1. Looks like he took you to school, Tyler. From the Senator’s Facebook page:
    “Don Balfour never said we should triple college tuition. It’s a false Internet rumor. Feel free to contact me at the office for more information – 404-656-0095. Thanks.”

    Why don’t you call him and put the rumors to rest?

  2. todd rehm says:

    Tyler, you should really call the man and put his side out too. If you can refute what he tells you, post that too. It’s punk -ass to do otherwise.

    • Tyler says:

      I actually plan on it. I don’t hate the man at all. I’d have posted this no matter which legislator did it. Some people really have no senses of humor. This blog is much more than just debate. Lighten up peeps.

      • Henry Waxman says:

        Tyler, “lighten up” was exactly what I was going to say to you after you got all upset about my Karen Handel “GED” video posting. It too was a joke.

  3. todd rehm says:

    I find the posting humorous but you still should have asked him his side of it as long as you’re posting a statement that he refutes.

    And for what it’s worth I have a scintillating sense of humor. Ask Don Balfour.

  4. Ramblinwreck says:

    Speaking of SB31, why is that still needed now that Obama is guaranteeing Georgia Power’s loans? Should Georgia Power customers have to pay twice for that financing?

  5. Jeff says:

    I don’t know about the Senator’s motivations here, but I have been known to join groups or fan pages I oppose simply to keep easy tabs on them via FB. Really, if you call yourself and informed purveyor of fact and opinion, how can you NOT want to keep tabs on the opposition’s thoughts and actions to whatever peaceful and respectful degree possible?

  6. Chris says:

    Well, we know which consultants Don is using. Tyler never said a thing about tuition and what Don might or might not have said.

    Tyler pointed out that people should be more careful what groups they join, and when they do join them, to remove them from their news feed.

  7. c_murrayiii says:

    Nothing speaks more to the inevitable doom of our nation that students who protest and get their panties in a twist over actually having to pay for college. Just look at all the “demonstrations” today across the nation by young, spoiled nitwits who are angry about the state not carrying their load as much anymore.

    • I’d gladly pay more tuition, if they solved the issue of getting people graduated on time.

      Taking a full load of only required classes it took me an extra year outside of the four year track program, solely for the reason that the classes I needed were not offered in a sequence that allowed for me to graduate. The only two courses I took that I did not need were in my last semester, to meet the hour requirement.

      Tuition may need to be higher, but here in Georgia they need to fix problems before they can start charging more.

    • TheAirborneOne says:

      Nothing speaks more to the inevitable doom of our nation than legislators that make ludicrous requests without an iota of thought and get their depends full of poop over actually having to explain their reasons for making such requests (which directly impact 300,000+ citizens.) Just look at the “press conference” today across the street from the Governor held by by a joint-committee of ignorant, spoiled elitists who are angry about having their pre-conventional thoughts questioned and not able to shed their accountability as easily anymore. 😉

    • Ryan English says:

      It’s not so much the issue of paying for college. Lord knows I’m def having to take out enough in loans to cover debt for a good portion of my next 2 decades, but I agree with Ron in that tuition increases are fine so long as they are doing something to prevent the upperclassmen from getting screwed over. Too many times in undergrad I had to wait till the next semester or possible 2 semesters to get the class I needed. Now the colleges are taking in more freshmen students and cutting even more upper level classes. The term “4 year degree” is quickly becoming a thing of the past. Of course, given the current state of the economy, it might actually payoff to stay in college for a decade and then by that time, the savior Obama and his cronies will have wrecked the economy so much that student debt might never have to be paid back.

    • macho says:

      It’s really no different than telling an infant she is no longer allowed to have a baby bottle anymore. There will tears and temper tantrums, but she’ll learn to deal with it pretty quickly.

      • Kellie says:

        If high schools would stop inflating students grades, we’d have less students in college and less money wasted.
        Not everyone belongs in college.

        • Add to the fact that colleges and universities in Georgia, realizing that they have a significant amount of students having their tuition and fees covered by the HOPE scholarship, have steadily raised their tuition far outpacing the cost of inflation realizing their best students will never notice the cost increases.

          Of course, we’re now getting to the point where the HOPE scholarship is endangered by the Board of Regents actions.

          Maybe they all need to be sent a copy of the fairy tale “The Goose that Laid the Golden Egg.” Apparently they forgot the lesson of that story.

          • Yep, I was bored in college and dropped out in the first semester to go work for a dot com. I’ve considered going back one of these days just to get the piece of paper, but figure what’s the point? I’ve trained so many people with college degrees and various IT certifications that I keep coming to the conclusion that it’s probably a waste of my time.

            • ByteMe says:

              I was bored, too, but stuck it out because the women were totally HOT.

              Maybe it’s different here in Georgia 🙂

              (Then I moved to Colorado and…. yuck!)

              Seriously: for some jobs you don’t need a degree, but for others when you’re stuck competing with people who have advanced degrees, you’re going to find the drawbacks to your earlier decision.

              • c_murrayiii says:

                I can certify that the women at UGA are indeed very hot. And they don’t wear jean shorts and clap their arms together like Frankenstein monsters.

                • Yes, but I’ve also met a few of the women at UGA… the only thing bright about them was the sparkly jewelry and jewel studded jeans and shirts they wore. Intelligent conversations (ie, things not revolving around American Idol, TMZ, Entertainment Tonight) weren’t possible. I will say that I do know a few really bright women that graduated from UGA, but they are few and far between. One of them is probably going to be working for us rather soon. But if all you’re looking for in women is looks, then sure… UGA has plenty of good looking women. I don’t think the HOPE scholarship or any form of taxpayer money should pay for them to go party and be eye candy for those seriously seeking an education though.

                  • Those students tend to lose their HOPE scholarship pretty quickly.

                    I was the 2nd graduating class to get the HOPE scholarship. It was the sole reason I choose UGA over Vanderbilt or George Washington.

        • Republican Lady says:

          That is so true. I am teaching college students who think it is okay to turn homework in whenever they get around to it, not when it is due, then complain their high school teachers let them turn it in whenever.

          Some can’t construct a simple sentence, and have told me they don’t like doing term papers so they don’t. Then they want their parents to come talk to me about changing their grade.

          In talking to my former professors, they say the same thing, some students, because of the NCLB, want degrees with no effort.

          Students have learn how to manipulate the system to their advantage and get upset when the same tactics don’t work in college.

          • ByteMe says:

            Does anyone really think Cary Grant would be sitting around his parents’ basement playing video games??

            We have raised a whole new generation of children who won’t grow up.

              • ByteMe says:

                I call BULLSH*T on that, DNA. You continually claim that it’s the parents’ responsibility to raise their children to become adults. So you can’t now claim it’s all the guvmint’s fault. If you can’t even believe your own faulty theories, what do you have left?

                • Call BS all you want. But you’re the one that keeps arguing to increase the size and scope of government intervention…. and to punish and steel from the “responsible” in order to give to the unaccountable and irresponsible (this includes corporate bailouts, protectionist spending policies and interventionist wars on whatever… just so you know I’m not just talking about handouts to the lazy). Eventually, people will and do say “why bother?” and quit producing and join in the line to the “free” stuff.

                  As long as government keeps handing out the fish… teaching to fish can possibly only lead to a job working for said government (or the chosen corporate winners – SB-31). And unless that is one’s goal, why bother? Have you not noticed the “Going Galt” bumper stickers?

                  • ByteMe says:

                    Still being that shining light for your little movement, huh DNA? You might want to consider that with all that responsibility you want people to take that you stop blaming government for all your problems. Learn to take responsibility!

                    I say lay the blame where it belongs. At the feet of the parents who refuse to make their kids grow up. You would rather say “They’re helpless! It’s all the government’s fault!” It’s a loser’s view you have there, DNA. No wonder your party is going nowhere.

                    • ByteMe says:


                      Let me know where I said “goverment is the solution” to the problem of parents not making their kids grow up. Seems you want to blame it on the government boogie man instead of the parents. What’s up with that??

                    • See, I don’t think Danny’s saying that at all. I think he’s saying that these irresponsible parents (who I blame just as much as you do for not taking responsibility for their own children) are simply looking at this government option being flashed in front of them as if it’s candy and saying, “You know what, why should I bother putting in all this effort when someone else will do it for me?” When you take away the option of the government doing [insert task] for you, that leaves two options… either you step up to the task and get to work, or you don’t get it done.

                      So long as the government continues to give people an “out”, some people will continue to take it, while others (the responsible ones) will do what they should. And then there’s a subset of those that do what they should that also complain about those who are simply taking the out because they’re lazy, or whatever other adjective you’d like to use to describe them. You can include me in that subset, and I believe Danny as well… though I’ll leave it up to him to confirm that. 🙂

                    • I really don’t blame government… the nature of government is to want to grow (I think Jefferson said something about government growth being compared to growing Ivy “through every crack and crevice”)… Actually, I blame enablers like you, the manure if you will, that provides for the growth of government and the byproduct of mass dependency. It’s policies that you promote that eventually lead to more and more becoming wards of the state, both corporate and individual (whether they want to or not in some cases, (remember those that were forced to take bailout money and the proposed forced-on nationalized healthcare) in some cases due to mandates and bans that result in lack of choice), not mine. I’m for limited government, with both economic and civil liberty issues. It is policies you promote that result in limited options that tend to eventually reward for limitless irresponsible behavior and unaccountability.

                    • ByteMe says:

                      And yet… your party is so unpopular, DNA. But I’ll bet you want to blame that on other people as well.


                    • Mozart says:

                      Err…let’s bring some reality to this situation:

                      Approximate birth of Democratic Party in the US: 1787

                      Approximate birth of the Republican Party in the US: mid-1850’s

                      Approximate birth of the Libertarian Party in the US: 1971

                      Relatively speaking, the LP has done quite well in building a base in the short time it has existed.

                      It took the GOP 100+ years (depending on your measurement points) to make any kind of impact on the political landscape.

                      The LP has been around a very short 39 years. Give it some time before you so blatantly discount it, ByteMe.

                    • GOPGeorgia says:

                      1854, GOP founded by anti slavery activists
                      1856, John C Freemont, first Republican candidate for President, US Senator from California, born in Savannah GA
                      1860, Abe

                    • Population 1850 – 23,191,876
                      Population 2010 – 308,827,418
                      (2010 number from Census.Gov as I’m posting this)

                      In 1850, the country was still fairly new, and creating a second party wasn’t difficult. Creating a third party nearly 200 years later when the country has grown exponentially is quite a bit different of a situation. You can’t equate the two. Perhaps the LP will never become as big as the other two parties. Or perhaps people will notice that government spending is no longer a matter of if they should spend our money… but a matter of how they should spend it when it comes to the two major parties. Either way, the mindset of the population has changed from 1850. Back then, it was a mindset of working to better yourself and your family through hard work and people cared a lot more about politics. Nowadays, people want the cliffs notes in a 5 minute recap on the Bert Show and get on with their lives. People have become dependent upon the government being there for their needs instead of themselves.

                • ByteMe says:

                  Amazing. The “people need to take responsibility” crowd want to blame the government for parents not forcing their kids to grow up. Just stunning in the hypocrisy.

                  I guess I shouldn’t have expected more.

            • Republican Lady says:

              You probably aren’t old enough to remember but John Kennedy once said in a speech in the very early sixties, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

              Then we got Johnson’s social programs and it seems that quote went out of fashion and evolved into, “what’s in it for me,” and, “you owe me.”

              We need to go back and live Kennedy’s quote.

        • Technocrat says:

          Just make Hope scholars who fail or drop out replay the money with interest.
          Call [change] it to a LOAN which self extinguishes upon graduation with a 3.0.

          Just like we did for doctors and dentists who worked in rural poor areas [or military] for 4 years.

          • Ryan English says:

            The problem is not one that can be solved in just few simple steps. As a benefactor of the HOPE scholarship, I am all for this idea of making it a loan for those who accept it and then drop out, but what is defined as failing? Do we penalize only the students who accept the scholarship and then after say 2 semesters, lose it, but still graduate? What about those who lose it, then manage to actually work their way back and receive it again before graduation? I guess what I’m getting at is this, if at any point you accept the scholarship, but for some reason do not graduate with it, do you have to repay it then?

            As mentioned earlier, I agree with the point about students who graduate with it because of inflated grades. But is the problem with the students (who receive the scholarship) or the teachers who (essentually) lied to the students and built them up on false promises? Who would repay it then? The problem begins in the home, and progresses through our education system. College freshman in many cases arrive at college knowing only slightly more than a high school freshman knows. I personally have witnessed college english profs in 1101 classes, who are supposed to be teaching things such as research methods, having to place their energy in teaching basic grammer and composition. ( I myself do not have the best grammer in the world, but I feel that I can at least get by) but the majority of these students have no idea what an adjective is, or what passive voice is.

            The problem begins long before the student ever reaches College. College is simply another platform for exposing the failure in our education system as a whole.

            • Kellie says:

              Maybe the HOPE shouldn’t be given until the 2nd year of college. Too many students are qualifying for it in high school with inflated grades so they end up flunking out within the first year of college.

              • Republican Lady says:

                A good friend sent this to me. Tell me what you think about it.

                Fifty Years of Math 1959 – 2009 (in the USA )

                Last week I purchased a burger at Burger King for $1.58. The counter girl took my $2 and I was digging for my change when I pulled 8 cents from my pocket and gave it to her. She stood there, holding the nickel and 3 pennies, while looking at the screen on her register. I sensed her discomfort and tried to tell her to just give me two quarters, but she hailed the manager for help. While he tried to explain the transaction to her, she stood there and cried.. Why do I tell you this? Because of the evolution in teaching math since the 1950s:

                1. Teaching Math In 1950s
                A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit ?

                2. Teaching Math In 1960s
                A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?

                3. Teaching Math In 1970s
                A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?

                4. Teaching Math In 1980s
                A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.

                5. Teaching Math In 1990s
                A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers, and if you feel like crying, it’s ok. )

                6. Teaching Math In 2009
                Un hachero vende una carretada de madera para $100. El costo de la producciones es $80. Cuanto dinero ha hecho?

  8. boatfoot says:

    When the Teachers Retirement System of Georgia is sitting on $ 50 billion dollars and the investment staffers get incredible raises and an average of $ 16,000 in bonuses in a year when they lost 13% of the fund’s value. Tuition is not the first place to look to make up budget shortfalls.

    This obnoxious above private industry level of benefits was built on the backs of Georgia taxpayers and the college students’ tuition. Maybe it is time for them to invest a little in the future of higher education rather than the stock market.

Comments are closed.