Not sure what the exact schedule is but the debate(s) begin at 7pm. AG debate starts at 8:30. That should be interesting.

And the live feed from GPB?

Debate Stream


26 Responses to Atlanta Press Club Debates CiT – 7/11

  1. Jen B. says:

    After watching both debates, my husband has decided to pull a Republican ballot and vote for Sam Olens. I feel like walking off the same cliff.

    • Donna says:

      For God sake, tell your husband to get a grip! Sam Olens is NOT the man for the job.

      I think Ken Hodges is definitely getting my vote tonight. How in the heck did Teilhet even get in to this race with NO experience??????????????

      • Tony says:


        Well, allow me to retort. This will be the longest thing I ever post here, but I felt it necessary since you included so many question marks in a row.

        On the Democratic side of the ballot, you have two guys looking to tear each other down. I agree with Melb — I too would have liked to see more substance on the issues. And by issues, I mean “what are you going to do as AG” instead of “how is the other guy a bad candidate.” Both of the Democratic candidates are focusing on things that are not real issues in my mind (but may help to get them votes).

        From the Hodges camp:

        1. Prosecutorial experience: a red herring. If Hodges wanted to run on experience, he can highlight his own experience — which is more substantial than Teilhet’s — without making it seem like you can only be AG if you have a criminal law background. This simply is not the case, and I think Hodges is trying to put more emphasis on it than it deserves.

        2. Teilhet Accepting Per Diem Reimbursements: I probably wouldn’t have taken a per diem if I was Rob Teilhet, but I don’t think it is dishonest for him to accept his per diem when that is a part of his comp for being in the General Assembly (which, as I understand, is not a very high paying job).

        3. Teilhet having worked for an insurance company that is now under investigation. I haven’t heard that one before, but Teilhet’s response was that he left before any wrongdoing may have occurred. I would be more interested if there was a “there” there, but if there was, I am sure we would have heard more about this.

        From Teilhet’s side:

        1. Calling Ken Hodges a “bad” prosecutor is a low blow, whether in a general or in a primary. There isn’t a foundation for it — unless he is referring to two cases, which is a limited view. Teilhet, if I ever thought about voting for you, you lost me with that comment. I know this one is heated, but try to rise above it.

        2. Brining up the fact that Hodges is defendant in several lawsuits. This comes with the territory of being a DA. You know better than that.

        3. Phoebe Putney: I’ll be honest: I haven’t paid too much attention to this one. I am not necessarily buying Hodges’s public safety argument, but it isn’t unreasonable. Move on.

        4. Kenneth Walker: Very unfortunate incident. All of my “facts” are things I have learned through media reports and the various shills on this blog. From what little I know, there seems like open ground to criticize Hodges’s handling of the case. But it just doesn’t resonate with me, because it isn’t clear cut. Move on.

        The problem may very well be that all of the candidates are generally in favor of the same things. So, this becomes a race that is more about the candidate than the issues.

        As for Olens: I don’t agree with spending money to attack healthcare, especially when that is being taken up by others. Other than that, I have liked what I have seen. I especially liked how he took the high road frequently during the debate — something I think our Democratic candidates should try now and again. Just watch the debate.

        For full disclosure, I’m also not a big party guy. I vote for the best candidate. Typically, I have found that to be the Democrat. But not always.

        I see your question marks, and raise you an exclamation point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • Tony says:

          FFS, that was long. Sorry.

          • Melb says:

            I like your post Tony.

            The SEUS insurance company story is that Teilhet was hired to set up the in house legal counsel, the company is currently under criminal investigation by the State Insurance Commissioner for Enron style accounting – Teilhet oversaw the setup of the insurance company. The case is still under investigation.

            As for the per diems, it is optional and many do not accept it unless they live pretty far from the capitol. The purpose of the per diem is not compensation in general, but for housing and food expenses when a legislators is away from home. The fact that Teilhet took this money while he was staying at home and eating at home is actually shady.

            Other than that I thought you had a good analysis!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            • Stefan says:

              That’s not accurate. He was a workers comp defense attorney. He was not a corporate attorney. He was not general counsel.

              • JGW says:

                Stefan: It’s accurate to say that, as far as public notice went, SEUS said it hired Teilhet to set up its in-house legal department. From the Marietta Daily Journal, May 27, 2006: “POLITICAL PLATTER: State Rep. Robert Teilhet (D-Smyrna) has joined Southeastern U.S. Insurance as counsel with duties that include setting up their in-house legal department. His last day at Brock Clay was Friday.” You can find the article through a NewsBank or LexisNexis search. The headline is “Time short for registering for upcoming primaries,” and the author is Bill Kinney.

                • Stefan says:

                  their in house INSURANCE DEFENSE legal department. Those arent the same people that set up the insurance company structure, which is what it says above “Teilhet oversaw the setup of the insurance company”.

                  Do you really not know the difference? Corporate structure is not even done by employees of the insurance firm.

                • Sara says:

                  Most insurance companies in GA hire in-house attorneys to defend some of the claims against their insureds (the ones they do not farm out to outside counsel, of which their in-house attorneys still retain oversight.) When he was hired to set up their in-house legal department, this is what he was hired to do. Not set up the company–that would already have been done by corporate attorneys drafting the agreements, bylaws, corporate structure documents, etc. necessary to start a new corporation.

            • parker404 says:

              This per diem thing is the most ridiculous non-issue. Ever. Our State Representatives make the grand sum of $17,000 a year. That figures out to less than $1,000 a month take home. There is nothing unsavory, unethical or untoward about them being paid a per diem for the 40 or so days they serve at the Capitol. They are not getting rich off the freaking per diem. Considering that they have to take time from their “real jobs” (with or without pay) on those Capitol service days, how in the heck are they supposed to make a living?

              You’re for Hodges. That’s great. Just don’t create an ethics problem that isn’t there.

              • Melb says:

                Um. They are in session for 4 months and while there are political events to attend it is not a full time job.

                As I said, it is for housing and food, not a bonus and definitely not something people who are driving 10 miles each way, staying at their home, and eating their own food or having a lobbyist paying for it should take.

                • Melb says:

                  4 months at most where it is full time and 8 months where it probably takes up 2 days a week if that.

                • parker404 says:

                  If a State Legislator’s real job is as an hourly employee at Banana Republic, and she had to take certain days away from the Banana to serve at the Capitol, what is wrong with her getting a per diem for those days? The Banana is not going to pay her when she doesn’t show up to fold their shirts.

                  Show me where Teilhet, or any other Metro Atlanta Legislator, has received undue enrichment from the per diem. It’s not the case, and you know it.

                  Stick to the experience argument. Mr. Phoebe Putney himself is not going to win any ethics fights.

          • Ed says:

            Also, THAT’S WHAT SHE SAID!

        • Ed says:

          You are the new JMP!

        • Chris says:

          You make some good points, but how many other DA’s in the state have ongoing legal problems from their time as DA? It’s one thing for some overzealous defendant to file a meritless case against a DA which is quickly dismissed, I think if you look at the legal problems Hodges has had, they speak to something more than just standard operating “problems” that other DAs have.

  2. Melb says:

    Also, Teilhet saying Hodges was a bad prosecutor was stupid. He is very accomplished and his conviction record is really high and a rise in crime has to do with police work, not the prosecutor’s office.

  3. Melb says:

    you must not be Steve Golden. I don’t think microphones were necessary in this debate, but a ring and boxing gloves.

    Hodges was pissed about Teilhet lying about the Walker case with good reason, and Teilhet seemed very robotic and like he was a little slow.

    I was glad Hodges was given the opportunity to address the Pheobe bs as well.

    I would have liked to seen more substance questions asked. It seemed that the only substance questions asked were about water, immigration, and open government – which they seemed to agree on in the issues.

    Teilhet definitely does not have any experience – legislative he did nothing and privately he has done some workers comp. I thought the line that he had lunch with lobbyists more than he had experience in the courtroom.

    However, I would have liked Hodges to go more into depth about his experience. When he explained his role in the Pheobe case – it showed where his priorities were.

  4. Julianal says:

    Well I can tell you that Preston Smith scared the freckles right off my face..

  5. Peter Tondee says:

    Sigh… I can honestly say I’m mostly undecided (if not leaning slightly to Teilhet), and to call that a landslide of anything is some grand sockpuppetry. Hodges may have won the landslide of angry, but nobody won that debate.

  6. Steven says:

    I kept getting kicked out of the comment loop too, but I thought Hodges won in a landslide. Teilhet seemed like he is completely out of his league on this – the guy has never tried a single criminal case?!?!?

  7. JMPrince says:

    Was knocked out of the comment loop here. But I was leaving soon anyway… JMP