Guess some folks get a bit upset when the truth hits 'em upside their head. The expected response to my first Campaign Corner article has hit the airwaves at Cumminghome.com, and it is unusual in it's response and it's source. [Click Here to read the response]

First, Jerry Bowman, not the candidate, speaks about the issues involving the ad. Interesting. I know the county has found a need to create a Director of Communications, but I didn't know that the Conway campaign did also.

Now to the substance of the article.

First, Jerry tries the misdirection tactic by trying to tie Charlie Laughinghouse to my article. Not so fast, Jerry! As everyone who knows me already understands, I am my own person, and take no marching orders from anyone. Nor have Charlie Laughinghouse and I co-ordinated any campaign strategies. He has his own campaign to run and I have everyone elses to critique. Jack's ad just happened to be the first one. So to try to tie Cumminghome.com and Charlie Laughinghouse to this effort is both ludicrous and disingenuous.

Next, Jerry states that SPLOST has has no ties to state funding, yet as someone who was on the SPLOST approval committee, he knows that matching funds of up to 75% came with the vote on SPLOST. In addition, to hear Jerry talk, Jack was the only person responsible for SPLOST funding and road improvements. Sorry, but when you run on a record, you have to tell the whole story, and saying Jack was the driving force on SPLOST because it passed is like saying that Jack was the driving force behind my FLIP program because it passed under his tenure as chairman. Just doesn't wash.

Jerry is flat out wrong on the sewer, and has no backup to prove Jack's involvement, and the votes Jack has taken on allowing private plants speaks against Jerry's assertions.

I'm not even going to dignify Jerry's comment on the Big Box ordinance, except to say that it further embarrasses the campaign to try to take credit for another commissioner's hard work.

Jerry finally comes up with a correct statement on Jack's support for the Big Creek Greenway, which I guess (to him) negates all the things that I correctly pointed out in my earlier article. In my mind, supporting one greenway project while being the lead person responsible for razing the rest of the county doesn't make you a greenspace advocate.

And Jerry continues the mantra of the "lowest property tax rates" in metro Atlanta. But he, and others, continue to ignore the underlying problem with that. The tax rate is low, but home values have skyrocketed in that timeframe. While that is good for people SELLING their homes, for those of us STAYING here, our taxes have still, in essence, nearly doubled. But with all that extra tax revenue, where are the infrastructure improvements associated with a doubling of the tax base? Our problem is that the policies associated with the majority of commissioners under Jack's chairmanship have actually outstripped our ability to improve our infrastructure. We are actually further behind than we were four years ago. Our tax rate is low, our property values are high, and we STILL can't get to GA 400 from our house in less than 35 minutes. And where would our tax rate be now if Jack hadn't supported the millage increase in 2003, or if he had questioned the Sheriff's budget increases in the first two years of his tenure, or if he hadn't added the extra expenses I mentioned in my first article (or the others I haven't yet detailed)?

I'm not even sure where Jerry's comments on our library awards is coming from, as I never claimed to take credit for them as Jack's supporters have, again, with no substantiation of his direct involvement. Looks like more smoke and mirrors to me.

It is even more absurd that Jerry Bowman insists that Jack Conway was not "taking credit" for the things listed in the full-page, full-color ad in Sunday's FCN. At the very bottom of the page, does it not state that the ad was paid for by "The Friends of Jack Conway"? And is that not his campaign committee? Does this mean that his committee is placing ads not approved by the candidate himself?

On a final note, while it is apparent that Jerry and I disagree on our respective opinions, I rely on facts on which to base mine. It is naive of anyone, especially someone who has been around this process as much as Jerry Bowman has, to think that things are not rigged in people's favor in this county. Anyone who went through the process to create our Land Use Map and our UDC can see the hands of those whose livelihood is directly affected by those laws that we have created. You can also see it in the votes that are taken on issues that affect family friends, long-time acquaintances and entities that control the financial purse strings of people in power. I remember an old Groucho Marx line from one of his movies, where he said, "I resent that remark! I don't deny it, but I resent it!" Resent all you want, Jerry. You may think this was a personal attack: I prefer to think of it as setting the record straight.

Understand this: I am not picking on Jack Conway specifically. His campaign just had the misfortune to publish the first ad of the political season, and has tried to take liberties with the actual facts. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to allow that to happen while I am able to comment on political happenings in this county. I think it also serves notice to other candidates that they had better get their facts straight before trying to pull something over on the voters of this county. Why am I doing this? Because I can. And because I am tired of politicians taking liberties with the truth.