Morning Reads for Friday, October 26, 2012

I am not one of those who in expressing opinions confine themselves to facts. – Mark Twain

– The Atlanta Press Club is hosting Georgia: Red or Blue? October 29 at The Commerce Club.
Ryan raises boatload of cash for the GOP at Wednesday RUSH HOUR fund-raiser. No word if the campaign will reimburse the thousands of inconvenienced redirected commuters for the gas burned.
– Georgia is the 33rd most taxed state in the USA.
Gov. Deal appoints another department head. We should start a game called “Nathan Deal’s Seven Degrees of Separation.” Or something.
– Savannah Morning News picks Ron Stephens for District 164 and Jack Kingston for District 1.
– Told you the early voting lines were long in Douglas County.
The rule of unintended consequences.
Chick-fil-A thriving, despite those who wish it wasn’t.

Sen. Johnny Isakson on the “fiscal cliff.” (Warning: audio begins immediately)
Sen. Saxby Chambliss on those Benghazi emails.
Preference Cascades and such.
– Wait for it….Hurricane Sandy is …. raaaaacist.
Another book for the insomniac’s night stand.
– So much for that “special relationship.”
Rep Jim Moran’s son, Patrick, in deeper trouble.
Gloooooooom, despair and agony being wailed by DC Democrats.
Toxic Desperation.

Random Everywhere:
Very.Important. Stuff. Hurricane Sandy may impact The World’s Largest Cocktail Party. Oh, and the football game, too.
Costumes from Gone With The Wind beautifully restored the Harry Ransom Center at the University of Texas.
– Sure, he fills out the uniform nicely, but can he sing?

Don’t Forget tonight’s Bon Voyage party for Jason Pye at Ormsby’s, 6pm – ???.


  1. Andre says:

    The Democrats’ nominee for Sheriff of Clayton County, Victor Hill, saw his trial delayed Thursday after the prosecution filed an appeal to Judge Albert Collier’s dismissal of five charges against Hill.

    Judge Collier turned Georgia campaign finance law on its head when he agreed with Steven Frey, attorney for Victor Hill, that there is no crime of using campaign funds for personal use because the candidate owns those funds.

    The prosecution in the Hill case filed its appeal of Judge Collier’s ruling with the Georgia Court of Appeals, because Collier’s ruling has statewide implications.

    “This is an important issue, whether a candidate for office can take his or her campaign funds for purposes not allowed by law and if he or she does, what is the penalty for the misuse of those funds?,” said special prosecutor Layla Zon. “Is it only an ethical violation under the ethics statute — which is a misdemeanor, no matter how much money is misappropriated — or is it also theft? The state’s position is that it is both. This matters not only to the citizens of Clayton County but also throughout the entire state.”

    As of right now, it is perfectly legal for folks like Buzz Brockway (sorry, Buzz; your name was the first that came to mind for use in this example) to use his campaign cash towards renovating his home. I don’t believe lawmakers had that kind of expenditure in mind when they passed a law that reads, “contributions and interest thereon, if any, shall not constitute personal assets of such candidate or such public officer.”

    Buzz, since you were my guinea pig in this comment, I think you should take the lead on this. Craft legislation that clears up who “owns” campaign funds. Or, as I said before, you’re going to have a bumper crop of candidates waving around Judge Collier’s ruling saying they did nothing wrong when they used campaign contributions for personal reasons.

    • I’m not sure I’m the best one to craft such legislation as it’s outside my area of expertise. However, it needs to be done. When the bankruptcy Judge took claim over Jill Chambers’ campaign funds a few years ago I thought it was strange. Campaign funds are not personal funds, there are rules about how that money can and can’t be spent. It looks like the Victor Hill case is causing even more confusion.

      Thanks Andre.

    • Andre says:

      Here’s a little epilogue:

      The IRS, in Publication 17, says that campaign contributions “are not income to a candidate unless they are diverted to his or her personal use.”

      Victor Hill has not denied that he diverted campaign funds to his personal use. Hill simply believes that he “owns” those campaign funds, and can spend them as he sees fit.

      The question, however, is whether Victor Hill reported those campaign contributions as income. If he didn’t, then maybe the feds need to audit Hill’s finances and look into the possibility of tax evasion.

      I’m interested in seeing the income tax returns of one Victor Keith Hill. I wonder if he’ll release them.

    • saltycracker says:

      Unfortunately we can’t have teachers interpreting these laws, the police or campus police ahould be in a position to make a call. We have a process to hear the circumstances and probably quickly dismiss it. It should not involve a lot of people or time. If we can’t trust what we put in place to protect our children then we have a big problem.

      What I have seen is an occurance of mandated reporting in schools has a very big influence on the children including the observers and changes behavior. Possibly averting a bad situation.

    • Lea Thrace says:

      His Dad being a vet has ZERO bearing on the situation. It is only mentioned to tug at heart strings. That pisses me off for many reasons. Do not exploit this man’s service to his nation for something COMPLETELY unrelated.

      I agree that discretion should be allowed. However, schools have ZERO TOLERANCE laws that they have to adhere to. Either change the rules to give discretion back to administrators and teachers or enforce the rules as they stand. But right now, the law stands so the school did the right thing. No matter how sad that may be.

      • Blog Goliard says:

        Why do I get the sense that I’d hear the same thing–“it’s the law! it’s ZERO TOLERANCE! we have no choice! the school did the right thing!”–even if the rule said the child had to be drawn and quartered?

        Bad regulations suck and must be changed. Authority figures who shrug and follow bad regulations even when children are needlessly hurt by them also suck and must be changed.

        • Calypso says:

          Zero tolerance=zero brains

          Hiding behind ‘zero tolerance’ allows those who should be making decisions to abdicate their responsibilities to the students and their parents.

          Zero tolerance is a weak, irresponsible and cowardly way to deal with issues in the schools. Zero tolerance should be thrown out and replaced with adults making adult decisions, except no one wants either the authority or the responsibility for making those decisions.

          • AMB says:

            Guns have consequences. All you pro-gun types want guns everywhere with few restrictions. But guns in the wrong hands and the wrong place should have strict consequences.
            I have no sympathy for the “I forgot my gun was in there.” It’s a frickin gun. Be more careful or give it up.

            • mountainpass says:

              I’ll talk slow for you.

              He is 8. It was his BB gun. It was unloaded.

              If he brings his dad’s .40 to school then we can talk.

          • saltycracker says:


            Zero tolerance should move decisions to a trained and experienced level not blindly punish children for dumb things. It is wrong when the consequences are automatic such as suspension for a bread knife in a lunch bag.

            The level of “forgiveness” or don’t want to get involved or close relations with the parent causes some teachers to make the wrong decision. So a bad seed watching this learns the boundaries are very moveable. Why put it on them ?

            Just observed a big lesson in this.

      • mountainpass says:

        Exploit…….? I’m not exploiting it. I’m pointing out that his family at home is under attack by the same government that he is in harms way while fighting for. I think it’s easy to understand that the 8 year old meant no harm. He found the gun and told the teacher. Now he’s in the Court System. That costs me you and his family for what? He’s 8, he did the right thing(although if he had kept his mouth shut he might have made it home, of course if he got caught he would endure the same fate). But he didn’t know all that, he did the what he was taught to do, trust the teacher and instead of getting slack he gets court. I hope he learned something here.

        Yes lets change the rules, I don’t think it’s a law.

        • Lea Thrace says:

          The exploitation comment was not directed at you. But I stand by it. It has NO RELEVANCE to the incident. It’s not his dad’s gun. He didnt have the gun because Dad was in the military. It adds nothing factual to the story. It’s like mentioning that the kid was asian, or had cancer. None of it explains why the gun was brought to school. It’s just there to stir up emotion. Which to mean screams of exploitation.

          It is a law by the way. The schools have zero tolerance policies but the reporting aspect is mandated by Georgia law.

  2. saltycracker says:

    Proving you just cant make this stuff up.
    Now an enticing legal reason to serve the public.
    If only we could count on some rulings to stay around !

Comments are closed.