While I don't know Mr. Stansell, I do know Mike Stewart. Mike is an intelligent and pragmatic individual, and I know he will do a fine job as a state representative. Mike has said that he will no longer work at Waller Lansden should he win the election. While naturally this won't completely end his relationship with his law firm and his friends and colleagues there, I think it shows that Mike will try to be his own individual and represent his constituents the best he can. I encourage Pith readers who are potential Stewart voters to seek out Mike and meet him. I am confident you will come to know him as a capable and sincere public servant.

I am not the same man I was when I was 19 years old, not by a longshot. It seems downright silly for Stewart and his folks to come after Stansell for a single vote he cast in a primary when he was in high school. Next we'll hear about a hair pulling scandal in preschool. Come on.

The idea that Stewart's vow to quit Waller Lansden cleanses him of his current and extensive Republican connections is equally ridiculous. His Republican colleagues and contributors will soon be the same people lobbying him to make favorable decisions on behalf of their big money, big business interests to the detriment of Joe Q. Public. So according to Stewart's campaign, we are to pillory Stansell for one high school vote, but let Stewart slide for years of Republican activities as an adult, and his current affiliation with those same interests. Please.

I find Deacon's comment interesting because it seems to make the very point I and others have preached on this blog: that there is a problem with Mike Stewart's affiliations. Let me be clear, I think both Stansell and Stewart are Democrats. They have similar positions on the issues that are important to me. The main difference between them is their affiliations and the career path each has chosen. None of the Stewart supporters have argued that Stansell has done anything less than work hard for the consumers of Tennessee and try to protect them as an advocate at the department of Commerce and Insurance (notwithstanding this silly whisper campaign about Trip Assured; uh, last I checked, Mr. Stansell was not the head of the Department while he was there; I don't think he had the power or the authority to choose who to investigate).

On the other hand, Stewart has built his career advocating on behalf of big business interests. And it is only natural that Mike is going to take their calls, or at the very least he is going to take calls from the dozens of Waller attorneys and lobbyists that contributed to his campaign and represent those greedy corporate interests (even after Stewart leaves Waller; its only natural to take calls from people you acknowledge to be your friends and supporters).

Deacon, who seems to be a Stewart supporter, even acknowledges (perhaps inadvertently) that there is a problem with Stewart being both a state representative and being closely aligned with corporate interests. Otherwise, why would Deacon acknowledge that Stewart's choice to no longer work at Waller "shows that Mike will try to be his own individual and represent his constituents the best he can." The implication with that statement is that Mike cannot represent his constituents to the best of his ability with the current people (i.e. clients and co-workers) he currently affiliates himself with.

You know what...I agree with Deacon! That's why I'm supporting Stansell. There's no doubt he's looking out for the avergae voter of his district and with Stewart, it seems like there are always going to be lingering questions about his affiliations or whom he might feel beholden to after this race.

I had never really thought about it before until TN Dem mentioned it, but why would Stewart need to leave his job if he is elected? Is there something wrong with where he works? Is it not possible to work at Waller or with the people at Waller and still be ethical?

TD, I appreciate your point of view, but I think you misinterpreted my comments a bit. My point was more to the fact that Mike would not completely cease any type of relationship with his colleagues should he become state representative. If you were elected state representative, would you completely sever ties with the people you currently work with? Of course not. Some of the attorneys at Waller are probably Mike's friends. My point was more that I don't think it is fair to let someone's place of employment paint them in a specific way. We saw it in the last mayoral election; Mayor Dean used to be Public Defender, and some tried to paint him as being soft on crime or sympathetic to criminals. I personally think that is ridiculous. Because Mayor Dean was PD, is he going to deal people he used to represent the best ways to commit crimes in Nashville? Again, of course not. I think the same logic applies to Mike and Waller Lansden.

To the questions Judicious raised, I would answer "yes". It is possible to work at Waller or with its attorneys and still be ethical. I first have a problem with the stigma that Waller is some evil law firm, but more importantly Mike would quit Waller because he would want to devote the majority of his time being state representative. I would assume that a successful firm like Waller works its attorneys very hard and expects a great deal from them. Mike knows if he is elected he would not be able to keep his current work schedule and be an affective attorney at Waller, so he is choosing public service over his law career. I, for one, think that is very admirable. TD says, "The implication with that statement is that Mike cannot represent his constituents to the best of his ability with the current people (i.e. clients and co-workers) he currently affiliates himself with." I would say that is correct...not because the people Mike works with are nefarious, but because he would not be able to devote the full time and attention required to be a state representative and an attorney at Waller.

I'm sure we will have to agree to disagree, but I wanted to clear up any misinterpretation.

We saw it in the last mayoral election,

Actually, we didn't, which is what makes the Scene's current shilling all the more curious. The same civilization-threatening demons they're attacking in endless (and increasingly incredible) blog posts backed the candidate they endorsed last year. The Scene-presumed "conflict" apparently only exists when these writers want it to. There's a point at which the "Wait! Wait! Look! A SCANdal! becomes less like high-brow journalism and more like the high-pitched sound that little brothers make when they're not getting enough attention.

Even if I accept your point, 60% of Mike's supporters don't work for Waller, an ample majority. If you don't trust Lee & Weaver anymore, perhaps you might at least ask why it is that so many of the rest of us support Stewart? Maybe it's because he helped to organize our neighborhood long before East Nashville had any of its current cache? Or because he was integral to the rebuild after the tornado? Or because he's been active in local issues and a long-term advocate for District 52, well before he was a candidate? Or because of the immeasurable ways in which he and his wife have helped to make our community stronger, from their active involvement in their church to their years of service at the Cayce Homes? Unless his service to our community has been a part of an eighteen-year-long-vast-right-wing-conspiracy to bring a Republican-in-Democrat's-clothing to this House Seat, Mike's going to be an exceptional contributor to the House and an undoubtedly reliable representative for the residents in District 52.

Catherine, I called for a Waller ceasefire since we've done our part to shine a bright light on the shady conduct of a few of their more errant lawyers. In this regard, I think we have served Pith Nation well. I'm ready to move on.

But Woods won't listen to me. He won't listen to anyone. I can't control him and wouldn't deem to try.

I don't usually engage in a back and forth on an individual blog post. I like to make my point, let it stand, and simply let everyone else state their view as well. But Deacon makes some excellent points (some of which I agree with) which I think necessitate a little follow up.

First, I agree that Stewart would continue to have some type of relationship with the people at Waller. I agree, that's a natural result after working with the same people for so long. But that's exactly what concerns me. The lobbyists and attorneys at Waller represent companies that engage in heinous behavior and are paid to fight against certain positions and ideas that are important to me. It's only natural that Stewart would continue to have a relationship with those people and those people are going to have a higher level of access to Stewart as state rep than they would have with Stansell (e.g., I assume that his friends and contributors at Waller know how to reach Stewart 24 hours a day, meaning they will have a higher level access to him and ability to lobby their client's corporate interests to him much moreso than they would have access to Stansell).

Let me also be clear that I don't think Waller lobbying their corporate clients' interest to Stewart is in any way unethical. I'm a firm believer in the first amendment and that amendment protects the rights of lobbyists to speak on behalf of their clients. But just because I recognize that Waller's influence over Stewart may be perfectly ehtical and legal, it doesn't mean I like it. And it certainly is not what I want from a state rep.

Finally, Deacon, I do think you are wrong that Stewart will quit Waller out of concerns of having enough time to devote to legislative responsibilities. Stewart has stated, and been quoted in other media outlets, as saying he would leave Waller to avoid the appearance of impropriety. To suggest that Stewart would leave Waller because he would not have the time to devote to both tasks not only is differnet than Stewart's stated reason for leaving Waller, but it is also an insult to Stewart and every other hard working person to suggest that they are not capable of working hard at their job and also being committed to public service. I work 50+ hours per week and still find time to devote to charitable works and causes.

Deacon, your arguments are well stated. I appreciate your point of view. I just don't see why we would want to risk having a state rep that could potentially be influenced when there is an excellent Democratic alternative to vote for.

Catherine, I called for a Waller ceasefire... In this regard, I think we have served Pith Nation well. I'm ready to move on.

Got it, neighbor. Maybe you need to wear something a little lower cut? Show some leg? Distract the man already. Or just get the illustrator to draw your head bigger.

You know, there may be something else going on here-- the Scene is always in a better position, journalistically speaking anyway, when the less qualified candidate wins. It would make for a pretty boring epilogue to the last three years of District 52 coverage if the next guy turned out to be a solid, reliable, intelligent progressive. Maybe Woods just doesn't want Mike Stewart in office because he knows there won't be anything to complain about once he's there?

That sounds about right.

Here's a consolation: go ask Woods to beat up the guy who designed your captcha feature. It's lousy. "Airplane?" That's the best they could do? The programmer needs to be taken out the Woodshed.

Stansell, I mean Tennessee Democrat, a slaughter in this race not in your favor is inevitable but I feel confident that blogging on Pith is not the best use of your campaign time.

I found this post interesting:
http://mudwire.com/Home/tabid/36/EntryID/19/Default.aspx

I agree, Stansell is cute!

A pretty entertaining piece, Eastland, although I'd bet most residents of our district know that our councilman spells his name with at least one less vowel.

As for support from the blogosphere, I'll take Sean Braisted over Jon Crisp anyday:

http://seanbraisted.blogspot.com/2008/07/unions-vote-stewart.html

(BTW, I'm typing "airplane" again to post this. Seriously, Woods, can you take care of that?)

Sure didn't look like Braisted was endorsing anyone from what I read. Having spoken to Sean about this race, he's too smart to go either way publicly. I'm sure he'll read this and I hope he'll speak for himself in saying he was reporting on the blog you posted, not stating his personal opinion about either candidate.

As for the mudwire piece, Catherine, it also reported facts. What in it was inaccurate? The Belle Meade crowd loves Stewart. Is that not true?

Also, the idea that Stewart moved to East Nashville before it had cache is just plain wrong. As a lifelong resident, I remember when East Nashville was scary and when it became cool for the newly rich. It was the new cool thing by '96. I guess Catherine is one of the Green Hills Stewart supporters because she doesn't seem to know East Nashville very well. By the way, Stansell lives in a part of East Nashville that would not be considered uber trendy today, let alone 12 years ago. Stansell lives like the majority of the people he will represent.

In this post, Braisted says he would pick Stansell over Stewart. I think I'll take Braisted and Crisp.

http://seanbraisted.blogspot.com/2008/06/guilt-by-association.html

If all things are equal, I generally just root for the underdog, 'tis the way of a Buffalo Bills fan. Stewart and Stansell both have their positive qualities, and both have some downsides. Either way, the district will be well represented come next year.

Hopefully, some organization will sponsor a debate/forum (maybe there already have been...haven't heard of any) so that we can get past talking about who supports whom and get down to what these candidates want to do with their position.

This Saturday morning. 9:30. East Precinct on Trinity Lane. Debate between the two.

Heh, fat chance in hell. Lemme qualify my previous statement by saying I hope there is a debate that isn't held at 9:30AM the day after the 4th of July.

You outed me. I've lived in Green Hills most of my adult life. Never crossed the river. Nope. Never been to the East Side. Nope. Nope. Never. If they don't sell it at the Green Hills Mall, I have no use for it at all. In fact, I even buy my drawer pulls at Anthropologie. Thank god for the Nashville Scene or I would never know anything at all about East Nashville and wouldn't be able to pretend to be from there in order to continue to post to this entertaining repartee.

Snore. Once the anonymous posters start making personal attacks, there's little left of use to discuss. I'm going back to the lake.

Typing "airplane" again, btw.

If Stewart's campaign does their homework they will find enough information to have Stansell disbarred based on his work at the TDCI with Trip Assured.

Ok, 40% of Stewart's contributions came from his big corporate law firm? I'm from Tennessee, and I know you gotta dance with who brung you. And so my vote goes to Stansell.