Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
145 comments Add your comment
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 17th, 2009
6:50 am
Road builder paves way to Capitol clout
Matthews opposed basing new taxes for transportation on regional votes rather than a statewide referendum. Twice, the proposal has failed.
Matthews wanted the state to let private firms build public toll roads. The idea was approved.
Matthews criticized rail transit plans as too expensive. Those plans, already unpopular among lawmakers, stalled.-Urinal
Hmmmmm, Matthews was on the same side of the issue as all the other Republicans in Georgia, so there must be a nefarious plot!!
They don’t wanna raise taxes, why, that’s evil!
Andy the Troll
May 17th, 2009
7:21 am
Why am I not suprised?
ewwwwww
catlady
May 17th, 2009
7:21 am
There are at least 2 people up and posting too early on a Sunday. : )
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 17th, 2009
7:27 am
“It is clear that Notre Dame didn’t understand what it means to be Catholic when they issued this invitation,” Cardinal Francis George of Chicago said shortly after the university announced Obozo’s appearance.
Jenkins, who declined interview requests, has said Notre Dame does not support Obozo’s positions on issues regarding the protection of human life but that his appearance provides “a basis for further positive engagement.”-Urinal
Oh yeah, the Word of God is now subject to the whims of liberal focus groups, further positive engagement, yeesh.
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 17th, 2009
7:31 am
There are at least 2 people up and posting too early on a Sunday. : )
Cat- Are you and Andy the Pud Puller one in the same?
What is it with the Urinal, it’s 7:30 in the morning and they have not yet sent out their legions of illegals to toss off the litter box liner into my perfectly manicured flower garden, shall we call this a midday edition?
catlady
May 17th, 2009
7:40 am
TIC, as I am up and posting also.
jt
May 17th, 2009
8:03 am
Don’t miss the forest for the trees: a huge cascade of bad news over the past 95 years – from our needless entry into World War I to the Great Depression of the 1930s; from the war in Vietnam to the current implosion of your retirement fund – has its genesis in the greatest robbery ever conceived, much less carried out: the constant, ongoing redistribution of wealth from the ordinary Americans who create the wealth to a favored elite, via income taxation and fiat currency. The most productive and wealthiest nation to ever exist has been plundered into poverty right under our noses, and the plunder continues.
Redneck Convert
May 17th, 2009
8:14 am
Well, I see where they got a picture of this soldier fighting the Taliban in a pair of pink boxer shorts. And it give me a idea. We could take care of these punks that want to walk around with with their pants down around their hips and their underwear showing by making them wear pink shorts. You could bet they would have their waist up around their chest then.
I see where this Obama is going to give a speech at Notre Dame anyway, even though us Conservatives have raised a mighty ruckus about it. They arrested about 19 godly protesters last night. Sooner or later, if we kick up enough dust, they will have to get rid of somebody. Either Pelosi or Obama or maybe somebody Obama wants to put in his Cabinet. That’s the way you have to operate if you’re out in the wilderness. Just scream bloody murder if there’s something you don’t like and see if the other side will dump somebody. And if they don’t do anything we can start talking about breaking off and forming our own country again.
Seems to me the GA guvner’s race is boiling down to Oxendine or this cookie baker from Fulton County. Things have come down to a pretty pass when you’re left with a choice between a outright crook or the woman with the worst golf swing in GA. I was kind of hoping this Ray McBerry would catch on with people. He makes alot of sense, saying the income tax is illegal and all and states have the right not to follow a federal law they don’t like.
Anyhow, after the Rev. Postlewaite finishes jawing at us for awhile down at the Church of Holiness me and Jim Earl and Joe Bill are hoping we can get a round in down at Countryland Golf Club. But the weather don’t look too good for it. If we can’t, I reckon I’ll settle for taking the missus to Ryans and watching her put on the feed bag for a couple hours. Have a good Sabbath everybody. And if my enemas on this blog don’t like what I wrote, I reckon you know what part of me you can kiss.
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 17th, 2009
8:16 am
MEXICALI, Mexico — Census data from the Mexican government indicate an extraordinary decline in the number of Mexican immigrants going to the United States.-Urinal
It looks like they got the change they voted for.
bwa
I Report :-) / You Whine :-(
May 17th, 2009
8:31 am
As any consumer who has battled with a health insurer over a bill well knows, the Byzantine bureaucracy that determines payment may make sensible decisions about protecting the insurer’s quarterly profits, but those decisions don’t necessarily protect the patient’s health. Many insurers, for example, balk at paying for colonoscopies, the exam considered the gold standard for early detection of colon cancer. So a patient may decide to get a cheaper test that misses his cancerous polyps. A couple of years later, he’s battling colon cancer.-Queen Pinko, Urinal
Here’s the part where you ask for one single solitary example of the above moonbat scenario and then wait for the answer you never get.
And it’s like the government will just be an bottomless well of health care providing, no, they would never, never ration it, no way.
way
Paul
May 17th, 2009
8:36 am
Awwww nuts. I checked the tv Sunday news show listings and Spkr Pelosi’s not gonna be on one of them. I thought for sure after VP Cheney’s appearances she’d be chomping at the bit to get her message out and counter his credibility on every venue she could book.
Heard a great line from a guy interviewed on MSNBC “The CIA is not in the habit of calling in the heads of the Intelligence Committees to tell them what they’re NOT going to do.”
DB, Gwinnettian
May 17th, 2009
8:43 am
Paul, this Pelosi obsession of yours: have you thought about having it looked at?
The Professor
May 17th, 2009
8:49 am
Can someone, anyone help me here? In the Catholic faith is it wrong to support the death penalty? Is the sin of abortion bigger than the sin of the putting a person to death? If not….why did we not see the outrage when persons who support the death penalty were invited to speak at Notre Dame past commencements? It seems to me that politics has permeated all of this. Just makes you go hmmmm………….
DB, Gwinnettian
May 17th, 2009
9:01 am
Professor @ 8.49, I’m sure there might have been a time when politics didn’t play a role in the Roman Catholic Church (or any major denomination whose leadership and members a politician could ill afford to ignore) but I’d be hard pressed to name when that might have been.
Obviously, the RCC’s decision to allow some Cardinals to go after pro-choice politicians with an order of magnitude more ruthlessness and noise than they do pro-death penalty or pro-preemptive war folks is directly related to politics; in this case, those of Pope Benedict, who as Cardinal Ratzinger facilitated some right-wing bishop’s desires in 2004 to noisily declare they’d deny John Kerry communion if he were to seek it in their church.
Hope that helps.
Road Scholar
May 17th, 2009
9:04 am
Professor: You hit the nail on the head and drove it flat! Ah, Politics!
Whiner: And how pray tell, do you propose to pay for infrastructure improvements and maintenance, esp transportation ? Don’t infrastructure improvements improve our quality of life, reduce delay, increase dependability and safety, create jobs, and encourage commerce? The jobs and purchase of materials also increase tax revenues?
So,since you seem to have a comment on anything and everything, how do you propose to pay for infrastructure improvements? Please stay on topic.
Mrs. Godzilla
May 17th, 2009
9:05 am
Shifting the discussion:
http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/?id=2529356
And Frank Rich this morning:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/opinion/17rich-5.html
He opens: “TO paraphrase Al Pacino in “Godfather III,” just when we thought we were out, the Bush mob keeps pulling us back in. And will keep doing so. No matter how hard President Obama tries to turn the page on the previous administration, he can’t. Until there is true transparency and true accountability, revelations of that unresolved eight-year nightmare will keep raining down drip by drip, disrupting the new administration’s high ambitions.”
Taxpayer
May 17th, 2009
9:06 am
What we need is a more complete separation of church and state — a cutting of the umbilical cord. No more tax exemptions, for openers. By the way, how are those Catholics dealing with gays and pedophiles these days — Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?
Paul
May 17th, 2009
9:07 am
G’morning, DB, Gwinnettian!
Just doin’ a little pingin’. You know, all the Rep diehards who maintained, even years later, that we should’ve would’ve gone into Iraq anyway, even given new info? Kinda the same here, just wonderin’ if there are any diehard Dems out there who will say, ‘y’know, maybe all of Pelosi’s antiBushCheney torture condemnations, well, maybe… they possibly….. could’ve been….. ummmm… politically movivated….”
And, as usual, just looking for evidence that my conclusions may need revising.
Haven’t heard anything yet to cause me to reconsider.
So yeah, it can come across as an obsession to those obsessed with not acknowledging the implications of Democratic leadership actions over the past few years.
Later!
jt
May 17th, 2009
9:10 am
So my statement is clear, and let me read it again. Let me read it again. I’m sorry. I have to find the page. I was informed that the Department of Justice opinions had concluded that the use of enhanced interrogations was legal. The only mention of waterboarding was that the briefing — in the briefing was that it was not being employed. When — when — when my staff person — I’m sorry, the page is out of order — five months later, my staff person told me that there had been a briefing — informing that there had been a briefing and that a letter had been sent. I was not briefed on what was in that briefing; I was just informed that the briefing had taken place. So — so let’s get this straight.” –Nancy Pelosi
DB, Gwinnettian
May 17th, 2009
9:11 am
‘y’know, maybe all of Pelosi’s antiBushCheney torture condemnations, well, maybe… they possibly….. could’ve been….. ummmm… politically movivated….”
Paul, Speaker Pelosi is a politician with constituencies to satisfy (and, given the American funding system, for better or for worse, donors to placate.)
Accusing such a professional of being politically motivated is like accusing Babe Ruth of hitting home runs.
jt
May 17th, 2009
9:13 am
THE GIPPER
“Now, where do some of these attacks originate? They’re coming from the very people whose past policies, all done in the name of compassion, brought us the current recession. Their policies drove up inflation and interest rates, and their policies stifled incentive, creativity and halted the movement of the poor up the economic ladder. Some of their criticism is perfectly sincere. But let’s also understand that some of their criticism comes from those who have a vested interest in a permanent welfare constituency and in government programs that reinforce the dependency of our people. Well, I would suggest that no one should have a vested interest in poverty or dependency, that these tragedies must never be looked at as a source of votes for politicians or paychecks for bureaucrats. They are blights on our society that we must work to eliminate, not institutionalize.” –Ronald Reagan
RW-(the original)
May 17th, 2009
9:14 am
Yes Paul, you’ve got some nerve discussing the current speaker of the house and her twisting the truth into an unrecognizable hodgepodge this very week when you could be bleating about unnamed death penalty advocates speaking at Notre Dame.
As you can see all your bringing up the current news has gotten you is the blog nanny yapping at you while bringing up these unnamed death penalty advocates from some unnamed time has gained three cheerleaders including said nanny.
The Professor
May 17th, 2009
9:16 am
DB 9:01,
Thanks for the insight.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:16 am
I’m glad to see Redneck posting this morning – it seems ol’ Mike has a big huge problem with our Redneck friend.
I wish that Redneck would do a liberal parody. I’ve seen a couple people try and it’s just not as good. The thing that makes Redneck so good is he/she makes fun of himself and also the tone – it’s not hateful. The couple of times I’ve seen someone try and do liberal parody it just comes out as a hateful attack. The funniest one I saw was back during the Democratic convention when someone posted a time line/agenda of the Democratic Convention. Now that was funny.
The only two bloggers here that are true centrists are Paul and Hillbilly Deluxe. The rest of us are obviously biased, some aren’t as viscious, but we all show our political leanings.
Paul,
Of course it’s Pelosi’s attacks on Bush were politically motivated – she’s a politician – everything a politician does is politically motivated. Duh!
Professor,
Good observations this morning.
Off for more coffee…………..
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:19 am
RW,
They are good observations and things to think about. And they are pertinent to the current debate – just because YOU don’t think so -
By the way – are you Catholic?
Andy the Troll
May 17th, 2009
9:30 am
I’m just here waiting for an Andy outburst… Sundays are always the best because that’s when Andy (the most christian here among us besides Redneck Convert) posts things like or GFY or POS…
Actually I’m starting to suspect that Andy is really Jay B cutting and pasting clips from the GOP website just for fun.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:33 am
Good toon this morning Luckovich!
RW-(the original)
May 17th, 2009
9:33 am
Bosch,
I wouldn’t call an unnamed speaker from an undescribed time a pertinent observation. It’s actually the text book definition of a strawman.
I did once put some microphones above a choir loft in a Catholic Church. Scared the hell out of me when I was crawling through the ceiling and somebody cranked up the pipe organ. Does that make me a Catholic?
clyde
May 17th, 2009
9:34 am
Good to see that Redneck wasn’t frightened away.
Today is the day the bootleggers make their money.
Tomorrow all the suits and fine dresses are sent to the cleaners to be cleaned of the soup stains spilled at the lunch after church.Keep the economy strong anyway you can.
Andy the Troll
May 17th, 2009
9:34 am
Take Nancy Botox Pelosi, take her please… Drawn and quartered, disembowled, waterboarded, however you wish for her demise, it’s your choice… She deosn’t help the debate and she’s counterproductive to those of us who really want change, not just hope.
If only some of the wingbutternuts out there could say the same of some of thier own, but it’s ideological loyalty before loyalty to the country as a whole, therefore none of them see ANY problem with thier representation… at all…
ewwwwwwwww
Taxpayer
May 17th, 2009
9:37 am
That NYTimes piece was interesting, Mrs. G. So, good old boy Rumsfeld was playing GeeW’s religious beliefs like a banjo. He hit all the right chords with the verses from the Bible on those top-secret briefings. Well played. Then again, religious fanatics are such easy targets for users of the faith.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:40 am
RW,
We are smart enough to infer who those “unnamed speakers” were – the Gipper and daddy Bush. One thing I’ve always admired about the Catholic faith – at least from the Vatican – is consistency – now does it do them good to be so inflexible as the culture climate changes? I don’t think so, but I’m not Catholic. However, I’ve always admired that in the Pope’s positions – if you are going to be an advocate for “life” then be consistent.
I’m surprised you made it through the pipe organ ordeal – I don’t think that makes you Catholic, but it certainly should make you “friend of the church” at any rate.
The Professor
May 17th, 2009
9:41 am
RW @9:33,
Ronald Reagan 1981, George H.W. Bush 1992, and George W. Bush 2001.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:42 am
Taxpayer,
I’ll believe that GWB is a religious man when I see the Pope run naked through the streets of Rome. People like him use religion to pander to the voter masses.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:43 am
Professor,
Oh, sorry, forgot about GWB.
AmVet
May 17th, 2009
9:44 am
Bipartisanship?
President Obama reaches out and snags Jon Huntsmen.
From the SLC Tribune: “He has a deep passion for the Chinese culture and a background in Asian affairs that dates back to a Mormon mission he served from 1979 to 1981 in Taiwan where he learned to speak Mandarin Chinese.”
“As governor, Huntsman spoke out in favor of Tibetan independence and supported pro-Tibetan protests in San Francisco that threatened to block the Olympic torch relay on its way to the Beijing Olympics in 2008.”
“And he will inherit responsibility for a staggering array of issues — from climate change to nuclear proliferation, global security to trade.”
But perhaps as important as anything else at this juncture, he is a Republican.
From last night:
eagle, that info about Horsley was a GREAT read. We sure do have our share of the outright nutjobs here, don’t we?
RW, your description of MJK’s death was most macabre! Niiice…
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
9:45 am
AmVet,
He did that to take him out of the running in 2012. Now that he works for him he can keep an eye on him. Hehehehe…..politicians always put politics first.
eagle scout
May 17th, 2009
9:57 am
Frank Rich (NY Times) on the Bush Administration Crime Family………….
TO paraphrase Al Pacino in “Godfather III,” just when we thought we were out, the Bush mob keeps pulling us back in. And will keep doing so. No matter how hard President Obama tries to turn the page on the previous administration, he can’t. Until there is true transparency and true accountability, revelations of that unresolved eight-year nightmare will keep raining down drip by drip, disrupting the new administration’s high ambitions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/opinion/17rich-5.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
RW-(the original)
May 17th, 2009
9:58 am
The new Catechism of the Catholic Church reflects this tradition, stating that the death penalty is possible in cases of extreme gravity. However, the Catechism adds: “If bloodless means [that is, other than killing] are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person” (#2267). Clearly, then, the bishops’ opposition to the death penalty is in accord with universal Church teaching
RW-(the original)
May 17th, 2009
9:59 am
Oops!
Hit post before dropping the link.
Link thing
RW-(the original)
May 17th, 2009
10:02 am
Of course I prefer having coffee over the current edition of Pravda where I can find out that Las Vegas just had the world’s largest bikini parade.
@@
May 17th, 2009
10:02 am
Roman Catholic:
Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm-without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself-the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”
Now here’s how other “organized” religions weigh in.
Southern Baptists believe that when all reasonable doubt has been eliminated through due process, the death sentence shall be rendered unto Ceasar.
The United Methodists’ (of which I am a member) doctrine is about as liberal in their thinking as any denomination can get when it comes to human rights. No torture, no political prisoners, no invasion of privacy. For the same reason, they oppose capital punishment and urge its elimination from all criminal codes.
Now’s here’s the inconvenient truth that liberals refuse to accept. The various denominations are diverse in their opinions as are members within each denomination. To support the church hierarchy’s opinion is not mandated.
Independent thinkers in search of…
Nothing like how liberals portray us.
AmVet
May 17th, 2009
10:04 am
Bosch, I think I had read that somewhere. And I must admit I know next to nothing of this man’s politics, but given his current position, I have a pretty good idea.
So call me a cynic, but a sitting governor from Utah has about as much chance of appealing to the independents, moderates and centrists, who now more than ever, determine the outcome of these elections, as did Mitt the Flip-Flopper.
Given the train wreck they have become, it will be damned interesting to see who the GOP trots out to fill their “slate” next time. With The Manteats in Black at the de facto helm, I’m guessing its going to be another laughfest…
TW
May 17th, 2009
10:15 am
10:02 – how interesting that such an elaborate investigation into the Church would omit any mention of forgiveness?
Jesus Christ anybody? Anybody?
Sermon on the Mount? Anybody? Anybody?
Nah…gets in the way…
Curious Observer
May 17th, 2009
10:33 am
Please explain how a prisoner sentenced to life without parole is a threat to society. He will never be allowed to leave prison, and it’s doubtful he has the means to cause harm to anyone except fellow inmates and his guards.
Let’s call the death penalty what it is: revenge. People who support the death penalty like to talk about “getting justice,” but that’s merely a euphemism for revenge. As a society, we ought to be better than that. Other civilized countries have abolished the death penalty. We, on the other hand, have allied ourselves with such sterling representatives of democracy as China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Iran. This morning, millions of supporters of the death penalty sit in church pews, sanctimoniously congratulating themselves upon their moral superiority. Yet, they lust for the blood of those who have offended against their laws. The death penalty is pure revenge. The sooner its supporters acknowledge that, the more honest the debate can become.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
10:33 am
RW,
Nice newsletter article, but there’s other newsletter articles on the Internets to discount the author of your linked article’s position. So, do we do a googly search and find the actual Catholic catechism and search through to see what the church’s actual stance on death penalty is? I’m not so much into that this morning. If you are so inclined, knock yourself out.
I’ll stick by what I wrote earlier.
Bosch
May 17th, 2009
10:39 am
Curious Observer,
I support the death penalty, and the reason I do so is just that – revenge. It’s not something I’m particularly proud of in myself, but it is just that.
clyde
May 17th, 2009
10:49 am
The death penalty stops reoffenders dead in their tracks.
@@
May 17th, 2009
10:50 am
TW:
For the sake of argument, let’s set up a “hypothetical”. Not drawing from personal experience so keep your mind from wandering into the gutter.
Three sisters, same family. The oldest (12 y.o.) reveals that she has been molested by a neighbor, a family member, a perfect stranger. The perpetrator approaches the family seeking forgiveness. They do so forgive.
Later, the oldest again (now 13 y.o.) reveals that the molestation continues. Again, the molester returns asking for forgiveness. It is so given.
Years later, the second-born sister (8 y.o.) reveals that said molester (twice forgiven) has taken to molesting her. Forgiveness abounds yet again.
The third child (4 y.o.) is taken to the hospital. It’s determined that the 4 y.o. has been repeatedly raped by the forgiven perpetrator. She subsequently dies from internal injuries.
At this point in the hypothetical, who do you think should assume the responsibility of forgiveness?
RW-(the original)
May 17th, 2009
10:58 am
Bosch,
I’m not so inclined, but what I excerpted seemed to be the church catechism. They seem amenable to offing the most heinous of criminals, but they’re pretty steadfast in not doing it preemptively from the womb.
By the way, I’m not particularly fond of the death penalty the way it’s administered outside of Texas and Florida.