RSS
Blogs › On The Campaign Trail
People are bold with e-mail
Posted April 8, 2008
After another day of campaigning, I returned to my laptop to check my e-mail.
Of course, there was the daily dose of bad, vulgar, and just plain ugly e-mail that I opened.
Today's e-mailer was upset because I had met with a particular individual. The e-mail began something like "You will be judged by the company you keep." In short, the e-mail recounted the many ways this particular person I had met with was supposedly a bad seed. And the e-mail encouraged me to stay away from folks like him.
Thanks, but no thanks.
I'm introducing myself to voters. That's my job. And folks like the guy I met the other week listened to why I want to be Solicitor.
I'm not out to right every wrong. No one person can do that. I have a campaign platform and that's what I'm sharing with folks.
Maybe the person I met with was no good. I don't know. Maybe the person who sent the e-mail was up to no good. Again, I don't know. But the person I met with was at least willing to listen to my campaign speech.
Where ever people are I stop and tell them who I am and why I'm running. The ones who actually listen and respond in kind are fun to talk with.
Then, of course, I have other -- kind of -- engaging conversations:
One voter said to me, "Sarah, you're gonna win!"
"Why?" I asked, wondering which one of my issues had caught his attention.
"You're the blonde, that's why."
"Hmmm. well, at least I'm being noticed," I said to myself.
Another voter told me I had his vote.
"Why?" I asked.
"Your name. I like the name Sarah. It runs in my family."
"Nice," I thought.
Now where's that guy who was discussing the issues with me? Oh, that's right, he's supposedly bad company, accordingly to the latest e-mail I received.
Campaigning is a wide-open sport.
Friends are calling their friends for me. Supporters are doing the same.
The following is a true story and reflects just how wide-open campaigns are.
One supporter was calling her friends about me. She was someone I'd met at a campaign stop earlier in the day. Well, 10:00 p.m. one night my phone rings. I answer. It was a woman's voice on the other end.
I hear, "Sarah, I've been telling all my friends about you." But her speech was slurred. And I could barely understand her. Then it hit me. She's been drinking.
I'm thinking maybe she didn't make a lot of calls. Hopefully, she didn't make any. Oh well, life goes on and so does the campaign. I thanked her and told her to stop for the night and get some rest. She deserved it.
The lady called the next day and apologized. "For what?" I asked. I had moved on. And that's what I do when I get ridiculous e-mail. Forget it and move on.
When judging someone by the company they keep, one should limit it to a person's friends and family. I'm proud of mine.
As for voters, far from keeping company with them I'm fighting tooth and nail in hopes of merely getting a few seconds of their attention.
Back on the campaign trail.
IndependentMail.com does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post or respond to every suggestion for a comment to be removed.
Before you post, consider this:
Please read our official user-contributions policy.
Posted by astro (jim talley) on April 9, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The bad seed Mrs. Drawdy is refering to is Charlie T. Blaine. He is a Forest Service Law Enforcer who is facing a lawsuit because he facilitated an illegal arrest on private property. He assulted and battered an innocent man, falsly imprisoned him, and threatened the man's wife with arrest while she stood near by holding the couple's 7 month old son. He also threaten to have the infant put in DSS custody. Apprently this "lawman's" absolute disregard for basic civil rights is of no concern to Mrs. Drawdy. Is this the kind of law enforcement she will encourage if elected? Incidently, Officer Blaine lives in Georgia, and tags his vehicles in North Carolina. He is not a voter as Mrs. Drawdy contends. There is a transcript of the preliminary hearing where the individual that Officer Blaine illegally arrested had all charges dropped due to no probable cause. Officer Blaine also admits to violating at least 2 state laws in the process of the illegal arrest. So, yes, I think it is fair to say that Sarah Drawdy should be jugded by the company she keeps.Particularly if she is unwilling to look further into this this matter that she is trying so cavalerly to just brush aside. What is she is she is not accountable? Let's hope for the sake of the Constitution, not our Solicitor.
Posted by SarahDrawdy (Sarah Drawdy) on April 9, 2008 at 11:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is absolutely ridiculous.
Yes, I met with Mr. Blaine just as I meet with everyone who wants to meet with me. I am a candidate for public office.
I met with Mr. Blaine once. I have absolutely nothing to do with a pending or dismissed case against Mr. Blaine. Nor am I going to open an investigation. I do not have access to files, interviews with witnesses or anything like that. Merely reading a transcript is no substitute for an investigation.
Certainly I do not condone behavior described by Mr. Talley -- the above writer.
Nor do I condone false accusations like Mr. Talley feels free to make against me. I have no idea who Mr. Talley is.
Let me be clear. I do not condone misconduct in office. On the contrary, I am the only candidate in the race who actually prosecutes the cases Mr. Talley claims to be concerned about, namely child neglect and child abuse.
I've not met with Mr. Talley. He has not extended me that courtesy. Free speech is wonderful, but with it comes responsibility.
Mr. Talley either saw me meet Mr. Blaine -- it was in a public place. Or he heard about it second-hand. I like to think that before someone is prosecuted either in court or on a website, all the facts should be gathered first. Mr. Talley failed to do that.
Posted by ksmalls (Karen Smalls) on April 9, 2008 at 12:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mrs. Drawdy,
Of the facts that Mr. Talley has pointed out, what do you disagree with? What false claims is he making against you? The only point he makes is a question: "Is this the kind of law enforcement she will encourage if elected?" I am interested why you would be campaigning for solicitor of the 10th circuit with a man that lives in Georgia that titles his vehicles in North Carolina. Is he even registered to vote in SC? How do you feel about the progressive decay of our civil rights in this country that is being fueled by unethical, bullyish, and unlawful law enforcement such as that described by Mr. Talley? Shouldn't those that enforce the law, be held to the law? Or perhaps, a slightly higher standard. I guess you hit the nail square on the head when you stated "maybe the person I met with was no good". And yeah, maybe that one voter was right when s/he said "You are blonde".
Posted by astro (jim talley) on April 9, 2008 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
First of all, it would be nice if Mrs. Drawdy could could be more specific about what false accusations were made against her. Secondly, it's obvious that I am the only one that bothered to gather any facts about this matter. The fact is that Mr. Blaine is putting Mrs. Drawdy's signs out in Oconee County. Mr. Blaine lives in Rabun County Georgia. He registers his vehicles in Macon County North Carolina. He is clearly not a constituent. To deny this is playing fast and loose with the facts. Thirdly, nobody suggested Mrs. Drawdy open an investigation. That would be ludicrous. Mrs. Drawdry acts like a court transcript is hearsay. She has access to it as we all do, it's public record. Mrs. Drawdy is obviously upset about being called out about her affiliation with a highly questionable individual. I think it's fair to call it an affiliation when Officer Blaine is driving about with a trailer full of her paraphernalia, distributing it.
Posted by rotel (Lucia Creedence) on April 9, 2008 at 4:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Talley wasn't talking about child abuse or neglect cases. He was talking about law officers gone bad cases. It sounds like the only one putting that child in a bad spot was Officer Blaine. Mrs. Drawdy's answer seems slippery at best. It was not my impression that Mr. Talley made any accusations against Mrs. Drawdy. In my life, my experience has been when someone reacts like Mrs. Drawdy did they are guilty as charged. She seems awfully defensive to me. I had one of her signs in my yard up until 20 minutes ago when I read this exchange. Now I guess I need an Adams sign. Thank you Mr. Talley for bringing this to our attention and making the beast rear her head.
Posted by SarahDrawdy (Sarah Drawdy) on April 9, 2008 at 6:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lucia Creedence:
You are correct. Mr. Tally was talking about law enforcement officers abusing their power.
Where I differ with him is that he implies I condone that activity. Let me clearly state that I do NOT condone misconduct in office.
I had no idea who Mr. Blaine was other than that he was a member of law enforcement. So I met him. Period.
That act does not in anyway shape or form mean that I condone police misconduct. Mr. Talley stated that this kind of conduct is of no concern to me. That is simply not true. Hence, it is a falsehood.
I have no idea who Mr. Talley is. He's never once met with me. He simply assumed more than there was.
That is the end of this story.
If, as you put it, I or "the beast" reared her head, then I did. But I did so because it is simply NOT true that I condone any kind of wrongdoing.
I have made no promises in this campaign other than to try cases.
You are certainly free to take my sign down. I am thankful you considered me at one time.
But please know Oconee County has a mere 21% conviction rate and a whopping 71% dismissal rate.
These numbers are frightening. Oconee County has only had 15 trials since my opponent took office. They lost 6 of them and won 9. That's an average of 5 trials per year.
If that's good enough for you, there is nothing more I can do.
I wish you the best.
And again, thank you for having considered me.