Marijuana Candy Bill & Other Notes

That exciting bill has passed the Senate with just 4 dissenting votes (Balfour, Shafer, Pearson, and Schaeffer were the no votes. Vincent Fort was the legislation’s sponsor). Meanwhile Generalissimo Francisco Franco, much like the Sunday Sales Bill, is still dead.

The Chiropractic scope of practice bill has passed the Senate.

Senator Adelman’s township bill has been tabled. The private community bill passed, but the companion constitutional amendment failed by 1 vote.

The Senate, at 4pm, is at the top of the second page of a four page calendar.


  1. Rick Day says:

    I am sending a box of Little Debbie “Cozmic Brownies” to each member of the lege for, one more time, making Georgia look like its run by the family of Lil’ Abner.

  2. RuralDem says:

    I started watching the live internet stream after getting home from class around 6pm.

    It was great seeing Senator Hooks take the gavel for about an hour last night. He always does something that just makes you start laughing. I thought it was funny how he kept making fun of the House members who walked in the chamber. While the entire Senate might not always get along, it was great to see that they were willing to relax and have a little fun.

    I have the utmost respect for Senator Johnson. After Senator Hooks, Senator Johnson is probably my second favorite member in either chamber. Unlike his counterpart in the House, Senator Johnson actually respects all members and not just those in his own party.

    I am glad the NRA bill did not come up. Although I am a member of the NRA and a strong supporter of the second amendment, I felt this legislation was simply wrong.

    The only other issue I was focused on was the PeachCare issue which unfortunately passed the House. The two Democrats that voted for it should be ashamed. There is no explanation good enough to explain their decision to vote in favor of that horrendous piece of legislation. At least we know 63 members in the Georgia House had the courage to stand up for our children. The 101 others who voted yes should be ashamed and need to be questioned on their reasoning for supporting this terrible piece of legislation.

  3. dingleberry says:

    Rural Dem,

    The 63 members of the house that voted for that legislation have only proven one thing–they care more about buying votes than they care about actually fixing health care. Based on your comments, anyone who votes for less government handouts “hates our children”.

    I know this is going to come as a shock to you, so you might want to take a seat: GOVERNMENT CANNOT SOLVE ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS!!! In fact, GOVERNMENT IS OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM!!!

  4. RuralDem says:

    Government cannot solve all problems. I do not think I have ever said it could, but nice that was a nice attempt.

    Fixing PeachCare? Dingleberry, what is wrong with it? Sure, the federal government has not paid it’s percentage. However, they will be reimbursing the state in the summer and then will continue to pay their share afterwards.

    So, all they had to do was cut Sonny’s “Go Fish” program completely, instead of just 8 million, and shuffle money from other places into PeachCare for just a few months. It is really not a difficult concept.

    I do not believe the legislators who favored this legislation “hate children”, however, I do believe they made a mistake in supporting Speaker Richardson’s poor legislation. I honestly believe he wants to truly gut the PeachCare program and will find any way he can to accomplish the goal of ending it.

  5. dingleberry says:

    The only way to EVER fix entitlement programs is to begin to ween people from them. Cutting off people from the program is the best thing that could have happened. Now, maybe the parents will go out and get a damn job instead of relying on you and I prop them up. OR, maybe they’ll use protection next time before they bring more kids that they cannot afford into this world.

    What’s wrong with PeachCare? The same thing that is wrong with Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, Welfare, etc…the fact that they exist.

    I don’t advocate completely ending the programs. We didn’t achieve a total welfare state overnight, and we’re not going to get out of one overnight. But it’s time to start gradually cutting back, and this PeachCare legislation is a good FIRST step.

  6. RuralDem says:

    Get a job? Um, I know plenty of families on PeachCare where the parents do have jobs, so try to bring up another argument. I’m sure there are cases where a family has one kid, both parents had great jobs, no need for PeachCare, then the parents experienced layoffs or something else. I am not saying people should stay on entitlement programs forever, however, if you’re a southerner, you know the old view of helping someone get back on their feet.

    If the parents are working and are trying to do well, I think they should have some temporary help until they can truly get back on their feet.

    I do not advocate people leeching and cheating the system like most liberals would, however, I also do not like the idea of letting these people just waste away.

  7. dingleberry says:

    If you think they should have some temporary help until they can truly get back on their feet, then why don’t YOU also pay my portion of that help too, and the portion of everyone else who doesn’t support handouts. You’re idealism goes only as far as your wallet and you know it. As long as you know that you won’t have to pay as much as long as the rest of us are having to pay as well, then you can be as idealistic as possible. But you and I both know that if was down to your money (and only YOUR money) or them “getting back on their feet” , you would choose YOUR MONEY.

  8. dingleberry says:

    By the way, thanks for being willing to not only sacrifice your money for the common good, but also being willing to sacrifice mine! I’m glad I have your idealism to manage what I earn.

  9. jkga says:

    Dingleberry – I don’t think you are convincing anyone with your arguments. People support things like Peachcare because they aren’t absolutely purely altruistic – they are, instead, willing to sacrifice their money for the common good IF everyone else is paying their fair share.

    RuralDem – I’m on your side here, but where do you get the idea that “most liberals” advocate leaching and cheating the system? Can you name even one? (Abbie Hoffman was an anarchist, not a liberal.)

  10. RuralDem says:


    I apologize. It was a poor choice of words on my part. I was attempting to show that my belief is basically in the center. I’ll try to rephrase it better:

    Those on the left have no problem with these types of programs, however, those on the right want to get rid of these programs.

    Obviously that’s just a generalization but my overall point is these systems need reform, but not eliminated.

  11. dingleberry says:


    How about this, I could care less if I convince anyone. But I’m tired of all of these lazy leeches sucking society’s tit. NOTE TO ALL: If you are poor, look in the mirror, it’s YOUR FAULT. For one of the following reasons:

    (1) You were too stupid to pay attention in school, so the only job you are qualified to do is flip burgers–NOT MY FAULT!

    (2) You are too lazy to get off of your dead ass and GET A JOB!!!–NOT MY FAULT!!

    (3) You are too stupid to use protection, so you keep having kid after kid until you can’t afford them–NOT MY FAULT!!!

    (4) You were born into poverty and are using that as excuse to do nothing with your life–NOT MY FAULT!!!!

    You only deserve what you earn. Not a damn penny more. What? You don’t like the fact that it’s only 5.15 and hour? Oh well, too bad. You made POOR decisions and now YOU have to pay for them.

  12. jkga says:


    Even if what you say is true about adults (and I’m not buying it), you are saying that poor children who don’t have access to a doctor or dentist deserve to suffer because of the mistakes of their parents. That’s a pretty brutal outlook on life to have, and I feel sorry for you if that’s how you really feel.

    RuralDem- apology accepted. How to strike the right balance between maintaining a decent level of service and preventing fraud is not an easy question.

  13. dingleberry says:

    Well, if you so so damn sorry for them, then why don’t YOU pay my share for them. Oh, that’s right, your idealism only goes as far as your wallet. I feel sorry for you. It must suck to be such a demagog.

    And by the way, I donate a good chunk of change VOLUNTARILY to children’s charities ever year. What have you done? Oh that’s right, you’ve used what money is taken out of your taxes to make you feel better about actively doing not a damn thing.

  14. Demonbeck says:

    Have all the convenience stores replaced the marijuana candy with tequila flavored candy yet?

  15. jkga says:


    I don’t want to pay your share. I want to pay my share, and I want you to pay your share. It’s not really that complicated.

    I’m glad you do actually care about poor children. It didn’t sound like you did, because you were justifying your opposition to Peachcare on blaming poor parents for their poverty.
    Do you think that the children helped by Peachcare are any more or less deserving than those helped by your charitable donations?

    You don’t know how to use the word demagogue, or how to spell it. You don’t know what I do or do not contribute to charity. I’d suggest you stick to commenting about things you know something about.

  16. jkga says:

    Pardon me, Dingleberry- I see that demagog is an accepted variant of demagogue. I still do not think it means what you think it means.

    Also, I meant to say youwere justifying your opposition to Peachcare *by* blaming poor parents.

  17. dingleberry says:


    I suggest you kiss my ass. Gee I wonder why it takes you two posts to point out a spelling error…oh, I know, it’s because you cannot form an argument with any actual substance.

    I’ve paid my share jkga. I have my own family to worry about. It’s not morally right to force me to support another family because the parents made bad choices when I need to look out for my own kids.

    And that is what it is, jkga. Poverty is NOTHING more than the result of poor choices. Maybe in your mind intelligent, hard-working, responsible people who make good decisions still end up poor, but not in the real world. People with the smallest amount of ambition succeed. Period.

    Quit blaming society for the poor choices of poor people.

  18. dingleberry says:

    And by the way, a demagogue is someone who uses emotional distortions in order to persuade an audience, often if he/she truly doesn’t believe what he/she is saying.

    You use this whole, “Oh, what about the poor children” argument to make people think that you are some kind of of benevolent person, but really, you’re not willing to actively do anything to help the children…only what is passively given to them through your tax money. I guess it’s easier to ignore the problem if you feel like the government is doing the work for you, huh?

  19. whitemalevoters says:

    I think the both of you should partake in some candy flavored marijuana and chill out.

    They probably would if the state legislature full of dumb “conservatives” hadn’t banned it.

    At least they haven’t banned beer-flavored water (see Natural Lite) and NASCAR. Those are the only two things keeping white male voters in this state.

  20. jkga says:


    I never said that society is to blame for the choices of poor people. I do think that society is responsible for providing a safety net for children whose parents do not or cannot provide adequately for them for whatever reason. I also think that it’s in society’s best interests to do so, to give kids the chance to be productive citizens. I also believe that taxation is an imperfect but reasonably fair way to distribute that responsibility. I would rather share that burden than take it all on myself. I’m happier to pay my share knowing that other people aren’t getting out of their share of the responsibility.

    You are absolutely right when you say I would prefer to ignore the healthcare needs of indigent children. I would also prefer to ignore the maintenance of roads, the management of police and firefighters, and the regulation of what sort of toxins industries are permitted to release into the air and water. I cannot be an expert in all of these areas. I think they are all too important and too big to leave entirely to the private sector. I would rather pay my fair share of taxes and have a competent government look after these things while I live my own life (which includes working, doing volunteer work, giving money to private charities, and engaging in diverting discussions on blogs). At election times I’ll do my best to make sure that those in government are held accountable for their performance.

    As far as your contention that “intelligent, hard-working, responsible people who make good decisions” never end up poor, I’ll take your word for it. I’m not ready to judge the poor all that harshly, though, seeing as plenty of stupid, lazy, talentless individuals seem to do just fine. We don’t live in a fair world no matter how you slice it. You say it’s not fair that you have to help support someone else’s kids. I can’t deny there’s some truth to that, but in the big scheme of things I’d say that’s a small measure of injustice.

Comments are closed.