Vote Gary Starnes in Chattanoogan.com poll

[apriled]

I am here for Politics to support Gary Starnes for Sessions Court Judge. Please vote for him in the Chattanoogan.com poll.

[apriled]

We were here first!! Travelgirl doesn't love this blog like I do. hehe she or he has only had two posts. Its all fun.

[apriled]

Travelgirl you only visited this entire blog 3 three times total to dump political messages. That is ok, you can eat Judicial dust, Sista I have 171 posts, which makes me a participant and you, like your candidate, a want a be, hehe

[travelgirl]

I agree with you on the Chattanoongan poll. It seemed like the more our supporters voted the more our percentage went down. Really strange....

[JC]

CATFIGHT!

[gridbug]

Vote not lest ye be judged

Apr 30, 2012 9:04:03 GMT -5 JC said:

CATFIGHT!

The one good thing about politics in this partisan days - better than rasslin!

[apriled]

Travelgirl, I believed from the beginning Ron Powers was going to be position 3 in the running. I just did not anticipate that Joe G. would knock him out of third place. Joe G is younger and apparently is very good at social networking.

Gary Starnes is a serious contender and a nice guy. He is the most likely winner against the power structure pick. The Chattanooga poll represent the pulse of the community. There is always 2014 for Ron Powers.

[Half-Tard]

these ladies have snakes coming out of their heads...It's the internets...not scientific has no bearing at all. Save your energy ladies for the election...no get out there and make me a pie!!! and bean dip

[apriled]

Aceman, it is you that should be serving Travelgril and I, cleaning our house and mindless manual labor.

[justme]

who is the "power structure" pick?

[apriled]

The power structure pick is the appointed the chosen, David Norton. Skillet and the Soddy Bottom Boys on the Ham. Co. Commission have a list of the chosen. If you are the chosen, you get an auto appointment the boys will campaign for you. That is how it works with the appointments in my opinion.

[Half-Tard]

David Norton. Skillet and the Soddy Bottom Boys on the Ham. Co. Commission have a list of the chosen. If you are the chosen, you get an auto appointment the boys will campaign for you. That is how it works with the appointments in my opinion.

I agree with that. So you know it won't be a person of color.

[apriled]

Aceman, you know what is going on. That is how it works.

[justme]

How do you know the Commissioners are campaigning for Judge Norton. I haven't seen anything to that effect?

Meanwhile, it seems to me that the best way to choose a candidate is based upon comparing the experience of each. My research so far shows the following:

Starnes..........degree/practicing since 1986
Norton...........municipal judge since 1985

Starnes..........all state and federal courts
Norton...........all state and federal courts

Starnes..........Rule 31 listed mediator
Norton...........believe he may have qualified as to training but be unable because of being a municipal judge

Starnes..........special judge for city
Norton...........Judge for City of Soddy Daisy

Starnes..........special judge for Hamilton County (unsure for how long of a period and if he is able to hear all types of cases)
Norton..........special judge for Hamilton County (unsure how long, but was able to hear all types of cases before his appointment because he was also a municipal judge).

I have nothing against Gary Starnes. I don't know him except from hearing his name. I do know Robert Starnes and think highly of him, but that's not enough of a reason for me to vote for someone of lesser experience.

While I can appreciate the mentality that says, vote'em all out, vote against the power structure or whatever the rallying cry is, and have thought that way myself at times, I do make an effort to base my vote on the qualifications and how the individual fills the qualifications.

It appears to me that Judge Norton is the better qualified candidate and he will be getting my vote.

[apriled]

Just me.

Vote for who ever you want. I love a good election by the people for the people. It is these appointed picks that are somewhat nasty.

I have nothing against David Norton except he is NOT the most qualified. He has been an Assistant County Attorney to Rheubin Taylor for what 27 years. How many cases has Mr. Norton actually tried in front of a jury? I would not vote for the city attorney to be Judge anymore than David Norton.

Further, your half baked notion that the Hamilton County group is not supporting Norton is 100 Percent Hogwash. First of all, it is undisputed that Skillet and the Soddy Bottom Boys have voted for David Norton to be a fill in, and have indeed endorsed him through that appointment. Everyone knows that, and that is the essence of power structure at the courthouse.

None of us just got off the turnip truck, Sista. The appointed essentially have the support of the Commissioners, which does vantage them. If you are suggesting that they do not use their official capacity to influence the outcome, I will have to say that you are not fully informed.

Just because you are not getting on bus, does not mean the bus is stopping.

[Half-Tard]

If you are suggesting that they do not use their official capacity to influence the outcome, I will have to say that you are not fully informed.

Ask Rick Smith..and Dr. Scales and oh um Jesse Register, Current County Mayor Coppinger..Hamiton County crooked as a dogs hind leg.


Ps. what's the party affiliation of the chosen...? I'm as shocked as you are not the republican party I know..

[justme]

You are welcome, billvol.

apriled - my point, which you apparently missed, is that simply because he was the pick of the Commission does not mean he's not also the best qualified, and that my personal attempt as a maturing voter is to see past the crap & hype and actually consider a person's qualifications - in any race, not just this one. I don't vote for people because they are picked to fill an appointment by the Hamilton County Commission. Nor do I not vote for people because they are picked to fill an appointment by the Commission. I attempt to vote reasonably and rationally.

The fact is that Judge Norton has been the Judge in Soddy Daisy since 1985, the year before Mr. Starnes began practicing. To my knowledge, the Soddy Daisy court has essentially the same requirements and limitations that Hamilton County Sessions Court has. Therefore, Judge Norton has been handling exactly the same type cases as are heard in Sessions Court on a weekly basis for 27 years. Additionally, he's been sitting as special judge in Sessions court for almost the same period of time.

For you to claim he's not the most qualified in terms of actual experience on the bench is simply a refusal to acknowledge what you are obviously not interested in considering as you support your pick.

As to how many cases he's tried in front of jury - I have no idea and I suspect that you don't either. You also seem to either disregard or are unaware of one relevant factor: Sessions Court, although a trial court, is not a court with a jury.

Like you, I want people to exercise their right to vote. That's as the process should be. However, I'm interested in reasonable attempts to determine who the best candidate is. Your response came off as a little defensive, not really reasonable.

By the way, just because I have a different opinion doesn't mean I just got off the turnip truck, either, and...I'm obviously not your Sista.

[apriled]

Let me make this abundantly clear to you. It is you, yes you that brought up experience, and the entire issue of experience. You even wrote a dissertation about it as the basis of being a better candidate, and posted it on a thread about the next Sessions Court Judge, Gary Starnes.

Now, you wish to dance around the issue of courtroom experience. I did not miss your message, it was about experience, Sista

You now wish to disregard the issue of trial court experience. Sorry, you cannot have it both ways.

Sitting in the County Attorney's office for 27 years, does not impress me.

As far as Judge experience, Gary Starnes has heard thousands of cases in City of Chattanooga and Sessions Court as a special judge.

Skillet and Soddy Bottom will not have the final say, the Will of the people Will. Sista.

[apriled]

I get that Justme and Billvol (Norton Trolls) are following the posts of Starnes for Judge supporters.

Follow the leader, just sayin.

[justme]

[As far as Judge experience, Gary Starnes has heard thousands of cases in City of Chattanooga and Sessions Court as a special judge]

My point, again missed it would seem, is that Judge Norton quite simply, by virtue of his time on the Soddy Daisy bench, has MORE experience.

If he heard 50 cases a week over the past 27 years, (assuming 48 dockets a year), that's 44,000+ cases. If it was 1/2 that, it's 22,000+ cases. If it was 1/4 that (12 cases a week), that's still 11,000+ cases.

That doesn't even include the cases he's heard in Sessions Court over the past 27 years. Assuming he sat one time a month as special judge in Sessions over a 27-year period and there were 100 cases on each docket, that's an additional 32,000+ cases. (By the way, a quick check of the 7-day docket for Hamilton County Sessions Criminal Court shows 110 pages of cases, at approximately 10 cases per page, which I divided by 5 (it equaled 220) and then further reduced in the interest of fairness to come up with a reasonable but not padded number, one meant to account for times when he did not sit even once during a month and certainly not including those months when he may have sat multiple times).

By contrast, facts again - those pesky little things - Judge Norton has been on the bench since before Mr. Starnes was practicing. Although Mr. Starnes has been a special judge in the City of Chattanooga, its requirements and limitations are not the same as Sessions. Further, although Mr. Starnes has been a special judge in Sessions Court, I suspect that he has only been allowed to hear civil cases because he did not have the qualifications to hear criminal cases. These are the facts.

I am certainly willing to be educated and if I am wrong will certainly take an appropriate critique, factor new information into my decision. You may want to check with Mr. Starnes regarding his experience ON THE BENCH compared to Judge Norton's.

You focus on cases tried before a jury. I have absolutely no information about the number or type of cases either of these gentlemen may or may not have tried before a jury. Do you? You fling that out as your flaming sword, but do you have any facts to support what you are saying?

As to your other comments, they don't deserve a response. At last check this category was labeled "debate & politics." Regardless of the thread label, if it's trollish to debate (which is what I am attempting to do), what's the purpose? Did you really expect to post and only have cheerleaders? If you want to cheerlead on one side and denigrate on the other, that's certainly your prerogative. But, if you want to debate, bring something with a little more substance to the table.

[apriled]

Just me,

You are so funny. You post a dissertation about experience and went to the trouble to generate the experience "Table of Norton," and now deem that you have no numbers to verify the cases your candidate has tried while hanging out with Rheubin Taylor for 27 year as the Assistant County Attorney. I think they blog all day.

Dancing around the issue of trial court experience.

You deem my comments unworthy of your response and lacking substance. Well, Sista, suggesting that your comments are mo better than me.

You are not debating, you are side stepping core issues that you raised, ie experience. You are a campaign troll.

BillVol and Justme, how is the weather in SD?

[apriled]

From Justme table

Starnes..........degree/practicing since 1986
Norton...........municipal judge since 1985

Just me,

David Norton has been Judge for SD since 1985, which means he graduated from law school in the early 70's. How old is your candidate, just curious.