A reader tipped me to this article about the Go Fish controversy in today’s Wall Street Journal. No new ground covered but it’s interesting that the issue keeps drawing attention.
The governor — who fondly recalls a childhood in which his grandfather took him fishing with a cane pole along the banks of Big Indian Creek in Middle Georgia — said critics must not be fishermen. “They haven’t seen a kid’s eyes light up when he catches his first fish.”
Others aren’t so nostalgic. Last month, the Georgia Department of Veterans Services was forced by budget problems to close a housing unit for 81 sick or disabled veterans in the town of Milledgeville. “It’s a shame that our veterans are being displaced so we can catch some fish,” said Fae Casper, a retired Army sergeant who heads the Georgia chapter of the American Legion. “Revenue is important, but taking care of the people that allow us to be free is, to me, more important.”
The state Department of Education, like other state agencies, is examining how it will reduce at least 6% of its $8.2 billion budget for the rest of the fiscal year, which ends in June.
“It really makes you question the state’s priorities,” said Phyllis Edwards, superintendent of the City Schools of Decatur, a seven-school system just east of Atlanta. Because of cuts that by 2010 could take as much as $2 million from a current budget of $37 million, the school may have to terminate a Spanish program for elementary students and the five teachers who staff it.
It seems to me this is getting blown way out of proportion. I agree the Governor’s dogged support for the program seems a bit silly, but $19 million won’t solve all our current budget woes. Sure, say the Governor was wrong but don’t suggest that the choice was between taking care of Veterans and Go Fish – or between teaching Spanish in Decatur or Go Fish.
UPDATE: I can see that I didn’t accurately express my opinion on this subject so let me try to do a better job. Go Fish has become a red herring. That is, we have all these people, like the ones mentioned in the WSJ article, complaining about how the budget for their department is going to be cut and trying to say it was so Sonny could fund Go Fish. That’s simply not true. I don’t think Go Fish was a good idea, nor do I think such programs are things government should be doing. However, Go Fish didn’t cause the State’s current budget crisis and to imply that it did doesn’t alleviate the budget woes.
{ 26 comments }
19 mil here. 19 mil there. Soon you’ll be talking about real money.
I, for one, am glad to see our little napoleon get some national attention for all the wonderful things he has done for our state.
It’s not the 19 million. It’s about judgement. And priorities.
As a boater, I like the idea of more boat ramps. And I like to fish.
But this idea that fishing tournaments are going to be an engine of real economic change in georgia is not based in reality.
Cause, you know, we don’t have any water here.
And if the governor really thinks that professional bass fishing is going to be the next NASCAR, then he’s all wet.
Go Fish is a waste. Fishing is not a role of Government.
I agree with Grift – cut a little here and a little there; before you know it you have a whole lot of money. That’s how families budget and the gov’t should to.
Sonny just can’t admit he had a bad idea.
My point was not to try and justify Go Fish. Go Fish has become a red herring. To say “I can’t teach Spanish to my students because of Go Fish” is not accurate.
Damn liberal media
Buzz, the Republican serve up the same Red Herring when they try to connect gay marriage with diseases, pedophelia and rampant masturbation orgys.
The only thing the veteran and the fishing thing have in common is they are taxpayer funded. On that, we agree.
I also agree with your point that just because it is the ‘new common way’ of bizarre political communication is used by both sides does not make it right.
Just make sure you point that out the next time them Repubs use the same tactic to connect two formerly unconnected thingies…
Buzz, this is a self inflicted wound. Telling all state agencies that it is vital that they cut their budget, but keep your own superfluous pet project, invites exactly these kinds of comparisons.
“Revenue is important, but taking care of the people that allow us to be free is, to me, more important.”
Am I the only person that has a problem with they way that is worded?
“Am I the only person that has a problem with they way that is worded?”
Yes.
It should be “people who” not “people that.”
Not what I’m talking about.
“that” is a wild card that can be freely exchanged with “who”.
Jason: No, you are not the only one POed about that statement. It’s the same line of reasoning Senator Jack Hill used last year to defend the state’s ownership and maintenance of golf courses like the one at Hard Labor Creek. I think his wording was on the order of: “Rural people deserve recreation too.”
Bill:
“Who” refers to people, “that” does not.
They can not be freely exchanged.
“They can not be freely exchanged.”
Thanks to Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, et al.
“That” is nonsense, Rugby.
Geez people!
If it was a single word that Jason had a problem with, he most likely had a problem with “allow”, not “that”, “who” or even “whom.” But most likely it was the entire statement that posed the socialist argument that something is needed for someone because they “deserve” it or it’s only “fair” that they have it and we need to use the force of government to take money away from those that “earned” it so the item can be provided to those “less fortunate” who could have “earned” it but haven’t, didn’t or won’t.
That being said. I agree with Jason that I don’t like how it was worded but in the context of the statement… I believe veterans have “earned” just about everything we give them. But then again, I’m a little prejudice when it comes to veterans.
Well if he had a problem with “whom” not being used, he needs to learn when it is appropriate to use “whom”.
In this instance, it was not.
(loves it when people like Adams jumps in thinking we are dead serious on an alternate thread within a thread)
Is there a mnemonic way to know when to use “whom” over “who”?
you’re in the south, no one uses “whom”.
Bill,
I understood the annoying “tongue in cheek” sidebar argument between “who/that.” I just took the opportunity to make or clarify a point.
And umbk is correct, only pretentious Yankee a**holes use “whom.” I know, I married into a family of them.
you’re in the south, no one uses “whom”.
At last! I can tell my southern-bred mom a good excuse!
you’re in the south, no one uses “whom”.
This is another reason why I like you. You are serious about correct Grammar, like me.
Bill
Was she born in GA?
You know we’re behind here.
Yes, she was born in Georgia. She knows her grammar, though.
Both set of my grandparents were born here. Bad grammar. Not terrible, just not proper.
I say things like “landed up” – it drives my husband nuts. He says “you END up, you don’t land up!”
Got it from my mom.
Comments on this entry are closed.