Mike Wiggins Can Deny All He Wants, But…
by Bill Simon
The fact is, apparently Liz Young knew enough about him to know that he WOULD have liked the e-mailed comment about Judge Carol Hunstein being a “one-legged Jewish lady from DeKalb County”.
I’ve met Mike Wiggins. I’m not impressed.
He is running for a judgeship when he has had ZERO experience practicing law under the Georgia Code. Nor does he have ANY experience in interpreting Georgia law, at ANY judicial level in this state.
Electing him to the Georgia Supreme Court today would be akin to electing Howard Mead to the Georgia Court of Appeals back in 2004 over Judge Debra Bernes.
Of course, no telling what Liz Young thinks about Judge Bernes…but, I now have a strong suspicion about how she would describe her in an e-mail…
Technorati Tags: Judge Carol Hunstein, Mike Wiggins, Georgia law
October 21st, 2006 at 4:01 pm
He’s going to get crushed
October 22nd, 2006 at 5:51 pm
…and rightly so, Josh. This guy Wiggins is a total fraud, a.k.a a typical Bush appointee.
October 22nd, 2006 at 8:45 pm
Charley,
I don;t think he’s a fraud. i think he’s a good guy, who just doesn’t have a chance or the correct resume
October 23rd, 2006 at 4:39 am
Mike Wiggins is at least a beneficiary of, and at worst, a party to, an illegal campaign finance scheme. See Thurday’s AJC for details.
October 23rd, 2006 at 12:45 pm
Charley,
Mike Wiggins is a lot like Perry J. McGuire, eh?
The next time, or should I say the first time, they appear in court, it will be as a defendant?
Has anyone explained RICO to Perry J yet?
October 24th, 2006 at 4:06 am
McGuire’s answer to what RICO is:
“Yeah, Rico, that was Casper Van Dien’s character in ‘Starship Troopers’. Man, the bugs were cool in that one!”
LOL
October 24th, 2006 at 9:18 am
Charley,
High Five, Dude!
October 24th, 2006 at 10:19 am
I met Mike W. at the Paulding GOP meeting this weekend. He is a good guy and probally a very astute lawyer. However, he is a poor choice for the position he is running for and will not get elected. Oh, and being from Washington is not going to help anybody in GA this year.
Last but not least, I don’t think his campaign is top notch. He does not seem to be running a “Georgia” campaign.
October 26th, 2006 at 11:26 am
Did you see Hunsteins ad. If it’s true, Wiggens is toast
October 26th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Josh,
Wiggens clearly represents Republican family values.
I mean, he only threatened to kill his pregnant sister. He didn’t actually do it. All hat, no cattle.
October 26th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
I saw Wiggins’ ad for the first time today. It’s talking about how he is “tough on crime” and it really would have made better comedy than a political commercial.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:52 am
I’ve been thinking about this for a while. I’ll admit that my logic might be a little flawed. I was on the fence on this race, and quite frankly was thinking about skipping over it. Based on Hunsteins ad I’ve decided to vote for Wiggins. Someone who brings 20 year old family matters into a Supreme Court justice campaign, does not deserve to sit on the bench.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:12 pm
Josh
How could you vote for either one?
They both got real issues!
They should seek help ASAP!
October 29th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Josh,
And here I thought you made your decisions based on sound logic.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:11 pm
Bill,
I know. The logic here is that she is way way out of bounds.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:21 pm
Josh,
And what is your logic in voting for Wiggins?
This easy for me punt on this vote!!!!!!!
October 29th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
Josh,
So how does that compare to the Swiftboat ads?
If threatening to kill your sister years ago is out of bounds, as you say, then make comments out of getting three Purple Hearts, with command approval,is in bounds?
If the decussion is valid on the Purple Hearts, then the discussion of the death threats is valid.
Just my unhumble opinion.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:38 pm
Actually the logic is if she makes that kind of bad decision in a campaign, what’s she going to do on the bench.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:42 pm
MD,
The point is that she brought family issues that are 20 years old into the race. Hunstein brought it into the race, not a third party organization.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
If he had killed his pregnant sister, would that have still been just “family issues?”
Is hiding behind a third party the way to get into a public office, say President of the United States?
Most murders are in the circle of family and friends. About 7 out of 10, if I remember correctly.
So the police should ignore a wife being threatened with death by a husband, etc etc etc?
Josh, that’s a weak argument you’re making. Bad judgement? Campaign judgements are very dynamic and time sensitive.
Judgements from the bench, usually, have little time presure and few dynamics for the judge. (As compared to candidates)
In more simple terms, judges don’t sentence themselves to death.
Candidates do face electoral life and death decisions.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
Josh,
Would you vote for a judge that threanten to kill his sister? You are part of the rational crowd on this blog, you must be drinking some MD 20/20?
October 29th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
Wiggins is the hand picked GOP candidate. They should have picked a better one.
Perry J. McGuire was the hand picked candidate of the GOP. They should have picked a lawyer who didn’t have a history of breaking the law.
By hand picked, I mean the GOP asked them to run. Not that the voters selected them by default in the primary.
Different from Lowell Stacey Cagle. The State GOP supported him over Reed. Cagle is no more honest than Reed. IMHO
October 29th, 2006 at 9:18 pm
John,
Do you know the circumstances twenty years ago? Were you there? Do you know for a fact that it’s true? Do you have any brothers and sisters? Have you ever had heated discussions with them, where you said things that you shouldn’t have said, that might be damning if taken out of context?
October 29th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
MD,
Nice way to try to switch your argument. The facts are that Hunstein went after his family. This is over twenty years old. He didn’t kill his sister, so that argument is total BS.
October 30th, 2006 at 7:22 am
Josh,
Josh,
I have had arguments with my sisters and brother. Yet we have never threatened to kill each other. Wiggins has not denied the charge, nor has his sister come forward.
October 30th, 2006 at 7:52 am
John,
During your campaign you made a point about Betty Price and your son. You also made numerous points about Stephens whisper/blog campaign about Handel being gay.
You were strongly against attacks on family. Those attacks were not aired in a TV ad. What Stephens did and Betty did were wrong. I think what Hunstein did was wrong.
October 30th, 2006 at 8:36 am
Josh,
You are right about attacks on the family and that is why I made it clear I would not vote for Hunstein.
Yet, Wiggens scares me. The attacks on Handel and I where just vicious with nothing about us threatening too kill anyone.
I cannot speak for Karen, but I think from knowing her she would deny a charge like that as well as I ASAP.
October 30th, 2006 at 8:46 am
Check this out.
http://www.georgiapoliticaldigest.com/article_3985.shtml
October 30th, 2006 at 8:50 am
Josh,
If that is true you are right. Also Hunstein should be removed from the bench.
October 30th, 2006 at 9:50 am
Josh,
At last night’s debate between Perdue and Taylor, Perdue dredged-up a nearly 20 year-old event that Mark admitted to doing with his son.
So, since Sonny is now using 20 year-old “family” stuff against Mark Taylor, does that mean you are going to follow your logic on the Hunstein-Wiggins matter and vote for Mark Taylor now?
October 30th, 2006 at 9:54 am
Why can’t Mike Wiggins, Atty At-Law write his OWN official-threatening letter to the TV stations???
October 30th, 2006 at 10:47 am
Bill,
I never said that this was the only factor in my vote. The on difference is that the AJC brought out the Taylor stuff this weekend. Sonny was repeating what the AJC outlined. I do not understand why Sonny even went there though.
October 30th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
Josh,
YOU were all for Wiggins until the Hunstein ad and the subsequent bad press from it. When you changed your mind based on the “attack on his family”, you changed your mind on that basis only.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:17 pm
Josh,
There are two sides to everything…and I believe Hunstein’s side:
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2006/10/31/now_speaks_the_sister_and_shes_1.html