After having mulled over in my mind Kelli's statement (in today's Ledger article) that she did not ask me to run in order to close the primary -and giving great deference to her integrity -a known factor, I conclude I may have made a mistake or misstatement in recollection. It is possible that she did not explicitly ask me to run for that purpose -and even possible that she did not explicitly ask me to run at all; however, it is a definite fact that she called me informing me of the election law loophole, about which I was not previously aware. What I think now happened was this: When she informed me of this loophole -and told me the pros and cons of the various alternatives available as it related to her perception as a conservative candidate, I inferred or read that to mean that this would help her chances of winning. One thing is for certain: When I realised the ramifications of this, I told Kelli that there was almost 100% chance someone would ask me why I registered to run -and I asked her advice. Since lying is not an option, I was stuck between being quiet and naming her as the one who made me aware of this loophole. Kelli was kind enough to say she didn't mind me saying she was the one who brought it to my attention because she was not ashamed to admit her beliefs that she was in favour of closed primaries. So, it is possible that I mischaractarised her motives for making me aware of this loophole, and, if so, I apologise for an off-centre recollection. Without a doubt, she is a hard worker who got signatures to save money (something I didn't do!) so as to not file pay the filing fee -she has always returned my messages when I wanted clarity on issues -and she has undoubtedly worked harder than me in her campaign (but I'm still going to vote for myself on the basis that I 'trust' the constitutional forefathers were probably wise when they left in the "write in" clause on the underlying premise that sometimes the write-in candidate is more qualified even if he can't afford the time/money to get signatures or pay the fee). I am terribly sorry for the length of my email here, but my conscience was playing tricks with me, and I wanted to make good for any possibly mischaracterisation I made -indeed, regardless of who wins (probably Kelli!), it is best to avoid any mudslinging -this would not be good for anybody. For one, this would impede Kelli's ability to be a good legislator when she eventually probably wins. --GW

In a message dated 10/18/2008 5:13:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Gww1210@aol.com writes:

You overlooked our campaign websites, but nonetheless, good job.

PS: I am also including comments about Linda and Kelli that were left out -to be fair and given them the credit they deserve.

RE: Link

RE: Stargel Faces Write-In's Smith, Watts, The Ledger, By ROBIN WILLIAMS ADAMS, Published: Friday, October 17, 2008 at 8:50 p.m.

The writer, Robin Williams-Adams, did a good job on this article, I think, except she could have mentioned the three candidates' websites -like she mentioned Dr. Smith's website in her prior article:

Dr. Smith's campaign site: Alton C. Smith | Florida House District 64 campaign Link
* Kelli's website is here: Vote Kelli Stargel Link
My websites are as follows:
* Gordon Wayne Watts for State Congress (main mirror) Link
* Gordon Wayne Watts for State Congress (alternate mirror) Link :-)

Also, if I mischaracterized Kelli's intents in my comments, this was unintentional; she did, in fact, ask me if I would run, but her motives may have simply been to close the primary on principle (not necessarily to benefit herself -after all, the results of closing the primary would have been impossible to predict) -since many on both sides of the isle prefer closed primaries.

She is a person of integrity. I've known her for years off and on, and I can tell you that she tries her best to be fast responsive to others' concerns.

Lastly, Linda Ivell, one of Kelli's friends, did indeed contribute to my campaign, and I was honest and reported as much, however it would be improper to say she is a bad person: Even after I had filed -and the matter was closed and done (no pun intended on "closed primaries"), nonetheless, one evening close to 1030 or 1045 pm, when I had trouble uploading my campaign report (I was new to this), I called Linda Ivell at home, and she did her dead-level best for about thirty minutes to help me, so I say this to illustrate she is a person of integrity and good character:

"Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught." ~quote from former U.S. Rep. J.C. Watts (R-OK)

All said an done, Dr. smith and I were willing "pawns" in this chess game: Mea culpa, I've admitted my role, which would normally be immoral and wrong -but I had good motives to illustrate and seek legislative change to close the loophole; however, what does that make the other players? Kelli would be the queen, Linda would be a rook or a castle, and the two candidates eliminated would be players on two other teams? -or, perhaps cheese pieces on the same team that were captured by the other side?

All three of us were participants (if that repulses you, you missed the motive), but all three of us are qualified -so get out there and vote!

I'm Gordon Wayne Watts, no doubt, a distant cousin of JC Watts, and I approve this message.

_______________________________________________________
** "Truth doesn't bend to the will of tyrants." ***GET TRUTH. *** Link / Link Gordon W. Watts, A.S., B.S., "Write-in" Candidate for Fla House of Representatives, Dist 64

Posts: 658 | Location: LAKELAND, "Imperial" Polk County, FLORIDA, U.S.A., Earth | Registered: 21 June 2008

Gordon Wayne Watts

821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113
(863) 688-9880

New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination. Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out!