Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > March > 21 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USLights, camera: Actors to their places!
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Ah, the good old days of House Speaker Tom Murphy and Lt. Gov. Zell Miller are back — that era when at some crucial time, one or the other would lock down provoking a momentary crisis in the legislative process. Tuesday was the 29th legislative day of the 40-day session, meaning that one day remains for the originating body to pass its legislation over to the other. Presumably, legislation that doesn’t make it over by the 30th day is dead for the session — though in some cases, language from “dead” bills can be attached to other bills.
Tuesday was significant because the House just passed its “supplemental” budget for last year — the budget originally intended to make adjustments to last year’s spending. The main budget has not passed yet.
The House chose to add a dash of pork to the supplemental and to include some of Gov. Sonny Perdue’s new legislative priorities, like his “Go Fish Georgia” initiative. On the day the supplemental passed, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle informed the House that the Senate wants a clean supplemental budget, one that addresses emergencies and adjustments. Thus started the Miller-Murphy moment.
The Senate is right — right in two ways. One is that the supplemental should be for fleshing out last year’s spending and nothing more. The other is that, as presumed fiscal conservatives, Republicans shouldn’t be pouring in the pork — special approporiations for the golf and other halls of fame, for example.
Two or three useful bills did “cross-over” Tuesday. One would take 75 percent of the revenues from red-light cameras, after paying for equipment and maintenance, and divert it to the state for funding a trauma network. That’s next best to banning them altogether. It reduces the incentive for cities and counties to use traffic cameras as a revenue tool. One Cobb County intersection, at Windy Hill Road and Cobb Parkway, generates $1.7 million in revenue to Marietta.
The other bill that passed the House would allow judges to impose the death penalty — or some other — when 10 of 12 jurors agree on capital punishment. Now the decision has to be unanimous. Some jurors deceive prosecutors by hiding their opposition to the death penalty — and then simply refuse to agree, no matter the crime. A unanimous jury would still be required for conviction. The bill now goes to the Senate.
The budget standoff may sound like a crisis. But sit tight. Been there, done that. Miller and Murhphy work it out eventually.
Comments
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. I’ve spent a little time watching a state legislature, in another state, and it is truly entertaining. It helps to know what the “in-games” are, as highlighted in Jim’s essay today. State legislatures are populated with interesting characters, maybe “quirky” is the right term. Those of you who have never had an opportunity to watch the legislature in action ought to make the effort, once or twice anyway.
On to the substance: sounds like our house republicans did not learn anything from the national elections last November. The American public is not hostile to our military action in Iraq (and that is (1) why the democrats were so quiet on the subject last fall, and (2) why they will not take any honest action against the war); the republicans were fired for uncontrolled earmarks. While I chastise our state republicans as slow learners, our national democrats are seemingly worse than the bunch the electorate fired last fall (although I doubt that many of us are surprised.)
I like the action on the red light cameras. I’m not entirely certain how I feel about the death penalty vote; if I had more confidence in the judgment of our prosecutors, I would likely support the change.
By TW
March 21, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
Memo to the bush admin – coaches with losing records are not afforded the luxury of a closed door practice.
By JoeD
March 21, 2007 9:05 AM | Link to this
I have to disagree on the death penalty bill. It creates a slippery slope that will be tough to navigate. Our judicial system does just fine as it is, requiring a unanimous jury for all decisions. To allow a non-unanimous vote for the most serious penalty this state can inflict just seems un-American. Let’s leave things the way they are. Yes, there are bad decisions by juries from time to time, but for the most part, they get it right. If you change the law every time a decision comes down opposite to how you feel it should, you’ll be changing the law monthly or weekly.
By CJ
March 21, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this
The death penalty bill that Jim is referring to is shameful. As great as our system of justice is, it’s far from perfect. In fact, two days ago Georgia’s House of Representatives approved $1.2 million to compensate a man who was imprisoned for 23 years for a rape he didn’t commit. Texas Governor Rick Perry recently pardoned a man who had spent more than 10 years in prison and 13 years on parole for a rape he didn’t commit.
In fact, people are frequently convicted of crimes they haven’t committed because of unreliable eyewitnesses, oversights in crime labs, false confessions and other reasons. With advances in DNA science, many wrongful convictions (including death row convictions) have been overturned. Unfortunately, DNA evidence isn’t properly preserved in thousands of cases (or was never taken in the first place), and as a result, many who were wrongfully convicted will never have an opportunity to prove their innocence.
Statistics tell us that people have been and continue to be convicted, and executed, for crimes they didn’t commit. It’s sad and ironic that the same week that the House voted to compensate an innocent man for his years in prison, the same legislators would make it easier to impose the death penalty.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 9:39 AM | Link to this
So the gutless hysterical lying eco-nutter TN slumlord and vainglorious supreme inventor of the internet alBore is predicktably refusing to hand over his congressional testimony lies and distortions *before he pukes it up “live”, so NO ONE can actually fact check it.
These global whining liars and distorters are obviously running scared. They can’t take logical, rational, factual criticism, so unsurprisingly they attempt to intimidate and bully and screech - or just refuse to be open and honest -like good little brownshirted fascists if anyone reasonably demands to actually critique their distortions and factual inaccuracies.
Albore’s worthless carbon credits scam is just another way to fleece either doltish or supremely naive eco-nutters and make very sleazy money for the alBOre. Though this scam is not quite outright ILLEGAL as in the Bhuddist Temple fundraising scam the alBOre lied under oath like a Klinton under oath about!!
By MoH4U
March 21, 2007 9:46 AM | Link to this
The bill to allow judges to impose the death penalty is nothing more than racial pandering to whites and legalized genocide of minorites jailed by a white judicial system. Who runs this state? White Republicans that’s who. Who votes them in? White Republicans that’s who. Who makes the laws? Who enforces them? Who runs the courts? White Republicans. White Republicans. White Republicans.
White Republicans may think they “ring the bell” now, but the tide is turning across the nation and the results can be seen in Washington, in New Orleans, in New York City, Los Angeles, Baghdad, Palestine, Somalia, and elsewhere.
The PEOPLE will rise and take back the institutions of justice, equality, and equity in the assets of this state and they will be fairly distributed to those in need instead those who lead through greed. We already have Sonny’s Barbecue.
We don’t need more of Gov. Sonny’s pork for the privileged
By harold
March 21, 2007 9:46 AM | Link to this
if “10 of 12 jurors agree on capital punishment” is enough then Harold will take a non-jury trial from a judge.
5 out of 6 people are f-ing morons.
you need all 12 people so the one statistically present smart person has to vote for it.
supposing “12 angry men” only had to have 10 angry men? not much of a play is it?
there should be no death penalty imposed by the state. sentence them to life and let the other prisoners kill the ones who truly deserve it
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 9:54 AM | Link to this
WHY DOES IDIOT SUNNI PERDUE WANT “Go Fish Georgia initiative?”
IS IDIOT SUNNI PERDIE TOO IGNORNANT TO KNOW HIS PRESIDENT BUSH WILL NOT SUPPORT A FISHING EXPEDITION?
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this
TFTT,
Was that you on the other side of the glory hole yesterday? I looked down and noticed that whomever it was was wearing cherry lipstick.
Doom praises TFTT for a pleasurable experience.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this
So the damn Germans, not content with the genocide of countless millions of innocent folks, including commies and homosexuals, now want to euthanise a young cuddly polar bear cub. Unsurprisingly its eco-wacko animal rights activists that are leading this despicable charge.
This is how the left behave folks - they’re as sick as the nazis and murderous commies … like Castro, Lenin, Mao, Mengistu, Comrade Mugabe, Stalin, Krushchev, Putin, Brezhnev, Dung, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot …
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 10:00 AM | Link to this
HOW ABOUT “take 75 percent of the revenues from red-light cameras” AND KEEP IT BACK IN THE POCKETS OF THE VICTIMS OF THE REVENUERS BY ADDING COUNTDOWN TIMERS TO ALL THESE INTERSECTIONS?
THEN ONLY THOSE WHO TRULY DESERVE A TICKET WILL GET ONE. THERE WILL BE NO “MICROSECOND AND A FLASH” DIFFERENCE THAT HAPPENS AT “GUESS” TIME AFTER YELLOW
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
March 21, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this
Hi Jim,
This is off topic, but you’ve just got to read this quote below from GW. It’s sooooo funny. I had to laugh.
“We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants,” Bush said Tuesday. “The initial response by Democrats, unfortunately, shows that some are more interested in scoring political points than in understanding the facts…
What’s funny about this is that this is politics. Ironic, huh? GW’s excuse in firing those attorneys is that it’s his political discretion to do so.
But here he is, basically saying that he won’t tolerate “politics”.
What about that 8 year fishing expedition that the GOP led in trying to bring Clinton down? By no means take that as my endorsement of Clinton. I just seem to remember that the GOP engaged in these very same tactics ad nauseum.
It’s just so strange to me how when stuff like this suits the GOP’s purpose, it’s noble. But when it harms the cause, it’s undignified.
Ok. On with your simple minded bashing of folks who don’t think like you.
By Smitty Werbenjagermanjensen
March 21, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this
Richardson and Cagle make a good Murphy and Miller. Richardson/Murphy, both egomanical, pea-brain toads. Cagle/Miller pragmatic populists.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this
HA HA HA HA … HA HA HA HA HA ….
So the gutless scumbag alBOre runs away from hearing ANY opposing point of view … like a despicable moral fascist this bloated global whining turd cowers like a terrified child caught in a tissue of lies.
Just TWO ultra cowardly HOURS before this ecoturd is supposed to puke up its eco-wacko lies and distortions is when the GOP get his transcript of hysterical lies!! 7am the morning of the testimony. He’s terrified of ANY criticism or logical critique!!
Now we see what a corrupt pu$$y the alBOre truly is!!
LMFAO!!
By One sweet day ...
March 21, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this
… time for the truth will sign on for the last time using the screen name time for suicide.
Well, I guy can hope can’t he?
By JK
March 21, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this
JaCP, I was just thinking the same thing. Why is Bush “fighting subpoenas” if there’s nothing to hide? Weren’t his cheerleaders so outraged at hiding important information that they dragged a sitting President into deposition, under oath, to testify as the the whereabouts of his private member? But now subpeonas are to be resisted and fought because…. Um…. WHY are they refusing to answer questions under oath again? Surely they’re not hiding anything unseemly! Perhaps some paragon of wisdom on this board can break it down for us.
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
Wow. Although I seldom agree with you guys, both JoeD and CJ present concise, thoughtful arguments this morning. Great posts!
Harold, how can you call people that run the red lights the “victims”? Have you ever seen the debacle that goes on at Windy Hill and 41, or at the Windy Hill exit, southbound 75? After the light turns red at least 5-6 cars go through. Those folks should pay a fine. Period.
I think I like the idea that we shouldn’t need a unanimous vote for the death penalty, but if I had to choose only one way to improve the process, I would rather see the number of appeals, and the time it takes to impose sentance go down. It’s ridiculous that death penalty recipients sit for 10 to 20 years on death row. If convicted, they should get 1 appeal, take care of it within a year, then it’s time for a ride on ole sparky……
By JoeD
March 21, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
JK, you will have to wait a few days. Jim Wooten is cooking up some cockamamie defense of the Loyal Bushie Army and will be printing it soon. But surely you don’t think that the possible imposition of politics on an independent branch of the government is as important as where President Clinton dipped his pen, do you?
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 10:23 AM | Link to this
THEY WANT WARRANTLESS WIRETAPS AND HOME INVASIONS BECAUSE YOU HAVE IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR
BUT THEY DO NOW WANT LEGAL SUBPOENAS? WHY NOT? BY THEIR OWN LOGIC AND RULESET THERE IS NOTHING TO FEAR! WELL, UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING TO HIDE, HMM?
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this
@ one big leftist turd
I see intellectually dishonest wankers like YOU cannot tolerate legitimate factual criticism of the bloated ecoturd alBOre.
Why can’t you lefties actually be HONEST for once??!!
Surely any fair minded person would utterly condemn the alBOre for:
Refusing to politely and respectfully listen to ANY opposing point of views,
REfusing to hand over a printed copy of one’s pathetic hysterical global whining distortions and lies - as JUST ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE in the USA DOES at least a couple of days before congressional testimony - until the dead of night the night before. 1am was when the demoNcrats got it - 7am the morning of the hearing was when the GOP House members got it!!
Lying and hysterically distorting very selective facts that simply do NOT prove the ecoturds global whining lies!!
Bullying and intimidating anyone who disagrees with the hysterical ecoturds.
What does the alBOre have to hide??!!
Talking of suicide AS YOU DID - when can we expect a long overdue much grander scale modern day liberal demoNcrat People’s Temple kool aid type event??? …huge smirk
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 10:29 AM | Link to this
EASY BARBARA, THERE ARE PLENTY OF “VICTIMS.” THAT YELLOW LIGHT IS THE SHORTEST AROUND. ASSUMING NORMAL STANDARDS OF YELLOW LIGHT LENGTHS AT OTHER INTERSECTIONS, YOU MAY WELL GET A TICKET. THE PROBLEM IS THAT IF THE LIGHT TURNS YELLOW AS YOU APPROACH THE INTERSECTION YOU MUST GUESS WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN MAKE IT THRU LEGALLY. IF YOU GUESS WRONG BY A SINGLE MICROSECOND YOU GET A TICKET FOR $80 IN THE MAIL. HOWEVER, HOW LONG IS THE YELLOW? WHO KNOWS! YOU HAVE TO GUESS! WITH A COUNTDOWN TIMER THERE WOULD BE NO GUESSWORK AND THUS NO VICTIMS OF BAD GUESSWORK. THE GOVT SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TICKET YOU FOR BAD SPATIAL GUESSWORK. WITH A COUNTDOWN TIMER THERE IS NO GUESSWORK. HOW ABOUT ATLANTA RD AND DELK RD? DONT YOU LIKE SEEING THAT TIMER AND KNOWING YOU HAVE 25+ SECONDS? NO WORRIES ABOUT IF THE LIGHT WILL TURN YELLOW IN THE NEXT SPLIT SECOND. THAT WAY YOU CAN KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE TRAFFIC INSTEAD OF ON THE LIGHT. THE TIMERS MAKE THE INTERSECTION FAR SAFER BY REMOVING THE WORRY OF LOOKING UP AT THE SIGNALS INSTEAD OF AT PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES AND OTHER CARS. EVERY MAJOR INTERSECTION SHOULD HAVE RED LIGHT TIMERS, NOT JUST THE CAMERA INTERSECTIONS. THEIR ABSENCE IS TANTAMOUNT TO WILLFUL MURDER OF US CITIZENS BY OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 10:33 AM | Link to this
HUGE deeply SATISFIED I HATE eco-whackos smirk
Well now … given that the albOre like a typical arrogant moral fascist refused to listen to GOP criticism of his global whining bollocks this morning, no one is listening to him … his opening drivel is hilariously being completely ignored by all the cable news networks including C-SPAN.
For JUST once EVEN the DAMN liberals are doing the decent, proper thing!!
LMFAO!!
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this
Sorry Harold; not buying it. Yellow means “hey, the light is about to turn red. If you’re not in the intersection, STOP.” The people who run the red light at Windy Hill aren’t even moving when the light turns yellow, and are well behind the stop marker. They just don’t want to wait the 1-2 minutes before they get a green light. Your life is worth so much more than getting somewhere 1-2 minutes faster. Slow down, enjoy, and live longer.
By One sweet day ...
March 21, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this
Oh, were you writing about Al Gore today? Hadn’t noticed. It’s just annoying having to scroll past your many, long, rambling, incoherent posts to get to the good ones. And actually, I’m a right wing turd. Please die.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this
Please die.
RIGHT BACK AT YA leftistturd!!
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this
BARBARA WHAT IS THE BRAKING DISTANCE FOR YOUR CAR AT 45 MPH THE SPEED LIMIT ON 41 AND WINDY HILL? HOW MANY SECONDS DOES THAT TAKE? WHAT IF THE PAVEMENT IS WET? HOW LONG IS THE YELLOW? IS IT THE SAME LENGTH 24 HOURS PER DAY? HAROLD BETS YOU CANT ANSWER ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS. IF YOUR CAR TAKE 4 SECONDS TO GO FROM 45 TO 0 AND YOU ARE 125 FEET FROM THE BALK LINE WHEN YOU NOTICE THE LIGHT TURNED YELLOW AT SOME POINT BUT YOU DONT KNOW PRECISELY WHEN UNLESS YOU WERE STARING AT IT, DO YOU STOP OR PROCEED? BARBARA WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH A COUNTDOWN TIMER? THEY IMPROVE SAFETY AND GIVE YOU A MUCH BETTER IDEA ABOUT HOW LONG YOU HAVE UNTIL THE LIGHT TURNS RED. RED LIGHT CAMERAS ARE A GOOD THING BUT THEY SHOULD ONLY TARGET THOSE WHO TRULY, KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY RUN THE RED LIGHT.
BARABARA YOU MUST DRIVE THRU THAT INTERSECTION ON WINDY HILL. HARODL DRIVES THRU ON 41. HAROLD IS NORMALLY GOING BETWEEN 40 AND 60, SO HAROLD HAS A DIFFERENT TAKE. IF YOU ARE ON WINDY HILL YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING 5 TO 10 MPH AND IT IS MUCH EASIER TO DECIDE TO STOP OR GO.
By One sweet day ...
March 21, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this
No, really, I’m a conservative Republican. Card carrying. An office holder. And you are an insane nut job. Have a nice life, but please, not too long a one.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this
@ one big leftist turd
its freaking hilarious to see that you simply can’t debate the BIG ISSUE of the day.
The alBOre is gonna ripped apart by the GOP later today on live TV … even the NY Slimes was sharply digging at this hysterical bloated ecoturd a few days ago!!
LOVELY JUBBLY!!
But it is fabulous fun watching dishonest cowardly leftist wankers like you meltdown, LIE ABOUT YOUR POLITICS and proffer repeated hysterical death wishes … are you rednekkks NAMBLA in disguise?? This is the sick kind of drivel it normally posts!!!
By harold
March 21, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this
harold saw the al gore movie. al gore did not provide his arguments scientifically and did not offer his statistics clearly. his movie felt as deceptive as anything from Rove
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this
Yes, Harold, you are right that there’s a big difference between rush hour and non-rush hour traffic and the ability to get through the intersections. I am not opposed to some device that would bring consistency in timing to the traffic lights. However, I honestly believe that most of the folks who are being cited are those who blatently run it when they could have stopped. I am not convinced that the majority of citiations are given to those folks who are traveling 45 MPH and are between 1 and 125 feet from the balk line. And I agree, wet pavement plays a role too. About 10 years ago I actually hit someone trying to stop at a red light under an overpass. Road was wet, plus slick with the oil build-up. Traffic in the ATL sucks. No doubt about it. But I think people drive too fast, especially when they see the light turn yellow. There’s a prevalent joke I’ve heard around these parts that “Yellow means speed up”. I think people really do believe that, and their driving is extremely dangerous.
And in an earlier post you mentioned having to watch for pedestrians and cyclists. I believe all drivers should always be watching for these. After all, we’re sitting in a nice comfy car, protected from the elements and not in as much danger of being hurt. Why not stop, or slow down, and let those folks across the road? After all, there’s always a good song on the radio or the CD player. There are too many aggressive drivers with the “all about ME” mentality around ATL. If we all slowed down and looked out for each other instead of ourselves, we could probably bring back a little more of the “village” society, which personally, I think would benefit us all.
By DebbieDoRight
March 21, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this
Looks like Sybill is talking to itself again….
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:08 AM | Link to this
HA HA HA HA …
so the gutless global whining fascist alBOre is about to scurry away from awkward questioning at 11.30 am, after refusing to listen to any one criticise his lies/distortions … and even worse, he won’t take awkward factual questions from global whining opponents… funny how cowardly these eco-wacko fascists are isn’t it??!! ’ The alBore is one of the most depicable turds the USA has ever puked up!!
By harold
March 21, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
harold is not convinced that most people dont deserve their red light tickets either.
so far there have been two times when harold was all kind of “sheet” after the light turned yellow at that very awkward moment where maybe you could panic stop but you probably shouldnt do that. so far no ticket for harold but one is inevitable as long as there’s an “oh sheet” moment at that light.
a countdown timer would remove the “oh sheet” moment entirely and then the red light ticket harold currently feels is inevitable would be totally evitable (yes that actually IS a word).
basically if RED means an $80 ticket, yellow should NOT be a surprise anymore. if the cameras truly are not just about revenue, they will add the countdown timers harold DEMANDS!
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this
at least harold, a known far left Bush hater shows some level of intellectual honesty on global whining. Although time for the truth notes that harold spoils his perceptive comments with an unwarranted, factually deeply flawed sneer at Karl Rove!!
By jm
March 21, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten is once again writing under the delusion that any politician, republican or democrat is a fiscal conservative. Both parties when given the opportunity load up the pork, since they need to prove a ROI to the special interest groups that put them in office. I just love how both parties love to hand out services but neither one has to guts to announce how they plan to pay for them. The supplemental budgets are a great sleight of hand method used to pay for pork that was “under valued” in the previous budget (which since it was an election year, was pork filled).
By WTH
March 21, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
Everything has a saturation point.
Except of course the earth’s capacity to absorb generated-heat AND the earth’s capacity to handle an indefinite increased human population.
for those two, of course, there is no saturation point.
By harold
March 21, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this
like orange juice isnt just for breakfast anymore, Bush hating is not just for the far left anymore. it’s for everyone except the wacko xian right and they secretly hate him but like thier drinking wont admit to it because its not considered proper in their circles
By jm
March 21, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this
Mr. Wooten is once again writing under the delusion that any politician, republican or democrat is a fiscal conservative. Both parties when given the opportunity load up the pork, since they need to prove a ROI to the special interest groups that put them in office. I just love how both parties love to hand out services but neither one has to guts to announce how they plan to pay for them. The supplemental budgets are a great sleight of hand method used to pay for pork that was “under valued” in the previous budget (which since it was an election year, was pork filled).
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this
whilst glibly ignoring the blindingly obvious fact that resident leftist nutters have been dishonestly ignoring my turdbrained posts, I have been wanking myself in a vainglorious manner. You sick leftist feckpigs sneer boorishly at my factual point that I can converse by myself proffering extreme right wing drivel!!
I’ll do you marxist wankpigs a favour and gladly inform you that the codeword today is alBore. This means that whilst you enjoy your wank, repeat to yourself in a low sullen voice “alBore…alBore…alBore…AAAAHHH!”
Afterwards you may sit back and gleefully enjoy a huge I’m a fake Brit repetitive douchebag SMIRK!!
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
Yes, Harold, I’ve had my “oh sheet” moments too. Had one just the other day at 41 and West Paces Ferry. I am awaiting the ticket as we speak. And you should have seen the look on my face. Kinda scrunched, pained, Oh Sheet! all at once. And my biggest concern is not the ticket, but the picture that might come with it. Ughhh…. Like I said, I’m not opposed to the timers. But I don’t want the penalties to go away, because I think that would just invite more habitual, aggressive driving at intersections.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this
I see the anal obsessive paedophile stalker is back … taking a rare short break from its protected by sick liberal restorative justice child molesting duties in VT.
By time to pass gas
March 21, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this
whilst dreaming up my next mindless, drooling screed, i thought i’d change my screen name to reflect the content of my posts
By Curious Observer
March 21, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this
Is it not strange indeed that even Richard Nixon did not attempt to block sworn testimony by his aides during the impeachment proceedings, and yet George W. Bush is attempting to do so in a much less impactful case?
We are witnessing the most arrogant, contemptuous administration in the history of this country—one that sees nothing wrong with issuing “signing statements” that declare a Congressional act means exactly the opposite of its intent; that believes Congress has no power to exert checks and balances on another branch of government; and that asserts the right to violate the law in the name of the fight against terrorism.
By harold
March 21, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
harold says once the countdown timers are in place increase the fine to $500!!!!
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this
Its hilarious to see the glorious sullen silence of the vile left on the alBOre’s cowardly moral fascist behaviour!!
Watch the bloated gutless alBore now: RUN, RUN, RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY …
Typical of sick craven leftists … don’t EVER tolerate awkward unscripted factual questions that can easily and swiftly shred an argument.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this
JOLLY WELL DONE I must say! Our sick twisted leftist anal obsessive paedophile NAMBLA sadistic perveted pooftah Bwarney Fwank loving molestor id stalker has graced us with his enlightening presence.
the resident anal obsessive id stalking nutter forces me to ponder why my turdbrained intellectually dishonest posts and tiresome prose are so easily copied and duplicated. huge I’m endlessly being exposed as a fake Brit intellectually dishonest right wing wankpig SMIRK!!
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this
HAROLD HAS FINALLY SURMISED THAT BUSH MISTAKENLY THINKS THE WORD “TERRORISM” MEANS “FREEDOM”
By Realist
March 21, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this
Damn…can’t tell the troll from the real. At least until the wankpig comments.
By HAROLD
March 21, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this
since the plantation owners were all woodshed rapists, dont that mean just about all current “african americans” are descended from plantation owners as well as from slaves?
seriously y’all aint nowhere nearly as black as african africans from africa.
slavery reparations would just mean african americans pay themselves!
so there you go, just stick some money in a savings account and consider yourself paid!!!!!!!
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
rednekkks NAMBLA … leave them kids alone you sick bastard!!
The blindingly obvious reason why I make my posts so easy to replicate is to watch unhinged, should have been aborted wankpig ultra leftist afterbirths like you wet themselves endlessly replicating them.
HINT: its all about gently parodying oneself - whilst sneering at hate America scum like you!!
The fact that I have effortlessly gotten so deeply and interminably under your lice infested yellowbellied skin is enormously amusing … now use that loaded Uzi to play russian roulette with!! there’s a good rabid pinko dog!!
By JohnD(the actual)
March 21, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this
The vote on the death penalty should be unanimous at 12. There will be obvious miscarriages of justice (OJ and Robert Blake both found not guilty) and others most of us will never recognize. The decision to impose the ultimate penalty should also carry the highest burden of proof.
Leave the red-light cameras alone. The cameras themselves are indifferent observers of the act and so what if the jurisdictions generate extra revenue at the expense of lawbreakers? One life saved is worth the aggravation and there is plenty of warning for drivers that the cameras are in use.
Ignoring a red light is far more dangerous than speeding on the interstates where there is a presumption of fast traffic - as opposed to the presumption other drivers will stop for red lights. Look both ways before entering an intersection after your light turns green is best.
By harold
March 21, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this
One life saved is worth the aggravation of red light cameras?
How about saving thousands of lives per year? Would that be worth the aggravation of a legitimate subway and commuter rail system in this region? Harold sure thinks so! Too bad F-TARD SUNNI PERDOOFUS would rather go fishing.
By time to pass gas
March 21, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this
blah, blah feckpig blah blah wankpig blah blah afterbirth, blah blah scum blah blah alBOre blah blah my sex change blah blah rogering the remains of j. edgar hoover blah blah leftist afterbirth pondscum blah blah oooh, j. edgar’s remains, you’ve never satisfied me so deeply before blah blah bollocks
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this
HA HA HA HA … GOOD BLOODY RIDDANCE
The arrogant, corrupt, incompetent white trash joke Blanco, supposedly the governor of LA (although its hard to tell given her chronic inactivity, is — huge surprise — NOT going to seek reelection … guess all those post Katrina polls and lies about Bush have sunk yet another worthless liberal’s career.
GET LOST BLANCO and take the black racist chocolate city mayor with you!!
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this
the intellectually dihonest post by the resident anal paedophilic VT Bwarney Frank cuddling perverted twisted nutter id stalker @ 11.54 is FREAKING HILARIOUS!! Gently goading witless pooftahs like you bubbaturd makes for a job well done!!
At times I must gleefully admit that my superior intellectual capabilities allow me to endlessly make absurd excuses about purposely adopting a simple and witless prose that is so easily parodied!! Leftist afterbirth scum glibly ignore the fact that my glorious intent to gently goad them by producing such pathetic and tiresome posts which are easily replicated is so blindingly obvious!!
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 12:33 PM | Link to this
Funny story, the Taliban is fighting Al Qaeda in Pakistan. http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0321/p99s01-duts.html
Dear JohnD @ 11:55, I respectfully disagree with your generalized assertion, “One life saved is worth the aggravation…” As Dr. Williams aptly notes, were that the case Congress would set a national speed limit of 10 mph. http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/02/21/nonsense_ideas
Dear JK, Harold, and Curious, I respectfully disagree with your assertion that Congress has an effective power of subpoena, to compel appearance by one in the executive branch; neither can it compel appearance by anyone in the judiciary, to make them explain a ruling. Similarly, the executive cannot compel congress to pass any law, nor compel any judge to rule a particular way on a case, and no judge (theoretically – I guess the rule does not apply to leftist judges) can write a law or enforce a ruling. The branches are co-equal, and none can tell another how to do its bidding. Any attempt to do so is mere political grandstanding.
By harold
March 21, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this
harold aint asserted that congress Congress has an effective power of subpoena
Congress asserted that Congress has an effective power of subpoena
but what really matters is not if harold or j-law thinks congress can do that but instead if the imprisoners who imprison people for failing to show for a subpoena believe that Congress has an effective power of subpoena that’s all that matters really. it’s what the men with the guns and handcuffs think about it
By harold
March 21, 2007 12:57 PM | Link to this
so anyway if congress cannot subpoena the executive then the clinton bill did not perjure himself in front of them seeing as how the whole thing was invalid?
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this
harold,
What type of drugs are you on? It must be some powerful sh*t!
By JK
March 21, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this
The branches are co-equal, and none can tell another how to do its bidding. Any attempt to do so is mere political grandstanding.
Er….Hey Lawyer man, why don’t you refresh us, then, as to the purpose of having three branches of government and how the whole “checks and balances” thing is supposed to work, since you think we’ve missed the point.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this
Dear Harold @ 12:54 and 12:57, much wisdom is your brief arguments. As an old Indian fighter, President Andrew Jackson famously spoke, on hearing that the Supreme Court had ruled for the Indians and their ilk, and against him, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcesterv.Georgia The bizarre thing about the Bill Clinton case was that he willingly testified under oath, when he famously committed perjury. He could have refused to appear in that civil suit, but the judge could have sanctioned him by construing all evidence in favor of his opponent. Bill of course was determined to win at any cost. How many times we are undone by hubris.
By time for the truth
March 21, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this
harold … did you buy these “powerful drugs” on a Sunday?
By harold
March 21, 2007 1:13 PM | Link to this
harold? on drugs? nope no drugs here
so anyhow the sun is what warms the earth. if the earth gets warmer, it has tilted more towards the sun. if it gets colder it tilted away from the sun. thus the seasons.
to believe humans can either A: affect how the sun warms the earth or B: accurately measure it is honestly rather silly
that said, all the antiglobalwarming things that they say need done are definietly good things to do. polluted air definitely exists and harms us so let’s get rid of it without making up doomsday scenarios like teh christians do
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 1:14 PM | Link to this
Dear JK @ 1:05, good question. Congress’s check on the executive is the power to impeach. The Executive’s check on the congress is the power to veto.
There are ancillary powers too - Congress has the power of the pocketbook. In the instant matter, Congress could forbid payment of anyone appointed to serve as a US Attorney, although that may not be well received in the jurisdictions where postitions are unfilled.
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 1:19 PM | Link to this
harold,
No drugs? You mean to tell me that you naturally think this way?
P.S. A lot of the Christian’s predictions have already come to past nutcase!
By jm
March 21, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw@1:10 - Ah yes, hubris … I see the “cakewalk” just had its four year anniversary. I wonder if W the incompetent will bring out the “Mission Accomplished” banner on its four year anniversary. Personally, I think it should be on prominent display in W’s Presidential Library, right next to a copy of “My Pet Goat”.
By WootenDull
March 21, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this
Wooten: How many names does getalife use on this blog, including other people’s?
Lock Plame up now.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
By harold
March 21, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this
slick willie went voluntarily! ha! he thought he would spew on congress too and they would thank him for it
By Political Foreskin
March 21, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this
zzzzz
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this
Jim Wooten,
WootenDull asks a good question at 1:20. Someone has been jacking the power of Doom and I don’t want to accuse the wrong person. Doom believes that it is that idiot “getalife”.
P.S. I know that you probably get off on our sqwabbles but we need a referee sometimes.
By harold
March 21, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
no drugs. harold is what most people term “genius”
By getalife
March 21, 2007 1:33 PM | Link to this
Jim,
Do tell these idiots who is jacking id’s.
wootendull(Andy) does it on Mike’s blog so I am sure it is him.
By CJ
March 21, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw,
Is it your position that when there are allegations that the President and/or his advisors may have broken the law, Congress cannot investigate?
How, dare say, did the founders expect the House to be able to impreach and the Senate expected to convict if Congress doesn’t have the authority to investigate.
Is it your position that the Attorney General and/or members of the Justice Department can break the law with impunity(with the exception of withholding payment)?
Do tell.
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 1:42 PM | Link to this
To whoever wants to know:
Matt Schuab just got traded to the Houston Texans.
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this
Doom, that is something I didn’t want to hear! The falcons have p!ssed away another good opportunity. I’m still mad at them for letting Patrick Kerney go…… Our team is going to suck eggs this year.
By jm
March 21, 2007 1:50 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw@1:10 - Ah yes, hubris … I see the “cakewalk” just had its four year anniversary. I wonder if W the incompetent will bring out the “Mission Accomplished” banner on its four year anniversary. Personally, I think it should be on prominent display in W’s Presidential Library, right next to a copy of “My Pet Goat”.
By Funeeee
March 21, 2007 1:58 PM | Link to this
A lot of the Christian’s predictions have already come to past
didn’t all those predictions already come to pass just before the Y1K scare? in 999 A.D. or so?
By Realist
March 21, 2007 1:59 PM | Link to this
Shaub deal is not done yet. He still has to agree to it and a lot can still go wrong. Its false information to say its done, its not.
Aside from that, the Falcons may as well get what they can for Shaub now while his star is still bright. Vick is our QB come hell or high water, whether we want him or not. He just gonna do what he do da way he do it.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this
Dear jm @ 1:20, you raise my curiosity. Suppose, hypothetically, the “surge” works – the preliminary stats look promising - and the Islamists are put to run. How would you then analyze the war strategy, considering the diffuse and unidentifiable enemy? Do you think the Kurds – for generations, in many places, THE oppressed minority - believe the war has been unsuccessful? As I noted above in one of my posts, the Taliban is now fighting Al Qaeda, in a bizarre change. I credit the President with successfully changing the dynamics of the middle east, and uniformly for the better.
By Realist
March 21, 2007 2:06 PM | Link to this
I’m not the biggest Vick fan..but the #2 QB is always the most popular man in town. Schuab couldn’t hold Vick’s jock strap in talent. Backup QB’s coming into games and having spurts of greatness is not uncommon. I just hate we couldn’t get more for him in a player and draft pick deal.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 2:10 PM | Link to this
Dear cj @ 1:38, actually my position is that there can be no violation of law by the president (or any other bureaucrat) in exercise of pure discretionary judgment. Hiring and firing political appointees is in the realm of such discretion. Or perhaps you think Congress passed a law micromanaging the Executive Branch? Heck, they cannot even manage Congress competently, the last thing we need is for them to micromanage the Executive branch. The tradition of democrats is to attempt to criminalize political differences, and as you suggest in your post, this is more of the same.
By Alabama Realist
March 21, 2007 2:11 PM | Link to this
Sorry about that ID thief. Im now Alabama Realist.
You need to read todays news. The falcons are getting some very high picks for Shaub if this deal goes through. Shaub is a proven solid player, not just a flash in the pan, one drive wonder like you imply. Shaub is known around the league as a future starter and star, which is why now is the time to move him and get those important early draft picks. Vicks best days are behind him, and that sucks for Atl fans.
By Alabama Realist
March 21, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this
And by the way, Shaub may not be able to hold Vicks jock in a physical ability comparison, but on mental ability, understanding the QB position, throwing ability, etc, Shaub is head and shoulders above Vick.
Vick isnt a Falcon, he is an Albatross around the neck of Atlanta fans.
By JohnD(the actual)
March 21, 2007 2:15 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw @12:33
Actually the speed limit is already set at 0 mph at red lights. So there are people who do not like the cameras, big deal. Stop for the red lights and the cameras are no problem.
Conservatives talk of holding down the cost of government, enforcing the laws we already have on the books, etc., etc., etc. Seems to me the cost of government in this case is zero for those who obey the law and $80 for those who do not. Pay to Play - how much more fair can this be?
By JohnD(the actual)
March 21, 2007 2:27 PM | Link to this
Sen. Patrick Leahy stated he wished to be sure that “politics” did not play a part in the firing of the prosecutors. What law is the President, or Attorney General, accused of breaking by firing the federal prosecutors?
Bill Clinton fired all the federal prosecutors. Senator Leahy offered no objection then, why now?
By John D(the actual)
March 21, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this
Dusty,
If you are out there, would you like to come over for dinner this evening in my new underground bunker in my backyard? I have just completed it for the impending invasion by the leftist/Islamist axis coalition.
By harold
March 21, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this
harold thought sure they were going to have vick get “accidentally” injured and out for the season like them dawgs did with that turd-a-shinski guy they seemed stuck with
but isnt there a sports blog for this crap?
By JohnD(the actual)
March 21, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this
Not my post at 2:32. Must be from the hijacker, Abdul the Butcher.
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 2:41 PM | Link to this
Realist, I love the Albatrose description. How true.
JBM, I think I’m as surprised as JohnD with you! You don’t like the red light cameras? I know it does add some more “government”, which I know you oppose, but the government is already responsible for paving the roads, putting up the lights, enforcing safetly. Why shouldn’t they use red light cameras to make the roads more safe?
Harold, yes, there’s a sports blog, but we conservatives (and possibly liberals too) occasionally like to take a break to lament the poor decisions of our Football team staff.
By JohnD(the actual)
March 21, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this
Dusty,
I forgot to mention that my underground bunker comes equipped with a fully loaded arsenal and a bed with clean sheets.
By JoeD
March 21, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this
I believe the question regrding the firing of the US attorneys is whether or not the administration interfered with the investigation or prosecution of criminal or potentially criminal activities by firing the attorneys, and conversely, sought to influence other investigations that were not proceeding according to GOP and/or White House desires. For instance, the US attorney that prosecuted Duke Cunningham and was reported to be investigating other GOPer’s was fired. The US attorney for New Mexico was fired after Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson made calls and didn’t get the answer they wanted on an investigation of a Democratic operative. Clinton asked all to leave at the beginning of his term, after 12 years of Republicans in the White House.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this
Dear JohnD and Barbara, while I present myself as a normal conservative in most ways, that presentation is arguably deceptive. I fear harold’s arguments frequently make sense to me, and especially here.
At other times on this blog, I have argued that there should be no law at all, except those for which the penalty is death. My overarching rationale is that government should always be the servant of the people, and that its tools – the power to kill, the power to incarcerate, and the power to steal – should be employed only sparingly. I have no reservation about government punishing an evil act; I have great reservations about punishing potentially harmful behavior, even if the punishment is nothing more than a cash fine. Traffic laws generally are an area I would totally decriminalize. I think traffic signals should come into play only to determine whether to execute a murderous driver.
By Mark Noble
March 21, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this
Since we’re doing sports, let’s try a little celebrity. Now that Britney is out of rehab, I think she should remarry. This time to an older man, say, I don’t know, let’s pick 44. A man who lives in a small town in, oh, I don’t know … Georgia, let’s say. A man who will help raise her children in a safe, stable environment. A man who will be supportive. Mature, yet still possessing a youthful, fun outlook. And who can still hit that stuff about twice a day. Yes, I think that’s what she needs.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this
Dear JoeD @ 2:55, we understand your desire to criminalize policy decisions. We Republicans believe we elect people to set policy, and do not wish to see crazed leftists marching to their own drummers on the government payroll.
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
March 21, 2007 3:17 PM | Link to this
CJ,
It’s Jbm’s position that Republicans are noble fighters for Truth, Justice and the American Way, while Democrats are just plain ‘ol bad folk.
It’s ok for the the Republican’s to break a few rules, invade a few countries, out a few covert agents, and basically not uphold the standards that they impose on others, so long as they’re fighting the good fight.
Democrats, on the other hand, are just “playing politics” when they do that.
So, for those of you keeping score at home:
Democrats = bad & ungodly Republicans = good & godly
Oh, and on top of all that, free markets will find a cure for AIDS and fix all the watersheds in West Virginia that have been destroyed by strip mining.
By "Crazed Leftist"
March 21, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this
So how come the President wants to go to court to keep his people from answering questions truthfully? I mean, aren’t they always truthful? Surely they have nothing to hide. I don’t understand why President Bush seems so angry at the idea of answering a few harmless questions. Mr. President, please don’t be angry! You know your people did nothing wrong. Just tell them to swear under oath to tell the truth, and we will all see that.
By jm
March 21, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this
jblaw@2:04 - I would like your definition of “works” regarding the surge. Right now, the shia militias are pretty much laying low and letting the US attack the sunni insurgents because they know time is on their side. The kurds want what they have wanted for hundreds of years, a homeland of their own. However, the turks, with their large (oppressed and restive) kurdish minority would probably view an independent kurdish state as a threat.
It still looks like the end result will be a shia dominated government, with sharia based law, that is more friendly to Iran than it is to the US.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 3:24 PM | Link to this
Dear JaCP @ 3:17, clearly you were impressed by the appearance of Valerie “Airhead” Plame, but I was not. She did not even know herself whether she was “covert.” And this is the sort of stuff that you think merits incarceration. Otherwise your post fairly reflects my thoughts.
Dear Crazed @ 3:18, I think you have it backwards. It is Congress that will have to go to court to attempt to compel the Executive Branch to testify under oath before Congress. Good luck with that.
Dear Jim Wooten, yesterday you invited our friend Lord Doom to suggest a blog topic; I wish to suggest one, the current Supreme Court case, Bong Hits 4 Jesus. Has great blog potential.
By getalife
March 21, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this
Why do wingnuts love to get lied to?
The majority of the American people are sick of the lies.
Impeach!
By CJ
March 21, 2007 3:29 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw at 2:10,
Sorry for the acerbic tone in my earlier post. I wrote the post in a hurry, and as you know, I’m an angry liberal.
First, I agree that Congress shouldn’t pass a law “micromanaging” the President. However, on that note, it is the President’s obligation under the Constitution to enforce the laws passed by Congress. The President does not get to pick and choose which laws he’ll enforce based upon whether or not he agrees with them or based upon his relationship with those who are under investigation for breaking such laws (ex: a Congressman from the same political party). If the Congress perceives that the President isn’t fulfilling his obligations for such reasons, then they have the authority to investigate and seek remedies. In this case, it is alleged that certain U.S. attorneys were fired because they were actually fulfilling their obligations by investigating possible wrongdoing by certain Republicans.
Also, you wrote that “there can be no violation of law by the president (or any other bureaucrat) in exercise of pure discretionary judgment.” That’s not true since any criminal violation would be an exercise of discretionary judgment; the violator chooses to break the law. So, even though firing U.S. attorneys to specifically hinder an investigation or influence an investigation would be, as you say, exercises of discretionary judgment — doing so would also be highly illegal.
Since the Justice Department is under a cloud here, as well as the White House, it wouldn’t be appropriate for the DOJ Office of Special Council, headed by Patrick Fitzgerald, to investigate this case. The result would be that Fitzgerald would be investigating his boss. The only means for getting to the truth under such circumstances is through Congressional action.
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this
Dear JaCP @ 3:17, I know I mocked you mercilessly in my last post, but more seriously you do highlight one difference between the leftists and decent people: my side investigates specific crimes looking for a culprit, whereas your side investigates people looking for a crime.
By Hubris
March 21, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this
I believe you have it backwards.
No, you have it backwards.
No, you are mistaken because I are smart.
No, you are mistaken because you are a moron!
But I read complex and obscure stuff and quote it all day to impress people.
No, you are mistaken because you are a moron.
By Investigator Man!
March 21, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
my side investigates specific crimes looking for a culprit,
As exemplified by the way my side thoroughly investigated the leaking of classified information and the compromising of the security and secrecy of international federal agents and investigations. We had far too much integrity to downplay the seriousness with that crazy lefty excuse: “It was really no big deal, so let’s drop it.” We is the epitome of integrity! We is honest and smart! I are a lawyer who bills people all day long while doing no actual work for them! HAHAHAHA!
By JoeD
March 21, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this
jbm, i believe that interference with a criminal investigation is a crime,not a “policy decision”.
By Ken Starr
March 21, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this
I was just doing what I was told, doggone it! I was told to investigate that man until I found a crime! I wanted to quit but they would have none of it. “You stay and get the dirt!” they demanded. I looked high. I looked low. I had nothing. Then I caught a lucky break. A federal employee (code name c u next tuesday) illegally recorded her conversations with a young intern who admitted to saving a dress with a very special stain on it. JACKPOT! I always wanted to be a novelist, but I wasn’t much good, but boy howdy, that stuff just wrote itself! Just goes to show you, if you wait long enough, every human exhibits a human frailty. FIND it, exploit it, and call him a sick, twisted culprit. Hallelujah!
By jbmlaw
March 21, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this
Dear CJ @ 3:29, no problem, the blog is for fun – this is not blood sport, and I took no offense. I used a term of art, that I fear causes confusion: discretionary judgment. The phrase means “making those decisions vested in the bureaucrat under law.”
If I am president and I have a US Attorney who wastes all of his time investigating mercury pollution by the local newsprint plant, when I have active Al Qaeda cells in the jurisdiction, I have authority to fire him. If I have a US Attorney who wastes all of his time trying to make a name for himself prosecuting politicians – think Rudy Guiliani here - when I have Mafia strongarming mom and pop stores, I have authority to fire him. That discretion is reasonably within my authority to set priorities (and there is not enough time or manpower to chase down every stupid allegation that pops up.) Here President Bush (or more likely Alberto Gonzales) decided there were better things for US Attorneys to waste their time on, and he should have right to enforce accountability, just as he himself is accountable to the president, and the president is accountable to the voters.
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this
Jim Wooten,
I know what it is. Its not your blog that’s idiotic, its the morons that come here. For some reason, you attract total imbeciles over here. The high point of today’s discussion were sports related.
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
March 21, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
Jbm,
I’m not investigator man, but he’s onto something.
Didn’t GW say that he took leaking of classified information very seriously, and that whomever did it would be “dealt with”?
Isn’t that right? Didn’t he say that?
Did Bush “deal with” it, or did Fitz?
And isn’t leaking the name of a covert CIA agent a federal crime?
Yes, I believe it is.
And didn’t “someone” in the Bush administration orchestrate the leaking of that information for vindicitive purposes?
Yes, I believe he did.
And weren’t those purposes meant to disparage the rep of someone who, in a noble show of democracy in action, brought a differing point of view to the table with regards to Bush’s claims about the reasons the US should invade a soverign country that had not attacked us?
Yep. That’s right.
So, I’m really not sure where you’re coming from. I’m just not sure about your argument.
Was the GOP, when funded by Richard Scaife and other “investors” investigating a crime or a person when it fought long and hard to unseat Bill “Penis” Clinton.
I think you have it exactly backwards. They were investigating a man that they didn’t like for political purposes. That’s politics. And evidently the Penis was the better politician, because he was re-elected and he wasn’t impeached.
But, in true Frank Luntz/Herr Rove form, the idea is that reality doesn’t really matter, so long as you keep saying what you want to people to believe long enough…folks will believe it and that will be reality.
George Bush is good.
Bill Clinton is bad.
Republicans are good.
Democrats are godless heathens.
Democrats are godless heathens.
Democrats kill babies.
Democrats kill old people.
Democrats hate freedom.
Blah, blah, blah.
Keep saying it. People are dying every day because George Bush has no idea what he’s doing.
Keep on talking. 58 percent of the people in this country think Iraq is a lost cause.
Keep on blaming Democrats. Scooter Libby was found guilty of perjury.
Keep on whining about “big government”. GW and the Republicans have grown the US government to sizes not seen this side of FDR.
Keep on lying to yourself. You’re gonna need it.
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
Jim Wooten,
You should also set-up a glory hole where Doom can recharge. TFTT would be a good person to employ for the task.
By Lord Doom(the real Doom)
March 21, 2007 4:11 PM | Link to this
Jim Wooten,
Now you see why WootenDull and myself asked you to ID this nickjacker btch. I know its getalife, I just need you to confirm it so that he can take his fa*ot a$$ on somewhere else.
By Disgusted
March 21, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this
According to ESPN, the Shaub deal includes Atlanta’s swapping first round draft order with Houston (Atlanta would now get the 8th choice and Houston the 10th)and the Falcons would get Houston’s second round choices for 2007 and 2008. It’s all contingent on Shaub’s reaching an agreement with Houston. ESPN also projects that Cincinnati’s Anthony Wright is a likely Atlanta choice for a backup QB slot.
By Lord Doom
March 21, 2007 4:25 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the info Disgusted.
By CJ
March 21, 2007 4:33 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw,
The scenarios you provided, regarding priorities, are entirely appropriate causes for dismissal and within the President’s authority. However, if the DOJ’s priorities are established based upon party affiliation (limit investigations to accusations of wrongdoing against members of one party — ignore accusations of wrongdoing against members of another party), then the President would not be fulfilling his Constitutional obligation to enforce the law, and the Congress is empowered to investigate such actions (or inactions). Also, regardless of appropriate or inappropriate priorities, if the White House (via the President’s staff and the DOJ) takes action to hinder or influence specific investigations, again, that would be illegal.
I agree that the DOJ must set priorities to determine which crimes to investigate and prosecute given limited budgets, personnel, evidence (some crimes can’t easily be proven), and hours in the day. But those priorities cannot be established as such – investigate Democrats, and you’ll be promoted; investigate Republicans, and you’ll be fired. Under the circumstances, investigating whether or not such “priorities” were established is not micromanaging.
By Political Foreskin
March 21, 2007 5:16 PM | Link to this
zzzzz
By Barbara
March 21, 2007 5:32 PM | Link to this
Mark Noble @ 3:04 - just a guess here, but I’d say in general: Falcons - intersting…. Britney - not….. (I’m just guessing)
jbm @3:01, I just have to push you a little on this one. I’m curious as to how you see it working if we had no traffic laws, given today’s heavy traffic congestion, coupled with the “I’m more important than anyone else” attitude that has crept into our selfish society today. I’m totally with you on limiting government power, but I still think there are important things that do require at least some regulation, such as traffic, food, protection of our children and elderly, (and many others that, for some reason aren’t coming to me right now…..). Anyway, how do you see it working if the government weren’t involved in regulating traffic flow through the use of signals and fines for enforcing the signals?
Lord Doom, the ID stealer is not getalife. The ID stealer, although extremely obnoxious and not at all welcome, is more original than getalife ever could be. The ID stealer is the one that goes sometimes by Political Foreskin, and other names. I fear my beloved Captain Freedom may be another one of his monikers. But it’s not getalife. He’s not that creative.
By JohnD(the actual)
March 21, 2007 5:39 PM | Link to this
To JaCP @ 4:07
Was Plame covert? There is much disagreement on that issue.
Armitage gave up her name in an interview but there has been no evidence presented to indicate he was part of a conspiracy.
Wilson’s report actually confirms a connection between Niger and Hussein. His statements to the contrary conflict with his report according to news sources.
If Libby’s “failure to recall” conversations and events is perjury then why was H. Clinton excused for the same tactic in her testimony on the White Water files?
The Democrats began the campaign to discredit the administration on Iraq only after the overthrow of Saddam and the terrorists began to disrupt the process. Then you heard the “Bush lied”, “Bush lied” repeated. This came from the same Democrats who spoke of the need to take out Saddam during the Clinton administration.
The lies come from both sides and their sole motivation is power. The elected Congress and Executives have no ground upon which to stand that is higher than the other.
The Republicans in office now are not conservatives and have deserted their conservative base. The size of government, the economy killing tax structure, illegal immigration and hosts of other conservative causes have been ignored by Bush and the rest.
McCain is a RINO, Schumer and Clinton are socialists and the list goes on and on.
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
March 22, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this
JohnD.
Apples and oranges. I give a rip about Hillary and White Water. Shady land deals are a dime a dozen (ask Sonny), so why should I care about one that happened 100 years ago, before any of those people did anything more than govern a third rate state? So Hillary is a liar. So what? She’s a politician. They all lie, cheat and steal.
And your casting dobut on Plame? That’s straight out of Rove’s back pocket…just cast a little dobut and that’s all the sheep need to disavow overwhelming evidence to the contrary (remember, Tobacco doesn’t cause lung cancer).
The fact of the matter is, the GOP, who so self-righetously proclaimed to be the light on the hill that we could all look up to, a beacon of hope in the night, the party that would restore our faith in government and make us proud of it, have systematically crapped all over us for the last 12 years. They’ve done nothing but rig the game to favor their friends.
Period. End of story. That’s what’s happened.
And I agree with you. They’re all crooks. I differentiate between Republicans and Democrats not. The terms liberal and conservative are terms used by mouths like Limbaugh to scare people who are dumb enough to listen to them. Those terms mean nothing.
So it amazes me every day to see Wooten and his buddies on this blog routinely defend the GOP and Bush (daddy’s boy, unaccomplished businessman, liar), when there is so much evidence that he and his administration are aggressively incompetent purveyors of self-righteous, self-serving, narrow-minded public policy. This is the United States of America, not their personal sandbox.
How can they lie so much and get away with it?
That’s what I want to know.
By JohnD
March 22, 2007 9:18 AM | Link to this
JaCP,
Hilary used the same tactics, not 100 years ago but while serving as First Lady to Bill. She lied under oath and now she hopes to be President. Everyone should care.
I see no difference in the politicians once elected to Congress or the White House with respect to their concern, or lack thereof, for the people who voted them into office. Their sole mission is to maintain the POWER we gave them.
There seem to be no statesmen or representatives of the people. They represent their party and their party leaders.
By Jim's a Cherry Picker
March 22, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this
JonnD,
Two things:
She’s not the one running the country at the moment.
I’m not planning on voting for her.
Bush is in charge. It’s his administration that sets the tone for the country, not the ex-president or his senator/wife.
It’s Bush’s administration that can’t swing a cat without generating another scandal, and blaming the Democrats or casting dobut doesn’t cut it. They’re crooks, plain and simple.
You’re right on with your comment about a lack of leadership, but I would take issue with the representation part: they represent the people who can pay them the most, which is pretty much corporate America. That is the only interest group getting attention, and it doesn’t matter whether the Dems or the GOP are running things.