repaid the $700,000.00 that you loaned yourself, you transferred the remaining balances of your Governor’s Exploratory Committees into your Governor’s Primary and General Campaign accounts, thus leaving a zero balance in your Exploratory Committees. Why did you pay yourself back, but not any of your other donors? Why did you continue to deposit funds in your Governor’s campaign accounts even though you were no longer seeking the office of Governor? Does this not violate Arkansas Campaign Finance Laws which require a candidate to refund any unspent funds within 30 days of the date when that candidate is no longer seeking the office for which the funds where solicited?
4.) On your final report for Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Exploratory Committee filed March 30, 2006, you show non-itemized expenditures of $64,366.74 listed in the “other” category. Disclosure laws require that any expenditure over $100.00 be itemized. Did you really have $64,000 worth of expenditures all under $100.00? If so wouldn’t that be at least 644 separate expenditures over a 30 day period for an average of 21.5 non-itemized expenditures per day? What were these expenditures for? Will you provide documentation to prove the legality of these expenditures?
5.) On February 6, 2006, you transferred $63,541.51 from Halter for Arkansas (Governor) General Exploratory Committee to Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Campaign. Since each of the donors to your General Exploratory committee had previously given the maximum legal donation to your primary efforts, how do you justify this transfer? Does this not constitute a minimum of thirty-two (32) violations of Arkansas Campaign Finance limits?
6.) Did you pay for the domain purchase, creation, development, and operation of the websites: www.billhalter.com and www.halterforarkansas.com with funds donated to your run for Governor of Arkansas? Does the continued use of the same to advertise your race for Lt. Governor constitute an illegal and undocumented in-kind contribution to your Lt. Governor Primary Campaign? In short, isn’t your Lt. Governor’s race benefiting from money given to you to run for Governor?
7.) Your Lt. Governor Primary Campaign Expenditure report filed on April 17, 2006 shows that you first paid the firm of Murphy, Putnam, Schorr on March 10, 2006. However, at least two local media outlets received payments from the same media firm on 3/9/2006 for airtime on your behalf. Also, the production of your Lt. Governor’s TV Ads occurred before you switched races on March 9th. Did you incorrectly report the date on which you first paid the media firm? If not, is there an undocumented payment to the media firm that occurred before March 9th, or did they extend you a line of credit? Finally, when and from which account did you pay for the production of your Lt. Governor’s television advertisements?
8.) On March 20, 2006, you transferred $2,087.82 from your Lt. Governor Primary Campaign to the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Election Campaign. What was the purpose of this action, and does it not constitute an illegal co-mingling of campaign funds? Since this occurred after you were no longer seeking the office of Governor, was this an illegal donation to your Governor’s campaign?
9.) On multiple occasions you have used campaign funds to make donations to churches including the AME and the Episcopal Lay Organization. These donations are a violation of Arkansas Campaign Finance Law Section 209(e) unless the candidate regularly attended these churches when he/she was not seeking election. Is this the case for you, or were the donations an illegal use of campaign funds?
10.) Arkansas Rules on Campaign Finance and Disclosure states in Section 224 that after a campaign has ended all assets must be disposed of at fair market value. Since your March 9th announcement that your campaigns for Governor had ended, have the assets of those campaigns been disposed of? If your Lt. Governor’s campaign has taken possession of said assets should there not be a record of their purchase from the Governor’s Campaign at fair market value? Doesn’t the lack of said documentation constitute a violation of Campaign Finance Rules?
11.) A review of the purchases of your Gubernatorial Exploratory Committees and Governor’s Primary Election Campaign show that the following assets, totaling $26,566.28, were acquired using funds raised for the Governor’s race. Where are these items now, and are they now or have they ever been used to promote your Lt. Governor’s campaign?
A.) Telephone Network $1500.00
B.) Halter for Arkansas Banner $298.75
C.) Dell Computer(s) $1996.62
D.) Office Furniture $300.00
E.) Democrat Gazette Subscription $80.00
F.) Halter for Arkansas Signs $1563.28
G.) Voter Activation Network $5000.00
H.) NGP Software and Support $14500.00
I.) Copy Machine $1327.63
12.) On March 28, 2006, you reported the transfer of $111,525.00 from the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Election Campaign to the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) General Election Campaign. Is this not another example of illegal co-mingling of campaign funds? Furthermore, is it legal for this transfer to be made 19 days after you were no longer seeking the office of Governor?
13.) On March 8, 2006 the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Exploratory Committee refunded the $700,000 that you had loaned to the race. However, the report filed for that Committee on March 30, 2006 showed $0.00 for the expenditure category “repayment of loans,” and reports $700,000 of outstanding campaign debts. Did you pay yourself back, and if so is it not illegal to continue to report a campaign debt?
14.) On March 4, 2006, you paid $2,000 rent for the month of March. Since you then switched races on March 9th, shouldn’t your Lt. Governor’s campaign have paid for the space from that point forward? Wouldn’t the failure to do so constitute an undocumented in-kind donation of $1419.35 worth of office space to your Lt. Governor Primary Campaign?
15.) Why did you loan your Governor’s Primary Exploratory Committee $100,000 on March 1, 2006, several weeks after you had formed a Governor’s Primary Election Campaign account? Shouldn’t you have ceased raising money for the exploratory committees immediately upon the formation of actual campaign accounts?
16.) Why did you continue to spend funds for non-preexisting debts from the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Election Campaign after you announced that you were no longer seeking the office of Governor? Specifically, were the expenses categorized as travel, office supplies, and paid workers that were made after March 9th legal expenditures for the Governor’s race, or were they expenditures that should have been paid from the Lt. Governor’s Primary Account?
17.) On several occasions your campaign has distributed a brochure, designed to double as a piece of direct mail, which promotes your Lt. Governor campaign. The disclaimer only says, “Paid for by Halter for Arkansas.” However, your March report for Halter for Arkansas (Lt. Governor) Primary Election Campaign shows no expenditure for direct mail or brochures. When were these pieces paid for? From which account were the funds taken? Furthermore, noting the number of entities with the name, “Halter for Arkansas,” shouldn’t your disclosure be more specific in order to comply with the spirit of the law?
18.) Your Governor’s Primary Election Campaign continued to accept donations well after you officially withdrew from the Governor’s race. From 3/17/2006, to 3/22/2006, reports show that the Halter for Arkansas (Governor) Primary Election Campaign received $14,050.00 in contributions from 11 donors. Shouldn’t you have returned the checks rather than cashing them? Is it not illegal to accept campaign contributions for an office that you are not seeking?
Comments
What in the world is Halter thinking.
Posted by: This is wild | April 25, 2006 03:26 PM
Give 'em hell, Mike!
Posted by: Devil in the details | April 25, 2006 03:27 PM
looky, looky Halter got caught!
Posted by: cookie jar | April 25, 2006 03:28 PM
Lucy,
Looks like you have some 'splaining to do!
Posted by: Ricky Ricardo | April 25, 2006 03:31 PM
I can't wait to see which trick Halter pulls out of his gigantic carpetbag to deal with this one. Rather, these 18 ones.
Posted by: RazorbackDem | April 25, 2006 03:31 PM
You know that the ethics folks would have not look at this. Halter should go to Jail. This is the perfect definition of fraud.
Posted by: Coldblue | April 25, 2006 03:32 PM
Mike Hathorn is slowly falling apart before our very eyes...... This reads like a desperate candidate watching his political future slip away.
Posted by: Hathorn falling apart | April 25, 2006 03:35 PM
Yeah let's fight amongst ourselves......it seems the Lt Gov's like to get technical since they can't beat Halter on the issues.
stupid ass democrats
halter next lt gov!
Posted by: LiberalTopher | April 25, 2006 03:35 PM
My guess is that Bud Jackson will soon respond.... "Not true"
Posted by: Anonymous | April 25, 2006 03:36 PM
Too bad he can't drop to the AG race. Looks like he should have stayed where he was at. Mister Halter, you WOULD have had a good political future here.
Posted by: Goodbye | April 25, 2006 03:37 PM
Wow! A quick count and it looks like there could be upward of 65 separate ethics violations here!
Even the meager $1,000 fine limit per violation will add up to a serious chunk of change for this one.
Posted by: Big Bite | April 25, 2006 03:37 PM
Mike thank you for standing up for what is right. You have my vote and again thank you.
Posted by: Thanks Mike | April 25, 2006 03:38 PM
Ehh.... like Education? Halter's main point is only short by $100+MM, even with a lotery.
Posted by: Falling and Topher | April 25, 2006 03:40 PM
You just made my decision much easier. Can't wait to donate to you... LEGALLY.
Posted by: Agree with 3:38 | April 25, 2006 03:42 PM
Hathorn, you are pathetic. You remind me of the school yard tattle tale who can't win at anything and nobody likes him so he just tries to make people's lives miserable.
Posted by: Waaaaaah | April 25, 2006 03:42 PM
You just made my decision much easier. Can't wait to donate to you... LEGALLY.
Posted by: Agree with 3:38 | April 25, 2006 03:42 PM
This is interesting... I knew there was something about the Guv/Lt. Guv bait n switch that didn't seem quite right. But I thought at the time it was legal. Maybe not.
Posted by: Odell Goodrum | April 25, 2006 03:42 PM
Voters eyes glaze over when you start talking about campaign finance attacks.
Nobody is going to care. And I sure as hell don't have the time to read 18 questions - that is coming from a political junkie.
Posted by: Hathorn Comes in 3rd | April 25, 2006 03:46 PM
You have to note Hathorn's apparent attempt at humor:
"I want to extend you the opportunity to answer the following 18 questions regarding your campaign finances as a courtesy between candidates."
Yeah, between candidates and the Arkansas news media...
Posted by: Odell Goodrum | April 25, 2006 03:47 PM
I can't believe the arrogance of Halter. First he thinks he can waltz back home and beat Mike Beebe. Then he tells people he can buy the Lt. Gov office.
Now he blatantly disregards the rules on campaign finance.
Posted by: Hubris 101 | April 25, 2006 03:48 PM
So assuming that everything he says is true and there are 65 violations and assuming there would be a $65,000 fine, that would make a bit of difference in the huge cash and name recognition advantage Halter has.
Posted by: Just a fine? | April 25, 2006 03:48 PM
See, the problem you have here is people who pay attention to these type things are the same people that convince there usually non-political junkie friends which way to vote. Yard signs and commercials also help.
I want to see what Halter's office has to say, before I make any assumptions. This seems like it could get pretty bad.
Posted by: Ron Cardwell, Jr. | April 25, 2006 03:50 PM
boy, i'm suprised there are so many rules that a politician has to adbide by concerning all the money they make while running for office. i'm sure the lawmakers that made these rules put appropriate loopholes in there for just this type of situation. after all, isn't running for office a politicians main job? they can even lose and make money. i don't think there is a decent politician out there. we gotta get the $$$ out of the election process or our country is gonna be even further in the crapper.
Posted by: clark | April 25, 2006 03:50 PM
No way a Rhodes scholar made such egregious errors. My bet is that most of this stuff has an easy explanation that would be clear after the next reporting cycle but makes Halter look bad in the mean time.
Were I lagging in the polls by 16% I may blast a guy, too, especially if I had done so in many campaigns before.
Posted by: Watching the watcher | April 25, 2006 03:50 PM
A couple things here that I've noticed.
1. The six people that were obviously hitting refresh every five seconds knowing that this was going to hit the blogs any second couldn't be more transparent (and I'm a Martin supporter) It shows an orchestrated campaign by Hathorne's camp to try and get bad buzz going for Halter.
2. I was taught in law school to never ask a question you don't already know the answer to. If these can all be explained and the ethics commission says there are no problems then Hathorne looks worse than Drew Pritt...okay, maybe not that bad. So I hope he knows what he's doing.
3. Who is Hathorne's manager and why has he not told Hathorne that he is third in a four man race and his best hope is to make the runoff? Wouldn't this constitute going after Wooldridge?
Anyway, You guys have fun posting and I will see you after post 236. This one will get crazy.
Posted by: 3rd base bum | April 25, 2006 03:51 PM
I don't know much about campaigns, but a bit about accounting. There could be a myriad of things requiring a person to have to transfer funds between related accounts. They could be loans, interest payment, fund inadvertantly routed into the wrong account, etc.
As for the expenses, you pay bills when you are billed or whenever your contract says you pay, not necessarily when the funds are expensed.
Also, if Halter contributes a bunch of cash to his primary, general or any other type of campaign, can't he move it around as he pleases? After all, it is his money.
Posted by: Legitimacy | April 25, 2006 03:54 PM
3rd base bum:
No kidding. I saw an increase of 5 posts to 25 in less than a minute.
There aren't many pro-Halter comments so it's pretty apparent where all this traffic is coming from...
Posted by: Basil | April 25, 2006 03:56 PM
actually from 5 to 25, it was 20 minutes, according to the time signatures.
Posted by: reply to basil | April 25, 2006 03:59 PM
So much for deleting multiple posts....you asleep arkblog or just agree with these annoying repetitive comments?
Posted by: sometimes repeats are ok I guess? | April 25, 2006 04:03 PM
Halter is just lucky that this isn't a federal race, he could be looking at jail time if that were the case.
The feds don't play.
However, not sure the state ethics commission has sense enough to sort through all of this stuff either.
Posted by: Fed | April 25, 2006 04:04 PM
Not ethical, not an Arkansan, not going to win...
Posted by: Anybody but Halter | April 25, 2006 04:04 PM
To Legitimacy:
The reason it matters is that there are $2000 fundraising limits for each of the six different entities mentioned.
Martin, Wooldridge, and Hathorn have each been fundraising with just a Lt. Gov Primary account. Meaning they aren't trying to play a shell game with up to $12,000 per donor.
That is why this matters.
If Halter used just one dime from one account to another he may have broken a dozen campaign limits, depending on the number of people who have given him over $2,000.
Additionally, he is required to return all unused donations for previous campaigns. Regardless of whether that donor wants to make another contribution.
Posted by: CJB | April 25, 2006 04:04 PM
I am glad that the Arkansas Times found a better Hathorn picture.
Posted by: PinPoint | April 25, 2006 04:08 PM
Suppose Halter did everything right in spirit, but he made errors along the way (which doesn't seem hard to do based on this press release).. And the transfers were a way to correct past mistakes (such as money put in the wrong account). That could be the simple answer...
Posted by: Supposing | April 25, 2006 04:09 PM
Halter's been keeping his nose clean. When all is said and done it will be Hathorn that is the new Pritt.
Posted by: Basil | April 25, 2006 04:09 PM
Regarding number one: Your only reason to believe he didn't have different bank accounts for each is based on the fact all of them used "Halter for Arkansas" in the thier name? Are you joking? I haven't even read the rest but I assume you put the best one first. You will and should be slapped with filing a frivilous complaint if you move forward with that with no more than that.
I can't stand Hatler, but this is just silly. If you don't have the balls to stand up against the DPA and challenge his residency requirement then shut up and sit down.
Posted by: what a joke | April 25, 2006 04:15 PM
apparently not, basil
Posted by: haha | April 25, 2006 04:15 PM
Bud....are you ready to move out of Arkansas? If so take Halter with you.
Posted by: move out of town | April 25, 2006 04:15 PM
This really smacks of desperation by Hathorn. It must suck to be 16 points behind at the end of April. I thought better of Mike. Guess I was wrong.
Posted by: Sad, sad Mike | April 25, 2006 04:17 PM
I agree with What a Joke, go back to conspiring with Pritt and make the residency charge. Oh wait, Pritt doesn't have the guts to do it - he's afraid of failure. Which is why he Quit the LG race.
Posted by: Donkey | April 25, 2006 04:18 PM
Here's what he should say....
No true.
Prove it is true.
Prove you are not gay.
Posted by: childish | April 25, 2006 04:18 PM
I thought Hathorne was running for Lt. Governor. When did he switch to the race to replace Drew Pritt?
Posted by: when did that happen | April 25, 2006 04:19 PM
I was going to vote for Tim but now my vote goes to Mike....
Posted by: changed my mind | April 25, 2006 04:23 PM
Come on folks, get real. Lots of bloggers seem to have already indicted,convicted and jailed Halter based on accusations from his political opponent. Accusations which are yet unproven and without giving Halter an opportunity to respond.
I think when the smoke clears it will be obvious that Hathorn is desperate. He is running 3rd in a 4 man race, doesn't have the $$ to mount an effective media campaign and if he loses this election it is strike 3...he is out of politics for good. Hathorn is no stranger to the art of negative campaigning, based on half-truths just to create doubt about his opposition. He showed us that much in his bid for Congress.
If you take the time to read Hathorns letter, it is clearly designed to confuse and create doubt, a cllassic legal ploy taught to in law school, generally used by lawyers when they are losing their case.
Before we start "hanging" Halter everyone should step back, take a deep breath and consider the reasons Hathorn would mount such an attack. Hathorn has nothing to lose!
Posted by: Bestaluck | April 25, 2006 04:24 PM
Bestaluck - Out of pure curiosity, what law school did you attend where they teach confusion tactics?
Posted by: Anonymous | April 25, 2006 04:28 PM
"I was going to vote for Tim but now my vote goes to Mike....
Posted by: changed my mind"
Great! You've exchanged empty rhetoric for empty accusations...
Posted by: Bas | April 25, 2006 04:29 PM
It amazes me that some people are so blinded by their support of a candidate that they will not for a minute believe their chosen one has done anything wrong. These men are not saints, so just think for one minute that they could have actually broken rules and get over your anointed-one-he-can't-have-done-anything-wrong bs.
Posted by: not a saint | April 25, 2006 04:31 PM
Hey these younguns been feminized way too long.
What a bitch fight.
_
Posted by: LWood | April 25, 2006 04:34 PM
Does Hathorn really want to throw ethic violation stones from his glass house built by D. Foster? I know of a few things done by Hathorn's campaign that is in violation too. Breaking terms of service agreements can result in legal action you know.
Posted by: what's good for the goose.... | April 25, 2006 04:36 PM
Is there anyone who can make an objective post on this topic? Every post so far seems to be jaded by one side or the other
Posted by: objective? | April 25, 2006 04:39 PM
This is a new low even for Hathorn. If he really intended to "extend the courtesy" of giving Halter the opportunity to respond in the spirit of focusing on a positive campaign ,why did he cc the press? Mike you really need to stop listening to D. Foster and Drew Pritt! They are leading you down a path of self-destruction.
Posted by: not impressed | April 25, 2006 04:40 PM
I'd like to dedicate the song "Desperado" to Mike Hathorn and his campaign. We are witnessing the end of Howdy-Doody's political career.
Not for not, the posts on this site were an obvious attempt by the Hathorn campaign to gin up a scandal where one does not lie.
Way to flood a blog with posts by a campaign!
Posted by: Desperado | April 25, 2006 04:42 PM
i'm not going to offer my thoughts/opinion until i can read halter's explanation on these issues.
but i will also say i am not convinced halter is a legal candidate meeting residency requirements anyway. why isn't anyone holding halter to the ground on that?
while it's possible halter might come up with some reasonable explanations, hathorn is getting his name out there, which can boost name recog, whether favorable or not.
does jay martin really even exist? if i didnt know of a friend's mom helping on his campaign, i wouldnt believe he existed. i'm being asked to vote for him....but think it would probably be wasted.
Posted by: billflyingbackfromCAtoexplain? | April 25, 2006 04:43 PM
Mike Hathorn is the new Ken Starr of Arkansas!
What a creep. He is hurting the Democratic Party!
Posted by: Gross! | April 25, 2006 04:44 PM
That Bill Halter - what a shameless bastard.who hates puppies.
Posted by: shameless | April 25, 2006 04:46 PM
The residency issue doesn't hold water. The accusation is misinterpritation of the law.
It's tantamount to saying that you aren't following instructions on the shampoo bottle if you "wash and rinse" but don't "repeat" until the bottle's empty...
Posted by: head and shoulders | April 25, 2006 04:47 PM
I love puppies.
Posted by: Paid for by Jay Martin for Lt. Governor | April 25, 2006 04:49 PM
Great to watch the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot once again. One thing about the Republicans is that they support one another as best they can, and so they win elections.
Posted by: Roland | April 25, 2006 04:50 PM
To channel Harry Truman, Mike Hathorn never gave anybody hell. He just told the truth and California Bill thought it was hell.
Posted by: Harry S Truman | April 25, 2006 04:52 PM
After this campaign, Mike Hathorn is going to need counseling. He has lost his friggin' mind!
Posted by: Mike Hathorn | April 25, 2006 04:54 PM
Jim holt will be the next Lt. Governor anyway. These little Dems are just wasting their time with this race...Arkansas doesn't want tax and spend Government anymore. Asa and Holt will make a great team and cut the size of state government and taxes. It's over for the DEms in Arkansas. Now, next up, let's get rid of Comrad Snyder and little Pryor....at least Berry voted to get rid of the Horrible Death Tax....
Posted by: Rick | April 25, 2006 04:57 PM
Seriously, who is Jay Martin? Where is he from? Where is he hiding?
Posted by: Is someone named Jay Martin really running? | April 25, 2006 04:58 PM
Drew Pritt, how many times are you going to post that Harry Truman quote? We have all seen it more than once with your name posted under it! Check it out ya'll, its in the archives.
You have publicly promised to do "anything" to keep Halter from being elected! You and Hathorn arent fooling anybody!
Posted by: I know who you are | April 25, 2006 04:58 PM
I'd say Jay Martin'swalking at a brisk pace.
Posted by: Bas | April 25, 2006 05:00 PM
I just read the response from Bud Jackson and I apologize for posting again, but . . .
To equate allegations of nearly 70 different ethics violations with a charge that the candidate doesn't like puppies!
What flippant disregard for the rules that govern money in politics!
Let us pray Lt. Governor Bill Halter would behave differently.
Posted by: Harry S Truman | April 25, 2006 05:01 PM
I noticed that Bud Jackson has branched out from "Not True."
Guess it doesn't apply this time, so he has to resort to "we refuse to answer."
Wonder how well that will work in front of the ethics commission?
Posted by: Nice Answer | April 25, 2006 05:05 PM
My bet is Halter is loving what he sees and praying that he files the allegation with the ethics commision so Hathorn will look like the Pritt he is when this is said and done.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 25, 2006 05:07 PM
I think everyone that wants Bill to answer the questions should give him a call. He may not feel obligated to answer Mike Hathorn, but perhaps he will answer the voters.
Halter Campaign
(501) 376-2727
Posted by: Give them a call | April 25, 2006 05:11 PM
Sounded to me like Bud said "put up or shut up" and then did a little name calling of his own, that is sure to cause Hathorn to pull the trigger.
They must feel confident they can answer and document any complaint to the satisfaction of the ethics commission.
Hathorn, Pritt and Foster are gonna find themselves looking pretty stupid!
Posted by: Checkmate | April 25, 2006 05:15 PM
I just got out of class. Didn't make the Harry Truman post or any of the other ones. Had nothing to do with this either.
All I can say is that the evidence continues to build and build that Bill Halter is not legally, ethically, or naturally qualified to serve as the next Lt. Governor of Arkansas.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 05:23 PM
Hey look, Bud's doing his best Officer Barbrady impression:
"Move along, nothing to see here!"
Posted by: Parkaholic | April 25, 2006 05:24 PM
Hey, Drew. Who are you endorsing in the Lt. Gov. race?
Posted by: BASIL | April 25, 2006 05:24 PM
Please Mr Gadfly, go gently into the good night and post no more!
Posted by: Your 15 minutes are up | April 25, 2006 05:25 PM
Hey Basil,
So exactly how much of California Bill's ill-gotten booty pays your check?
Posted by: Follow the (dirty) money | April 25, 2006 05:34 PM
All this concern over a part time job that entails presiding over the clown act called the Senate every two years. Let's spend time on what is important.
Posted by: dobert | April 25, 2006 05:42 PM
Wish I had a piece of that, but since you work for Hathorn and have obviously poured over his finance reports looking for illegal aliens, you know this Cockney bastard is not there....
Posted by: Bas | April 25, 2006 05:44 PM
Funny, stuff.
Hey, Bud. I know Bill likes puppies, so he has my vote!
Posted by: Good one! | April 25, 2006 05:45 PM
* I am endorsing the Democratic candidate who is not trying to buy Arkansas.
* I am endorsing the candidate who doesn't offer a plan that costs twice as much as it produces.
* I am supporting the candidate most qualified to serve as Governor should they be elevated to the position.
* I am supporting the candidate who has invested in Arkansas, not California and Washington, D.C.
So I am not endorsing Asa Hutchinson-lite, better known as Bill Halter. I am endorsing an Arkansas Democrat. I am endorsing....
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 05:59 PM
Drew, nobody gives a shi% about you or who you are going to endorse.
You're a convicted felon pig with an inflated ego.
Now leave us alone.
Posted by: Leave us alone! | April 25, 2006 06:12 PM
If only Monroe Schwarzlose was alive, we could see who he's endorsing for Lt. Gov. Would be as enlightening as Drew's thoughts on the subject.
What an idiot!
Posted by: Who cares | April 25, 2006 06:12 PM
Drew: I am with you on your post. If Halter could fly in here and convince our state to vote for him....maybe I can fly out
to Aspen and run for Mayor next month. Is this Rhodes Scholar no smarter than that? And I don't think he was out in the snow canvassing in NH for an Arkansas son either.
I wonder how he liked his first Jefferson Jackson dinner Saturday night?
As said in the popular Beverly Hillbillies song.....
Californy is the place you outta be......
Posted by: Californy aint for me! | April 25, 2006 06:18 PM
Do you not love that Drew thinks he, Sophmore at a franchise state university and general arsehole, is more qualified than a Rhodes scholar and three veteran legislators for the office of Lt. Gov.?
Or do you love it more that he fills the blogs with his never ending drivel but will not say which of the four Democratic candidates for LG will get his vote?
Whoever he's been working with has obviously told him not to endorse him for the sake of "discreteness" (and not because they would rather be kicked in the goolies a hundred times). Only an endorsement by Nick Wilson might possibly look worse...
Posted by: Basil | April 25, 2006 06:26 PM
I never was a convicted felon. Basil obviously is not from the state by his comments. Say whatever you guys want about me.
However, it doesn't change the fact that Bill Halter is a Washington, D.C. - outsider who had a business in California and is trying to buy a public office in Arkansas.
It doesn't change the fact that Bill Halter's lottery plan costs twice as much as it produces.
It doesn't change the fact that Bill Halter skirted and possibly broke numerous campaign finance laws.
It doesn't change the fact that Bill Halter hasn't lived here in Arkansas for the past seven years and is ineligible to run for Lt. Governor.
It doesn't change the fact that Bill Halter as a nominee for Lt. Governor weakens the candidacy of Mike Beebe for Governor.
Vote AGAINST Bill Halter, Vote FOR Arkansas on May 23rd.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 06:38 PM
I don't understand why so many people are upset with Hathorn. Isn't he doing us a public service by putting the evidence against Halter so we can make an educated decision when we go and vote in the LG election? I would want the same information from Hathorn, Wooldridge, and Martin as well.
Posted by: a young dem | April 25, 2006 07:04 PM
That's an easy one, young dem. They're pissed off because they are in the employ of Carpetbagger Bill and they're scared scatless that someone might catch on to what a lying, cheating piece of crap they work for.
Posted by: Grasshopper | April 25, 2006 07:11 PM
So Grasshopper, do you think Bill Halter will ever give the voters of Arkansas a straight answer? Or will Bud continue to send out flip responses of "Not True"?
Also could Bud's comments be Freudian slips about what he thinks about Bill Halter??
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 07:15 PM
Hathorn appears to be the only candidate who is engaging. Halter is dumping tons of cash into the Lt Gov race in an effort to buy the nomination, and he cut the deal with Beebe and the party to get support in return for getting out of the Gov's race.
Woolridge seems to be dazed and paralyzed by Halter's bait and switch. Martin doesn't seem to be a factor one way or the other in the campaign. Only Hathorn is forcing the issue to the forefront, and he's getting traction by doing so.
If Hathorn can force a run-off with Halter, he wins. Pretty smart strategy on his part.
Posted by: This is clear | April 25, 2006 07:38 PM
I don't think that Bill Halter has told the truth to the Arkansas voters yet.
* He said he was running for Governor - Not True
*He said that a lottery would raise $250 million per year - Not True
*He said he had always opposed privitization of Social Security - Not True
*He said he owns a farm in Garland County - Not True
*He said he was Clinton's man in the race - Not True
*He said he wouldn't run a negative campaign - Not True
Looks like Bud Jackson's comments are finally appropriate.
Bill Halter = Not True
Posted by: Where's the Truth | April 25, 2006 07:42 PM
The guys are running for lieutenant governor, right? Imagine what they would do to each other if this was an important office. Why so much infighting in the Demcratic Party? Is this all about the testosterone? I thought that was a Repub obsession.
Posted by: Polly Wannacracker | April 25, 2006 07:48 PM
I didn't like Halter before all this..now I really don't like Hawthorne.
Jay Martin, where are you? How can I donate to your campaign
Posted by: DBrown | April 25, 2006 07:51 PM
Hey Bill Halter,
WE WANT THE TRUTH!!!
Posted by: The Truth | April 25, 2006 08:01 PM
Hathorn has never been reprimanded by the ethics commission. Hershal Cleveland was reprimanded, but he still remains on the commission. So this is more lies from Halter's camp
Posted by: JC | April 25, 2006 08:08 PM
I am gay.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 08:15 PM
I hope this comment is the 100th in the thread. If so, do I win a prize?
Posted by: sjp | April 25, 2006 08:19 PM
I hope this comment is the 100th in the thread. If so, do I win a prize?
Posted by: sjp | April 25, 2006 08:20 PM
You want the truth...you can't handle the truth...(Damn, I like old movies!)
*Hathorn runs for Attny Gen for nearly a year and when that race looks to tough he jumps to Lt Gov.
*Hathorn spends all his money on frivilous crap and has none to run a media campaign
* Hathorn freeks when he sees poll #'s showing he doesn't have a prayer in the Lt Gov race.
*Hathorn accuses Halter of running Negative campaign because Halter runs a poll...media doesnt pick it up because it is a non-issue
*Hathorn summons Drew Pritt to file complaint with DPA regarding residency requirements, the media doesnt pick it up because it is a non-issue.
* Hathorn attacks Halter over campaign finance regarding april report knowing that the may report (according to law) will answer all 18 questions.
* try as he may, Hathorn can't get enough traction to move in to 2nd place.
The truth is...Hathorn is desperate, pissed off and doesnt know what else to do.
Posted by: Here's the truth | April 25, 2006 08:48 PM
The three most active posts on this blog all concern the lt.gov race. Maybe if the campaigns would stop acting like a bunch of whiny bitches on the blog , someone would actually give a shit about that race.
Posted by: here's the real truth | April 25, 2006 08:54 PM
Typical from Halter. His playbook is awfully similar to Karl Rove's. Start with negative "polling" to damage Hathorn's image. Then, when he gets caught breaking finance laws, make up lies again about Hathorn and then hope it all goes away. I for one won't let your misdirection blind me from your ethics violations.
Bill Halter, just because you break this state's laws don't mean you're an Arkansan. Take that carpetbag full of illegal cash and hit the road.
Posted by: Freedom | April 25, 2006 08:56 PM
I just can't see how these aren't violations of the law...
Posted by: Travis | April 25, 2006 09:03 PM
Hey "Freedom" , You need to do better than that! Halter would have no reason to run "negative polling" to damage Hathorn's image when he is 16 points ahead of him 7 weeks before the primary. You and I both know that Mike used that trick himself in the Dem primary for Congress, and only because he thought he was running behind.
Secondly, Halter hasn't been caught at anything...just accussed by an immature candidate who sees his political future going up in smoke.
Your time would be better spent trying to figure out how to ignore D. Foster and Drew Pritt, who have aligned themselves with Hathorn cause no body else wants them.
Posted by: Here's the truth | April 25, 2006 09:11 PM
Stop the Haltergate now! He is just another crook with a good tie!
Posted by: Stop The Insanity | April 25, 2006 09:40 PM
Hawthorn's people are in overdrive here, frantically blogging to try to dig their guy out of third place.
Bill Halter will be an asset to Arkansas beginning with his election to the lt. gov's post. Though it's a do-little position, his future as a policy-maker bodes well for the state.
Instead of Drew Pritt-style blogs of personal destruction, stick to the facts, and Hawthorn's allegations are NOT facts, only unsubstantiated charges that will fade when proven untrue.
Posted by: Stop the lying liars | April 25, 2006 09:58 PM
I suppose after 100+ posts mine is useless, but this nonsense has me fired up:
1) I have contributed significantly to Hathorn and his cc'ing the media on the letter to Halter was a misjudgment. I'm disappointed. It could have been used otherwise and appeared less petty.
2) Halter's tactics have proven tired, too. At one point I was ready to consider his run at the governorship, but his posturing has grown old and suggests he's more about style than substance. His spokespeople have not shown alot of class. Show me otherwise, Mr. Halter.
3) Both men- and others in the race- are concerned citizens who desire to serve us. I strongly doubt anyone is running for lt gov because it's a "cushy" job; stepping stone maybe, however, it IS an elected position and why wouldn't we want anyone in it who cares and desires to do something, especially something that more closely follows the agenda I think Hathorn and Halter (and the others) adhere to as opposed to the current administration?!
The limitations of blogs are obvious, but let's use them to discuss ideas. Save the bickering and personal attacks for chat rooms.
Posted by: Brad | April 25, 2006 10:15 PM
This blog, and latest facts about Bill Halter's deception, is becoming another rendition of AS THE STOMACH TURNS.
First of all his paid flying monkeys from out of state can't seem to get the names right. It's Mike HATHORN, not Hawthorne. Hawthorne was a poet with integrity. Hathorn is an elected official with integrity.
Second of all it seems to be a whose on second vaudevillian routine. First I am linked to Tim Wooldridge with a wink and a BBQ lunch. Now suddenly I am linked to Hathorn and D. Foster. Next thing you know, I will be accused of dating Bailey Newcomb from the Jay Martin campaign. Any guy should be so lucky.
Then to goad me out of not saying who I am endorsing I am accused of being forced to be kept quiet. Well since you are outsiders you don't know the real Drew Pritt. Here's a simple fact and song that applies to me :
YOU DON'T OWN ME.
Third of all some Republican Young Fascist of ASA!? chimes in with some messed up knowledge that there is a deal between Bill Halter and Mike Beebe. Lets just say there was more trust between Sir Winston Churchill and Josef Stalin at YALTA then there is between Beebe's camp and the Halter camp. But I am not speaking for them, just making an observation.
The saddest commentary is this, the Halter campaign thinks they survived another assault. They did not.
Bill Halter has told too many stories for too long. The people of Arkansas deserve better. They do not deserve one, four, eight, or any years of Bill Halter in elective office.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 10:33 PM
This thread is so pointless because it is being used by Hathorn people to gin-up a controversy that does not exist.
Mike Hathorn acts and looks like a 10-year-old.
He cleary does not have the gravitas to be a Lt. Governor.
Um, let's see. Rhodes Scholar who ran Social Security versus 30-year-old frat boy for Lt. Governor?
Get real, people. Halter is obviously the best candidate for Lt. Governor and Arkansans are recognizing that.
All this petty stuff about Halter -- is petty.
Hathorn
Posted by: Anonymous | April 25, 2006 10:36 PM
The late hour has overcome my senses in one regard. May I make a correction. Nathaniel Hawthorne was a short story writer and novelist, not a poet.
Hawthorne though did warn us of the dangers of a potential Bill Halter election from one of his works.
He wrote :
"Not to be deficient in this particular, one has provided one's self with a moral - the truth, namely, that the wrongdoing of one generation lives into the successive ones." (from The House of the Seven Gables)
Let us end this on May 23rd and send Bill Halter back to Washington, D.C.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 10:38 PM
Anonymous Halter supporter (probably Bud Jackson or another paid Halter staffer) get real for a second.
* Tim Wooldridge served for a number of years as a City Councilman and a State Legislator IN ARKANSAS.
* Mike Hathorn served our northwest region with distinction in the State Legislature IN ARKANSAS.
* Jay Martin has lived and served a life of service in the legislature, in his church, and with the homeless IN ARKANSAS.
Why are we, the voters of Arkansas, supposed to be impressed by the Rhodes Scholar schtick? Or the ran the Social Security deal?
Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar but he came home and TAUGHT in Arkansas before he sought office.
Bill Halter is commended for his service and education. That alone does not qualify him to be Lt. Governor. Serving, living, being a part of daily life in Arkansas FIRST is what should and does qualify a candidate.
I am not impressed by the bagging groceries. I am not impressed by someone who feels he doesn't have to answer questions.
What is petty is someone touting qualifications that are nonsense and say nothing about the character of the man. If Bill Halter wanted to be Lt. Governor, he should have earned it, rather than sought it deceptively.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 10:47 PM
I am gay. I like MEN!!!
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 25, 2006 10:51 PM
Drew pritt is more intelligent than the some of you think! Ifirst met him on Clark's convoy. I trust his opinions on how some of the local House races and Constitutional races will play out. We'll see on May 23.....but then you that dont appreciate his keen sense of politics will be trying to purchase ticks back to Cali. Drew,they might not be familiar enough with you calling you names and stuff.....but they all just moved to town recently. ANYONE but Halter.....bc we are from and for Arkansas!
Posted by: Anyone but Halter!! | April 25, 2006 11:02 PM
Funny that Drew keeps criticizing Halter for his out of state time yet Drew was the only rumored candidate in this race to have run for Congress in another state.
Posted by: Who's the outsider??? | April 25, 2006 11:05 PM
Thanks for a great sum up, Drew. I know you love hearing yourself type on this blog, but between you and the people claiming that this thing is full of "operatives" it is getting hard to make it down to real comments.
That said, I have supported Hathorn since his Congressional bid and will continue to.
Posted by: Fayettevillian | April 25, 2006 11:18 PM
I am even more gay than Pritt. I love MEN!!!
Posted by: Mike Hathorn | April 25, 2006 11:25 PM
You said it right, "who's the otsider???"! But Drew ran for Congress in 2 states, in one of those his website stated "God told him to". He also has been arrested 3 times on hot check charges and after 8 yrs of college he remains a sophomore.! This is the kind of person who is dangerous, and it scares me that there are some bloggers who egg him on for entertainment purposes, Even more scary is the possibility that some may take him seriously.
The thought that someone like Mike Hathorn would use him to advance his cause is in itself reason for voters to consider another candidate.
Posted by: any one but Hathorn. | April 25, 2006 11:51 PM
Yeah, okay, you're gay already. Nothing like belaboring the obvious. But what about that YD money, Pitt? The ghosts of SAU Democrats want their due . . . . . . .
Posted by: dogtownius | April 25, 2006 11:57 PM
Drew Pritt=Political gadfly
Posted by: Drew (arm)pitt | April 26, 2006 01:02 AM
I was going to vote against Halter because of the way he backed into the race, now I'm going to have to vote against Mike because he's such a crybaby
Honey, I don't know if I'm more sorry for what you could have been or for what you've become.
Posted by: amanda | April 26, 2006 05:30 AM
As we careen to post no. 150, I'd like to add the following:
At least Hathorn is doing something to move the meter in this race. As much as the public bitches and moans about "negative" campaigning, it's the only thing that gets people to move for or against a particular candidate.
Posted by: sjp | April 26, 2006 05:56 AM
If the press would actually look at the reports and write about what they mean (instead of just looking at the front pages of them and printing the totals) we might have a better situation here. Hathorn shouldn't have to do this - it is the media's job. There are lots of strange things that don't add up on candidate's reports that just slip on by . . .
Posted by: where is the media . . . zzzzzzzz | April 26, 2006 07:15 AM
Does anyone really think it's fair that Hathorn made allegations about Halter and then demanded that Halter prove they're not true? How would Hathorn like it if Halter suggested Hathorn was gay and then asked him to prove he's not?
If you have evidence of wrongdoing then point it out and file an ethics complaint according to the law. Otherwise stick to the issues instead of baseless accusations.
Posted by: anybody but Halter BUT.... | April 26, 2006 07:44 AM
It's hard to believe that all this is about the Lt. Governor's race...damn! Some of you politicos are scary, and that's without an elected office behind ya.
All this stuff about being gay or not is senseless. A politician's legal sexual leanings are irrelevant to me; it's how well he/she does their daytime job that counts.
Posted by: suzie | April 26, 2006 08:42 AM
"Does anyone really think it's fair that Hathorn made allegations about Halter and then demanded that Halter prove they're not true? How would Hathorn like it if Halter suggested Hathorn was gay and then asked him to prove he's not? "
Hathorn used examples from Halter's report as the proof. A more accurate example would be if Halter had evidence that Hathorn was gay and then said to prove otherwise. If you read the 18 questions, they are all very specific as to amounts and actual dates.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 26, 2006 08:51 AM
I just read Halter's bio...I'm impressed and will vote for the Rhodes Scholar (the Philosophy degree's a bonus). After witnessing the current college-educated idiot in the presidency, I know a degree doesn't necessarily mean what it use to; but I'm so sick of having an illiterate moron speak for America that...
...the connection to Clinton is just a bonus.
Posted by: suzie | April 26, 2006 09:11 AM
The spin from the Bill Halter camp is so sad and pathetic and yet as hillarious as a Don Knotts skit.
1.) They attack my character.
2.) They attack Mike Hathorn's character.
3.) They keep harping on the Rhodes Scholar schtick.
You know Congressman Marion Berry once said, "If you're defending yourself, you're losing." Let me also chime in, as an Arkansan, that we loved Bill Clinton and reelected him so many times not because he was a Rhodes Scholar. We did so because he was as authetically Arkansan as Doe's BBQ, Bradley County Pink Tomatos, Razorback Football, or Grapette soda.
So staying on message this is just one more (or eighteen more) nails in the coffin for a Bill Halter campaign. You are hemorraghing worse than the last Czarevitch of Russia.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 26, 2006 09:28 AM
Drew, you really need to change your Meds! Your history proves you have no integrity no ability to follow through with anything, and limited intelligence!
As for Hathorn, his association with you and D. Foster allude to his lack of character as well!
"Rub-a-dub-dub, three men in a tub"....oops...make that two and a half.
Posted by: Bestaluck | April 26, 2006 09:36 AM
Drew
That little "If you're defending yourself, you're losing" line has to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Bill Clinton spent his entire first presidential campaign defending himself and . . . wait for it . . . WON! Get your head out of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations and get a real job.
Posted by: 3rd base bum | April 26, 2006 09:55 AM
So staying on message this is just one more (or eighteen more) nails in the coffin for a Bill Halter campaign. You are hemorraghing worse than the last Czarevitch of Russia.
Posted by: Drew Pitt
You walked into the party
Like you were walking onto a yacht
Your hat strategically dipped below one eye
Your scarf it was apricot
You had one eye in the mirror as
You watched yourself gavotte...
[CARLY SIMON]
(Son of a gun)
Posted by: Drewism | April 26, 2006 09:58 AM
Speaking of hemorraghing, Drew it may be time to change your mini-pad.
Posted by: couldnt resist | April 26, 2006 10:02 AM
Seriously, folks. I love the down and dirty politics of tearing people down, but I have to say, as a person who knows . . .
1) Drew, there is nothing as Arkansan as Doe's BBQ. It doesn't exist. (Of course, a guy who can't pay his filing fee probably can't eat at Arkansas's most expensive hole, either.)
2) Anybody who thinks Drew Pritt gets his marching orders from anybody other than Tim Wooldridge (seriously, have you ever seen how they act when together in a public forum) is patently incorrect.
3) The complaint which was filed by Drew Pritt challenging Halter's residency was penned by Jason Bolden, a top-notch lawyer on staff at Wooldridge. (Mike's style reads like his challenge to Halter's financial ethics.)
Posted by: Anonymous | April 26, 2006 01:32 PM
LITTLE BILLY THE WIMP
Not Tough Enough to be the Nominee
You'd think someone who worked in the Clinton Administration would be a little tougher and a little less thin-skinned. Not so, Bill Halter. Halter whined to the press that he was the victim of "Rovian-Washington-style dirty politics" when subjected to what observers called standard campaign tactics.
Remember This?
LITTLE ROCK - Less than a week into the Democratic campaign for governor, newcomer Bill Halter is crying foul.In the meantime, Halter's campaign Wednesday accused that of rival Democrat Mike Beebe of dirty politics for having someone videotape Halter's announcement Saturday at the Capitol and his talk to students the day before at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock.
"From the very first day of this campaign, Mike Beebe and his campaign have engaged in Karl Rovian-Washington-style dirty politics," according to campaign manager Bud Jackson, who said he fears the campaign could get much dirtier between now and the May 23 Democratic primary.
[V]ideotaping a rival are garden-variety tactics in a political campaign, observers said. "It's just good hard-nosed politics to videotape people, to have people planted in crowds," said Republican political consultant Bill Vickery.
Democratic consultant Bill Paschall said such tactics are "pretty much politics as usual."
"When you run for governor, you become a public figure and you're pretty much open for careful scrutiny," Paschall said. "It's not something that's unusual. Campaigns do it all the time, especially when you've chosen a public setting" to speak. ( Halter campaign cries dirty politics, Arkansas News Bureau, January 26, 2006)
Posted by: BILLY THE WIMP | April 26, 2006 03:00 PM
I love how Pritt manages to hijack these threads and make them all about him, right down to accusing his detractors of being some nefarious alter-ego from a different state. Come on, folks, wise up. He wants the attention.
Pritt still hasn't taken down his "Pritt for Lt. Governor" website in spite of having plenty of time to while away posting in the Arkansas Blog. Methinks he likes to look at it, to relive the glory days of his pretend campaign. Probably while sitting amidst all those bumper stickers and buttons his twenty grand bought before he realized he was too broke to file (yeah, good investment with those signs!)
Posted by: Prouster | April 26, 2006 09:16 PM
I'M BILL HALTER. I AM A RHODES SCHOLAR. THEREFORE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO MAKE MISTAKES. ARKANSANS ARE TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS.
IM 5'6 AND HAVE NAPOLEON SYNDROME. MY CAMPAIGN MANAGER BUD JACKSON LOOKS LIKE A CARTOON CHARACTER AND STALKS TEENAGE GIRLS.
Posted by: bill halter | April 26, 2006 11:42 PM
I have inside sources, they say hathorn like girls..alot. And that he preys on them, then runs them into the ground.Is is gay??? Or maybe lonely???? Anyway he tried to get my friend in bed...mmmmmmm
Posted by: mmmm??? | April 27, 2006 12:01 PM
Hey,
I'm a women and if Mike Hathorn wanted to get me in bed. I say go for it.
Posted by: I'd bed Mike | April 27, 2006 01:27 PM
Sure, Lt. Gov is not typically a followed race, but I hear their is a VERY large endorsement that it about to come out in the race, which will boil up more talk, I'm sure.
Posted by: the word | April 27, 2006 02:07 PM
Dear I'd bed Mike,
For a good time call (501) 372-5...
Posted by: Procurista | April 27, 2006 02:49 PM
"I have inside sources, they say hathorn like girls..alot. And that he preys on them, then runs them into the ground.Is is gay??? Or maybe lonely???? Anyway he tried to get my friend in bed...mmmmmmm"
I've had more than one friend do the same before getting married and then getting divorced and then admitting they were gay. They weren't running for political office though. Just the fact that he's b-buddies with Mac is enough to make one wonder. Also watch Hathorn's wrist some time....limp as a wet noodle
Posted by: pretenders pretend very good | April 27, 2006 08:31 PM
Whose business is it anyway? Look, its hillarious that the person who has been in a same sex relationship and ran for office this year (namely myself) is accused of being straight and doing it for political benefit. Then the candidate who has been married is accused of being gay. I fail to see the logic in all of this crapola.
People are people....attraction is an ambiguous matter. Why is it used like some slight by some of you? My observation is that those who normally bash those in the GLBT Community end up being the biggest flaming closet queers themselves.
None of that changes the fact that :
1.) Bill Halter has not lived in this state for the past seven years.
2.) Serious questions about Bill Halter and possibly violation of the campaign finance laws have been raised and should be addressed.
3.) Bill Halter says he has a lottery plan that costs twice as much as it produces.
4.) Bill Halter hired a bunch of out of state talent to not just be his campaign manager but serve as staffers.
5.) Bud Jackson will now say something flip about cruelty to animals.
Did you work for PETA Bud, or just have a fascination with baby seals, puppies, and kittens?
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 28, 2006 11:15 AM
Drew Pritt likes sheep. talk about cruelty to animals!
Posted by: yes he does! | April 28, 2006 07:39 PM
"9.) On multiple occasions you have used campaign funds to make donations to churches including the AME and the Episcopal Lay Organization. These donations are a violation of Arkansas Campaign Finance Law Section 209(e) unless the candidate regularly attended these churches when he/she was not seeking election. Is this the case for you, or were the donations an illegal use of campaign funds?"
Doesn't he know that you are suppose to hire a black consultant to take your money and give to all the black churches? That's what Hathorn and Campbell have done. I guess it's ok to buy votes if you do it that way.
Posted by: all crooks | April 29, 2006 12:47 AM
"9.) On multiple occasions you have used campaign funds to make donations to churches including the AME and the Episcopal Lay Organization. These donations are a violation of Arkansas Campaign Finance Law Section 209(e) unless the candidate regularly attended these churches when he/she was not seeking election. Is this the case for you, or were the donations an illegal use of campaign funds?"
Doesn't he know that you are suppose to hire a black consultant to give money to all the black churches on your behalf? That's what Hathorn and Campbell have done. I guess it's ok to buy votes if you do it that way.
Posted by: Political money laundering | April 29, 2006 12:49 AM
A candidate's sexuality is none of our business EXCEPT when they lie to us about it. A simple "it none of your business" would suffice. Don't make the point to tell the public that you haven't found the right girl yet. When you do that, the deception is our business. How can we trust someone that's not honest with us?
Posted by: candidates telling lies is our business | April 29, 2006 12:55 AM
reading halters anwers made think tom delay was talking again
Posted by: Anonymous | April 29, 2006 07:32 PM
Reading 32-year-old frat boy for Lt. Governor Mike Hathorn's complaint made me think of Ken Starr.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 30, 2006 11:43 AM
There has been much discussion about whom I am helping in the lieutenant governor's race.
I am helping both Mike Hathorn and Tim Wooldridge. I have had discussions with both about how to knock off Bill Halter. They both helped me with my earlier complaint. As has Nate Coulter who helped draft Mike Hathorn's ethics complaint.
I will do anything I can to beat down Bill Halter and his unfair entrance into this race.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 30, 2006 08:49 PM
MAXWICK - I did not make the above post. Can you please start enforcing an I.P. tracing system or fix it where you have to register so you cannot misuse someone's name?
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 30, 2006 10:38 PM
For the record, why would I ask Nate Coulter, someone I haven't spoken with since 1993 and who also served on the steering committee for Bill Halter you dingus!
Posted by: Drew Pritt | April 30, 2006 10:39 PM
Just answer the questions Bill. Just answer the questions. I am a voter, and I deserve to know BEFORE I cast my vote.
Posted by: Joe voter | May 1, 2006 06:17 PM
The lieutenant governor's office is the appendix of state government--as in the pointy thing at the end of your large intestine that serves no useful purpose. The amount of drivel spewed on this blog about an office so meaningless is the equivalent of political masturbation.
Ditch it. Kill it. Nix it. Scrap it. The office has been worthless since it was created in 1929. Presiding over the state Senate does not require a separate constitutional office. If the Governor resigns, have the Senate President Pro Tempore (who already presides over the Senate)become Acting Governor pending a special election.
With all due respect, Lt. Gov. Win Rockefeller has been out of state for the last eight months in cancer treatment (and best wishes to him in his recovery) and the operations of state government have not been affected. The same was the case when Jim Guy Tucker as Lt. Gov. was out of state having medical treatment in the early 90s. This is a commentary on the office, not the officeholder.
Aside from political consultants, blog geeks, and political parties who are greedy for filing fees, no one and nothing would be harmed by the elimination of lite guv. The state Board of Apportionment is comprised of the Governor, Attorney General and Secretary of State, so this wouldn't affect redistricting.
The money spent on lite guv (which at least since Win Rock took over has included State Police protection) is better spent on public schools, pre-K, Medicaid, college scholarships.
Posted by: remove the appendix | May 2, 2006 02:40 PM
Yeah, see....and get rid of the Vice-President's position, too. In fact, if it starts with Vice-, Lt-, Co-, Sub-,Runner-up, or anything similar...nix it! We're solving bureaucracy right here on the Ark. Times blog!
Posted by: Arkansas Natural | May 3, 2006 01:58 PM
Hey, Drew Pritt paid his internet bill! His campaign website is back up. He hasn't changed a thing...I guess he enjoys pretending he's still a candidate.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 4, 2006 07:28 PM
Or maybe its because his internet provider finally got his site back up online. And maybe also because she has traced the I.P. address of the ones who tampered with it might not want to mess with her or her business at Ambiguous Arts. Because then she'll turn all that evidence over to Larry Jegley who is happy to P-R-O-S-E-C-U-T-E some "outside" source who tampered, damaged, and falsified all at once. My guess is the one above crowing might want to shut up.
Posted by: The Truth of the Matter | May 5, 2006 02:55 AM
Except that never happened. He didn't pay his internet bill, and rather than admitting he's po' after blowing all that money on yard signs and crap, he blamed Halter and some nutty conspiracy theory. As if anyone cares enough about him to hack his silly website.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 8, 2006 06:37 PM
Anonymous how can I "pay" an internet bill when it was donated to me in the first place.
I'll call your bluff.
Email KAFLINN@COMCAST.NET the webmaster.
Posted by: Drew Pritt | May 22, 2006 10:39 AM
You can't be 60738 serious?!?
Posted by: Max Ballstein | June 17, 2006 10:07 AM
You can't be 60738 serious?!?
Posted by: Max Ballstein | June 19, 2006 09:01 PM
http://www.ringtones-rate.com/mp3/ ringtones site. Free nokia ringtones here, Download ringtones FREE, Best free samsung ringtones. from website .
Posted by: funny ringtones | July 10, 2006 12:25 AM
http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site free. Free nokia ringtones here, Download ringtones FREE, Best free samsung ringtones. From website .
Posted by: ringtones free | August 1, 2006 08:06 PM