Comments from Lucy Baxley to her supporters:

"I want to start by telling you how grateful I am for the support that you gave me at the polls on Tuesday.  It has been truly humbling to see so many people work so hard on my behalf; our victory last night was just the beginning.

"For the next 5 months I will fight for the values that unite all Alabamians. During my travels across the state, I have seen folks struggling with escalating health care costs, a deterioration of discipline in the classroom, and a dwindling trust in state government.  We will answer these concerns and give people hope that their state government will once again work for them. 
 
"Now we start anew and I need your help to complete our vision for a better Alabama . . . Together we can bring greater support to small businesses, deliver quality education for all our children, and restore honesty and integrity to state government....
 
"Today is a great day in Alabama and tomorrow will be even better, together we can and will move forward."
 

thanks for the update....

Thank you, Glynn!

You are the only news source to notice that I received more votes than any other candidate - it must be helpful for certain newspapers, reporters and individuals to attack me. Just spell my name correctly, right?

On to November...

Nancy Worley
Secretary of State

Did anyone see or hear Ed Packard speak? Man, I'd just love to be a fly on the wall in that office one day.

HOORAY FOR NANCY!!!

Ron Florence

It is utterly astounding that a kook like Larry Darby, a self-avowed Holocaust denier, garnered 47 percent of all Democratic votes cast statewide.

Second, that he was allowed access to the Democratic ticket as a candidate bothers me just as much, if not more. What does that say about our executive leadership and rules?

Kevin L. Bardon
BardonK@uah.edu

I e-mailed Joe Turnham about this when the AP story came out, and he addressed the issue the night before the election on Alabama Public Television's "For The Record."

The decision was made not to decertify Darby because he is a lawyer and could have made legal hay out of the party's decision. It must have been the right decision, because he lost the race...

Thanks Glynn and keep up the good work. We are going to beat Bob Riley in November.

Deryl Whittle
Jefferson County

It is astonishing to me that "THE PEOPLE" can vote for candidates who are wallowing in money paid to them by special interests knowing that those people are bought and paid for and they will not look out for the "common man".

I suspect ANY Democrat will be more likely to look out for the "common man" or woman far more than ANY Republican, so it is important to vote for Democrats who can WIN elections.

What is puzzling about voters in states like Alabama is that average workers have been brain washed into thinking the Republican Party has their interests in mind.

How does it serve their financial interest for Bush to bash gays and talk about prayer in public while he promotes cutting taxes on the rich, fights unnecessary wars and runs up massive deficits and the national debt?

He talks about democracy in Iraq and destroys it here at home with the illegal domestic spying program. Meanwhile back in Montgomery, the politicians take the homeland security grant money to protect Alabama's cows and chickens, with no questions asked.

Here's a fact you will not see reported on local commercial TV news or played prominently in the local corporate newspapers.

On Alabama Public Television's "For The Record" last night, the Democrat in charge of the Alabama Agriculture Department said something astonishing. If only the Republicans would roll back the embargo on trade with Cuba, the Alabama economy would boom.

Where does Gov. Bob Riley stand on that? With Bush of course, and the South Florida Cuban mafia money. Where does Sen. Jeff Sessions stand on that? He made a speech against illegal immigrants and even had an op/ed piece in the Washington Post the other day on that subject. Where does Sen. Richard Shelby stand?

He's in hiding waiting for the shoe to drop on the FBI investigation on leaks to the press.

What is critical now is that all the Siegelman Democrats get onboard with Lucy Baxley's campaign - that is if you want to stop the Republicans from totally taking over this state.

We know you all love Don Siegelman, although that is still a mystery to me. But do you love your state? Can you now bring yourself to get as fired up about supporting the Democratic Party ticket in November?

Or will you let Karl Rove and the corporate special interests control your lives in perpetuity?

Get smart people. Support Lucy.

OK, Reverend Wilson. Count me in. I LOVE LUCY!

Not sure about this backwater excuse for a state though. I do wish folks who work by the hour would wise up.

How can they wise up if the press in this state will not do their jobs and keep people informed?

We need a technology initiative in this state to educate people about other ways to stay informed besides watching the local commercial Christian television news shows and reading the "family" newspapers.

Public Television does a good job of covering some things, but average people in Alabama don't seem to know it exists.

Talk radio is just pitiful around here. We have been trying to get a show on the air, and we will keep trying until we find the sponsorships to do it.

And we will keep blogging and trying to get other Web developers to tip people off about the blogs, and hope the press does more to cover this growing phenomenon.

Candidates for public office in Alabama should develop better Web sites and also educate at least the active public here about getting and exchanging information through blogs.

The national Democrats are all over this technology. It is the primary means of communication in New York, Washington, and on the West Coast.

WAKE UP ALABAMA!

To the editor:

Say it ain't so. Please say it ain't so.

A white racist, holocaust denying, immigrant hating, atheist just won almost 44% of the vote for Alabama Attorney General in the Democratic Primary!?

No this is not Germany in 1933, but the United States in 2006. What is going on?

Well, always the optimist, I don't think it is because almost half of the Democratic Party is a fascist gang intent on taking over the state. At least I hope not.

No, it's because almost half the Democrats who voted (a minority at that) went into the voting booth without any idea as to who was running or who they are. Incredible, but true!

It seems that his opponent, the very qualified and decent John Tyson, did not advertise on television, assuming that the Democratic voters could find out who the candidates were by reading. Obviously, the Democratic voters, and I am one, didn't bother turning off their TV sets and reading the papers.

So almost half of us went into the voting places and voted in ignorance.

But why Larry Darby? Because his name begins with a "D" while Tyson's begins with a "T." And we alphabetize the names on the ballot. So nearly 50% just voted for the first one and proudly said they had done their civic duty by voting.

Clearly, or public schools did their job by teaching us the alphabet. But we certainly didn't learn to read, did we?

I hope that Nancy Worley, our able Secretary of State whose last name begins with a very dangerous "W," will save us from ourselves by randomizing the names on the ballot.

But that will be a difficult task. All those state legislators whose names begin with alphabet-friendly letters will object. After all, what do you think got them elected.

Come on, Nancy, the future of Alabama is in your hands. We may never learn to read, but at least we can have an even chance at voting intelligently (or looking as if we are).

Jack Zylman
Southside, Birmingham

Hey Jack - You forgot to mention blogs.

The people in this state could have known about Darby by reading The Locust Fork News and Blog. We wrote about it days before the election and linked to the Southern Poverty Law Center report on Darby the racist.

I also wrote a column urging people to only vote in races in which they were informed about the candidates, instead of blindly voting for names on a ballot.

I suspect you are to some extent right about this, although it's not the entire story. Darby had e-mailed me a couple of weeks before the election saying he was finding a lot of sympathizers out there in Alabama who still long for the days of racial seperation. I think he had a few key supporters from his campaign who were left over from the old Wallace machine.

Maybe you don't encounter this blatant racism down there on Southside, but I see it everyday in the suburbs.

And don't forget. Bush and the Republicans know they can count on this vote in EVERY election, and they don't even have to say anything lilke "segregation forever." Just a few code words will do, such as "liberal judges."

So don't be naive. Darby's voters may be ignorant, but not all of them were that ignorant. They voted for the openly racist candidate.

I just received this by e-mail, way after the fact.

I had contacted Democratic Party chair Joe Turnham and asked him to keep me informed on this, but he never sent this to us. The Democratic Party needs to get online and into the 21st century on the use of technology, and recognize that some of the best journalists operating in this state and country publish online.

Statement From the Alabama Democratic Party on Larry Darby

The following statement is being made after the party learned two weeks ago of the recent bizarre and offensive positions, philosophy and actions of Mr. Larry Darby, a candidate who qualified for Attorney General. Our state party has received numerous complaints, press inquiry and correspondence from individuals and organizations.

The state party has conducted an internal review of Mr. Darby’s candidacy in light of his most recent declarations. We have consulted executive officers of our state committee as well as our legal counsel.

Mr. Darby’s comments have included: the denial of the Holocaust and the death of millions of Jews by genocide and remarks hurtful to many Jewish families; his intent to use his authority to call for martial law; instructing law enforcement to shoot illegal immigrants on sight, and his public association with groups tied to racism, since becoming a candidate.

The views he espouses were not known to party officials at the time of his qualification for the office and no formal challenge was made within the time frame set by our bylaws. The Alabama Democratic Party respects the free speech of our candidates to the fullest extent possible; however, his views and associations are absolutely not consistent with the principles and values of the Alabama Democratic Party and are offensive, dangerous and bring into question whether he should remain on our ballot.

After full due diligence on the party’s part, our legal counsel has advised us against taking action to remove him from the ballot at this time. Absentee ballots are currently being cast and the ballots for most counties are already printed. The party retains its rights with respect to its own bylaws and the statutes of election law in Alabama to protect its interests and the interests of Alabama voters to the fullest extent in the days ahead on this matter.

Party Chairman Joe Turnham advises all Democratic primary voters to be aware of Mr. Darby’s comments and to study fully the credentials, qualifications, and statements of all primary candidates before casting a ballot. Democrats voting in the June 6th Primary Election and should know that Mr. Darby’s comments are not reflective of this party, its platform or its principles.

Unfortunately, the other message on this issue from Jack Zylman is correct:  in a field of unknowns, the candidates at or near the top of the list fair better than those farther down.

I don't think randomly assigning the order solves the problem since someone will always be at the top of the ticket.  The fact that Darby got as many votes as he did is the result of a combination of problems. First, the Party should have been more aggressive in spreading the word about this guy. Merely issuing a "statement" just doesn't cut it these days.

Second, despite the fact that it may have been an uphill battle, I think the party should have taken whatever steps necessary to get him off the ballot. A conservative, safe approach on this issue was not the way to go. Even if the effort had ultimatley failed, which under the circumstances I am not sure would have been the case, the publicity genreated by the effort would have raised the awareness of Darby's outlandish views with the public.

Third, it seems that Tyson took this win for granted and saved his money. Hindsight is always 20/20, but that was obviously a mistake.

Finally, some fault has to lie with ADC for not endorsing Tyson simply because of a prosecution in Mobile that some in ADC were upset with. John is a good man, a good public servant and can be a great Attorney General.  Unfortunately, he is now finds himself having to defend only getting 56% of the vote against someone like Darby while the Republican incumbent, who has never been a trial attorney or prosecutor before he was appointed, coasted to an easy win against a well lnown opponent.  We have to do a better job of protecting the Party from ourselves.
 
Doug Jones
DJONES@whatleydrake.com

My own thoughts on the Darby fiasco is that the party did the right thing. I think it would set a bad precedent for us to have kicked Darby off. If we kick him off what do we do with Harry Lyon who called for the death penalty for illegal immigrants or the inevitable county commission candidate who says or does something offensive. Darby is a fringe candidate with no base, no money, and no real support. Going through a drawn out process to kick him off would have just given him more publicity and a bigger platfrom from which to spew his hate. Also, we'd get some backlash from editorial writers or the ACLU for infringing on his right to run.

I think the place to deal with Darby was at the ballot box. And while it's a shame he got 43% of the vote, I think the reasons are pretty practical. In addition to the one's I've seen discussed publicly (low name Id for both, Darby listed first on the ballot, etc) I think the news stories about Darby in the weeks before the primary served to increase his name ID without really leaving a lasting impression of the extremism of his views. Also, I am sure Tyson wishes he'd beaten Darby more decisively, but Darby was never a threat to actually get the nomination. Sure Tyson could have 150K on some ads to run up the score, but he'll need that money to get his message out against Troy King who will have access to plenty of money.

Those are my personal thoughts on the Darby matter and I think that most of the post primary coverage of Darby has been done for either sensationalism or ignorace.

Zac McCrary
Communications Director
Alabama Democratic Party