Morning Reads for Thursday, August 23

The morning always has a way of creeping up on me and peeking in my bedroom windows. The sunrise is such a pervert. – Jarod Kintz

Don’t forget tonight is Peach Pundit Road Show at the Movies!  And tomorrow night is Bi-Partisan Date Night.

Bridget Prediction: More and more people are finally seeing the value of technical skills.  Being able to DO something versus think about or manage or strategize.  I’d be interested to see stats of increased enrollment at technical schools this year.  Someone link me if you see numbers.

Ehh, it’s a little slow in the way of news this morning.  Plenty of articles on runoffs, but it’s Peach Pundit – we knew about the runoffs real-time.



Of Interest

Updated by Charlie:  I’m going to add in here a Happy Birthday to Martha Zoller.  Clearly she didn’t get what she wanted out of Tuesday’s vote, but she continues with a good political future ahead of her, whether that’s in media or elected office.  She remains in a position to make a difference for the causes she holds dear.  I look forward to seeing what’s next for her.


  1. Jackster says:

    Okay, I read military sequester I think the military is going to be locked in a room to make a decision. Does that make the president the Jury Foreman?

    Anyway, so the only way to get any sort of cuts to the fed. budget is this whole “Sequester” method…

    But now the congress wants to not cut certain things? I’m glad the macon delegation is speaking up for their districts, but to me military spending cuts are necessary.

    • Jackster says:

      And is it just, me or whenever there are budget cuts needed, the departments which are going to receive the cuts offer up the services and programs which have the biggest emotional attachment…

      Personally speaking, why can’t we cut the amount of contractors we use for intelligence and defense? I find it dishonest and a budgeting gimmick that the DOD, NSA, and CIA use so many contractors.

            • Noway says:

              The term mercs is negative and doesn’t take into account their patriotic service. The term can be used for any government contractor, if it used at all.

              • Blake says:

                It’s negative because of the colossal amounts they get paid, which kind of overshadows any patriotic service. And (semantic quibble) I’ve never heard anyone outside of soldiers & the like being called a mercenary. Behavior described as mercenary, maybe, but not for the person.

                • Noway says:

                  So, a service person who is enlisted on Friday, retires and signs up on Monday as a civilian is a merc and should be scorned? Nice class warfare there, Blake! Overshadows their service to country because of a civilian paycheck? Unreal….
                  Some of those you cite were hung off of a bridge in Fallujah a few years back.
                  But I’m sure those civilian bastards deserved it!!! Yeah, that’s it!!!

                  • Noway says:

                    Blake, Colin Powell was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, certainly a military position. He retired from the military to the civilian position of Secretary of State. Is his patriotism as a civilian with a higher paycheck to be looked down upon?

                  • Blake says:

                    You’re projecting an awful lot. Any “scorn” I’ve expressed here is for the congressional budgeters and their enablers who outsource war to the private sector, ripping off taxpayers and concealing the true cost of war.

                    Though frankly (and without agreeing with your bizarre and inflammatory comments about Fallujah or Colin Powell), mercenaries are often scorned, throughout history, because they *aren’t* doing it for the public service; they’re doing it for the money. Once you’re a private contractor, you aren’t bound to serve the patriotic U.S. of A.; you’re (often) hanging yourself out for any tinpot dictator to hire. There’s a huge difference.

                    • Noway says:

                      Blake, the contractors I speak of are working for the USA government, not helping to prop up Idi Amin’s successor! Jeezalou!
                      What was inflammatory about my pointing out, truthfully, that Powell did go from the military to the State Department and the fact that the military contractors were gunned down and their bodies abused by radical scum? To quote Frank Perdue, “Parts is parts and facts is facts.”
                      And whatever that you do for a living, you do for payment, I assume, so are you a merc of sorts?

                    • Blake says:

                      You’re not listening to me. The contractors you are speaking of are *not* working for the US government; they are working for Blackwater/Xie, Halliburton, or whomever. That’s the *whole point*. They work for whoever pays them.

                      Powell going from the military to the State Department is completely irrelevant; he went from working for one branch of the government to another. And do I really have to explain why focusing on the most emotionally-charged news story involving mercenaries in Iraq is inflammatory?

                      And I already pointed out that only soldiers for hire are referred to as mercs/mercenaries; that’s just the way the language is used. Why am I bothering to repeat myself to you.

                  • caroline says:

                    My nephew in the military has a real problem with these “contractors”. What they do a lot of time is undermine things because they report to a different boss–the company. They also are paid many times what the real patriotic people–the enlisted men are paid. And they are not held accountable for things that soldiers and sailors would be held accountable for in a military court of justice. So really, don’t waste your breath defending these contractors.

                    • Noway says:

                      Unbelievable!! Are you being fair? Caroline, ok, just so I’m clear, if you’re a lowly private you’re a patriot but if you’re a civilian contractor, you’re an unleashed pirate who is to be scored! The Blackwater folks did, indeed, engage in some bad, bad behavior, but don’t paint the entire contractor world with their brush. It isn’t fair to those who have honorably served their country as civilians. Is it ok that I have just wasted my breath? And all of this focus on money, the rate of pay is what it is. It is what the market will bear. Prime example: Military folks who get out of the service with experience in bomb disposal (EOD) are highly sought after by the civilian agencies. They make a ton of money on the private side for the skills they possess. The same with language experts. Those interpreters can make up to a $1000 a day. It is what the market has set on their experience value. These folks are not dishonorable.

      • SallyForth says:

        +100 Dispense with the outsourcing of our government services and the zillion-dollar unaccountable sweetheart contract deals, aka corporate welfare.

      • Noway says:

        How about cutting the same type of contractor personnel that may be employed by GSA, GAO and other non-security related agencies, too?

        • Blake says:

          Yes, by all means. If it can be done in-house, it ought to be. There are many reasons to use contractors–I see no reason government should own an asphalt paving business, for instance–but just as there’s no reason to employ intelligence/military contractors whose sole contract is with the gov’t, I’m sure there are plenty of non-security related agencies with the same problems. Do you know any examples?

  2. wicker says:

    A Gelato plant will bring 100 of those 550 jobs back.–plans-move-to-Marietta?instance=home_top_bullets

    I still think that Cobb County needs to do more for economic development though. Most of the factors that caused Cobb’s boom in the 80s and 90s no longer exist.

    As for that Kansas state senate race, it shows that Democrats are even less tolerant of folks who stray from the party mainstream than the GOP is. There are plenty of socially liberal Republicans, but practically no socially conservative Democrats. Yet it is always the Republicans that are pressured to “move to the center” by going socially liberal. The Democrats get to push their social issues all the time, and the Republicans get tarred as being obsessed with trivial ideas that don’t matter merely for opposing the Democratic/progressive social agenda. It is a double standard that is unfair.

  3. Here’s a great article about the Vogtle reactors and the risk sharing mechanism which is referenced by GPB (which I am in favor of). Among the many things I’ve read, I came across a quote from a Georgia Power exec somewhere that said if a Risk Sharing Mechanism (RSM) was put into place that investors wouldn’t be interested in building the reactor at all. So… if investors aren’t interested in backing and building a nuclear reactor, why would ratepayers be interested in backing / funding / prepaying for it?

  4. John Konop says:

    HUH???? This is nuts…………….

    Police investigate Georgia cheer coach accused of having girls strip

    ………The younger team members would have to answer questions beginning with the word “Honestly.” If they did not answer correctly, they were told to remove an article of clothing or run laps. Cheerleaders could reduce the number of laps to run by taking off an article of clothing, according to the police report….

    ……The coach told the school official that she closed her eyes and did not see if anyone removed all their clothing, according to the police report……..

    • John Vestal says:

      Apparently, it’s also Jay Bookman’s birthday….although I don’t see a joint celebration in this evening’s future. :>)

      Happy Birthday to both!….many happy, healthy returns of the day!

  5. greencracker says:

    On the one hand, I like the “Why is Georgia so …. ” map.

    But on the other hand, the Google auto-fill algorithm uses your personal search history to come up with possible phrases.

    Thus, the map reflects what that one map-maker thinks about the states!

    Try it yourself, you will get different results.

      • CobbGOPer says:

        Tyson is also a former staffer for Lynn Westmoreland. Which means he used to work for Chip Lake, Lynn’s former Chief of Staff and currently Doug Collins’ political consultant.


        • girl with a gun says:

          Wait…I thought Doug claimed to be “the 9th” and only had people from the 9th supporting him. LOL

      • CobbGOPer says:

        And the next question is: did Georgia Freedom PAC run any ads in the 12th primary? Specifically against Andersen? Chip Lake was also Rick Allen’s consultant, after all…

          • CobbGOPer says:

            So the only expenditures this “PAC” makes are to run ads against Zoller, and to support Collins. The treasurer of the “PAC” used to work for Collins’ political consultant until relatively recently, and you don’t think it’s worth looking into?

            • Charlie says:

              You’ve been going off here on Chip for a week. Well before this. If you’re suggesting something improper was done, then spell that out with the evidence that you have.

              Suggesting that Bryan Tyson once worked for Westmoreland and Chip once worked for Westmorland means….Chip and Bryan Tyson know each other. I know both of them too. Does that mean I’m part of a conspiracy? Are you suggesting I lawyer up for something?

              You’re still bitter about a loss from Chip 10 cycles ago. Maybe others, I don’t know. But let it go. As a few others have already attempted to nudge you, you come across here as mad at the world – more mad at some than others.

              It ain’t helping you, and it ain’t helping anybody else.

              Let. It. Go.

    • Calypso says:

      I can’t even put into words my reaction to this flaming a$$hole’s comments. I hope he loses 99%-1%. No, I hope NO ONE votes for this troglodytae. (No offense to any troglodytae that may be reading this.)

  6. AMB says:

    If you are going to criminalize abortion, then aren’t the candidate’s views a somewhat logical outcome?

    • Three Jack says:

      I’m with you AMB, no exceptions. If the GOP is going to continue as the anti-choice party, then the party better be prepared to deal with wackjobs like Akin and the sheriff candidate.

      • saltycracker says:

        And the approved by Obama TV ads are saying Romney and Paul oppose abortion for rape victims after Romney publically rejected Akin. So what’s more irresponsibly crazier the POTUS or some NH sheriff ?

        • Blake says:

          Well, yes, but one might reasonably think that rejecting Akin was merely deceptive damage control, given that Romney is still tight with Akin’s inspirational mentor Dr. Willke.

        • John Konop says:

          This is the problem……. This will get ugly……….”focible rape or incest” this will not play well in swing states……..

          …..Ryan backed more than one ‘forcible rape’ abortion bill

          The Ryan-Johnson failed amendment did specify limited exceptions, permitting abortion coverage including when the life of the mother is at stake and in line 16 of the proposed text “… unless the pregnancy is the result of an act of forcible rape or incest.”

          More recently and more widely covered, Ryan was among a much larger group of 186 co-sponsors that included Akin of H.R. 5939, “To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections….”

          Again, the text of the 2010 bill, typically written by committee senior staff, included nearly the same wording as his July 2009 amendment with the term “forcible rape.” The language in lines 15 and 16 reads: “(1) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of forcible rape, or incest with a minor….”

          • Harry says:

            The argument about whether forced rape causes pregnancy is a tempest in a teapot. The real issue is, should rape babies be aborted? The baby isn’t responsible for the circumstances of it’s conception. If she desires, mother can give the baby for adoption without ever having to see it.

            • Three Jack says:


              “The baby isn’t responsible for the circumstances of it’s conception.”

              In the case of rape, does this mean you are holding the mother responsible? She must endure 9 months of an unwanted pregnancy caused by a violent act against her that can never be understood by a man. Anybody using the ‘baby isn’t responsible’ shows a total lack of respect for the mother. Typical of the GRTL crowd.

              • Harry says:

                “She must endure 9 months of an unwanted pregnancy caused by a violent act against her that can never be understood by a man.”

                Bad things happen to good people. Taking an innocent life is not a remedy.

                • caroline says:

                  Okay. So you think she should not be allowed to have an abortion. Are you going to follow her around and make sure she goes to the doctor? Are you going to follow her around and make sure that she eats right? It seems to me that someone who was compelled to carry a pregnancy to term that was a result of a traumatic incident like a rape certainly could care less about prenatal care and all the other things that go along with being pregnant. What is the punishment that you think should be meted out if she drinks and smokes during pregnancy because surely there’s no desire to have a rapists child for most women. What happens if she takes things into her own hands and tries to miscarry herself like throwing herself down the stairs or falling on her stomach on purpose? You can make her stay pregnant but you can’t make her go along with everything else unless you are advocating for a virtual police state for pregnant women.

                • Noway says:

                  Harry, making her carry the result of a violent attack to term and deliver the result of the worst kind of physical assault is just plain wrong. I think you’re just stirring the pot here. I don’t see how reasonable people would prevent an exception for rape or the health of the mother.

                • Three Jack says:

                  “Bad things happen to good people. Taking an innocent life is not a remedy.”

                  Yea well bad things also happen to barely formed tissue mass as well. No need to carry on this discussion as it is clear you think women should be further punished for being the victim of a heinous crime. But I will ask, would you force your daughter to carry a baby conceived via rape even if she did not want to?

            • Scott65 says:

              I think that should be her choice…as well as her choice to end the pregnancy as early as possible with a hormonal pill (morning after pill) which prevents any fertilized egg from implanting itself. But in the area of adoption…who pays for the 9 months of prenatal care and such. I’m not sure but if possible adoptive parents knew a baby was from a “forcible rape” they might have second thoughts adopting the child. Its easy to say no abortion…in any circumstance…but the issue is much deeper than that

        • Harry says:

          Everything is related to everything. It’s really not possible to ignore certain reality, especially not infanticide.

          • SallyForth says:

            Infanticide?? Get a grip, Harry. A fertilized ovum, microscopic blob of goo, is NOT a baby! You know how we can tell? Because they put fertilized eggs into freezers for weeks, months, years. You cannot put a baby in a freezer. at all.

        • wicker says:

          If the left would stop pushing their social agenda, the right wouldn’t have a social agenda at all. It amazes me how everyone is so one-sided with these things.

          • SallyForth says:

            @wicker, I don’t think the left is doing the pushing – it’s the right wingers who are pushing their agenda, trying to put government inside women’s bodies.

            It isn’t a “social agenda” for women to just try to live their lives, defend their Constitutional right to privacy, particularly inside their own body. It is a basic necessity. Women are also defending their three basic rights set forth in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If gestating a fertilized ovum is their choice, they should be allowed to do so without government intrusion; the same applies if their choice is the reverse.

            If the truly ultra-liberal, demonic big-government-intrusion promoting people who disingenuously call themselves “conservative” would stop attacking women’s right to religious freedom, self-determination and decent healthcare, there would be no need for women to constantly defend themselves. They could get on with that life, liberty and pursuit of happiness thing.

Comments are closed.