Thursday, May 24, 2007

More on Greene-Whitehead

OK ... Bill Greene's campaign has Eric Spohn's statement to the police up, and there's quite a bit of discussion, of which Greene is participating in, over at Peaach Pundit.

One of the questions I asked there I'll restate here ... if it's a public building, then the Whitehead camp should have been afforded the same opportunity to place signs there as well. It would seem the only folks who could remove the signs would be those who worked at that building or some other sort of government official.

Of course there could be some sort of contractual agreement which stated Greene's campaign had the full authority to remove signs which didn't support his candidacy. Much how you can rent a venue and decorate it to your liking, but that doesn't mean other folks can come in and hang flyers during that time.

Still, wouldn't it have been better to just let him do it and then either reposition the Greene signs to cover the Whitehead ones or merely remove the signs after Brandon Phillips departed?

Make no mistake, if Phillips did attempt to hit Spohn, that's a crime and he should face the appropriate punishment. However, why was there even any real reason to make this a big deal? Why would Whitehead 'not approve' of one of his staffers placing signs out?

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is exactly why public buildings should never be allowed to be used for campaign function and/or fundraisers. But that is Watkinsville for you.

Is it just me or do other finding it hard to bet motivated to vote in this crappy election. Both sides just plan suck.

-David

2:48 PM  
Blogger Nicki said...

Amen, David. I'll not be voting for Greene, but I felt physically ill reading Whitehead's campaign piece. Actually I think I'll just stay home and cry on election day unless someon in the election proves to be competent.

Marlow, anyone?

5:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home