Morning Reads: 9 September 2013

Happy Monday. Here’s what happened over the weekend. Don’t forget that there’s another BBQ stop coming up soon, though my suburban Atlanta self is going to need to consult the internet to find out where Danielsville actually is.


Science, coming to a university near you, pending the General Assembly.
Columbia County, SC is looking at another $.01 sales tax for roads.
Some folks are getting vocal with their opinions on the August Commission.
If you don’t know anything about Macon, check out this interesting piece.
I’m not sure who well this will go over, but I think it may end poorly.
In case you were curious about what John Linder is up to nowadays.


 Ben Jealous, the current head of the NAACP, has announced his resignation.
Did you really need a full SWAT team for a 107 year old man?
Pass the tinfoil, please.
What to expect from the White House on Syria this week.
And with much rejoicing from Ed, wrestling is back in the Olympics.


Arkansas over Samford 31-21
Auburn over Arkansas State 38-9
Florida lost to Miami 21-16
Georgia over South Carolina 41-30, No I don’t want to talk about it.
Kentucky over Miami Ohio 41-7
LSU over UAB 56-17
Mississippi State over Alcorn State 51-7
Mizzu over Toledo 38-23
Ole Miss over SE Missouri State 31-13
Tennessee over Western Kentucky 52-20
Texas A&M over Sam Houston State 65-28
Vanderbilt over Austin Peay 38-3

Everything Else

 NFL teams and their respective beers.
I don’t think he’s familiar with the Streisand Effect, but he’s about to be.
That’s a big volcano


  1. Noway says:

    Love this gem. Nearly half of all births now covered by Medicaid. One more picking of productive people’s pocket. I know I’m happy to help out! Let’s see, 47% pay no federal income taxes, now this wonderful stat, 48% of births have gov’t help! Is this a great country or what?!

      • Noway says:

        43% doesn’t make me feel any better. Everyone should pay into the system. The number of people not paying some federal income tax should be zero.

        • Ellynn says:

          Until last year my parents didn’t pay any Fedral Income Taxes for about 5 years. They were between the age they retired and younger then 71 before the IRA’s kicked in to place. They didn’t collect any income outside of their intestest from savings, S.S checks and my mother’s teacher’s retirement plan. They paid enough in state taxes, their additional health insurance plans, medical expences outside of Medicare and insurance coverage, and Wisconsin based property taxes on a house, that they had enough dedectibles that they got a full refund of all federal taxes.

          Which federal write off should we get rid of so everyone pays some federal taxes?

            • Ellynn says:

              It was taxed orginally proir to the check being issued in the case of the pension or was sumbited to the IRS to be taxed. Then the dedectibles were subtracted and EVERYTHING they paid in to the federal government that year or was submited to be paid was refunded. They paid $0.00 in federal taxes. They still paid state income tax, and their $6000 plus property tax bill – which the fedral government lets you dedect as being taxed by the federal system. Buy the IRS refunded all past taxes paid in to the government for that year, including the 2009 report were the 47% comes from.

              • Noway says:

                But I guess they did pay fed taxes on their incomes and after all of the deductions you spoke of they had the $$ refunded. But it appears from what you described that they did initially pay.

                • Ellynn says:

                  Any one who gets income from either a job or an account that has a tax ID pays intiall federal income tax on that income. My 95 year old grandmother pays federal income tax on my grandfather’s private pension plan she still receives. My 20 year old niece who goes to college and works part time pays income tax on anything she makes. But at the end of the year when either one files their tax returns, both of them are getting full refunds. My niece because she makes less then $16,000 a year and gets a standard dedution, and my grandmother because after being in some form of nursing care for the last 11 years, everything paid to the nursing home at this point is dedectible.

                  Both are part of the 43 or 47% who pay no federal income tax. My niece still pays that 12 % or so of Social Security/ Medicare taxes.

        • David C says:

          AGAIN: Everyone DOES pay into the system. Income tax is not the only tax, and most who pay no income tax make up the bulk of those supplying payroll tax, which has a cap on how much income is assessed by it. So saying people are somehow cheating the system because they don’t pay federal income tax is either displaying complete ignorance or trying to grind a partisan axe.

          • Noway says:

            Didn’t say they didn’t pay into the system. But some pay into the system more than do others. Some do not pay federal income taxes, while others pay all you lissted PLUS federal taxes. That’s a fact.

          • Noway says:

            And some not only do not pay any federal income taxes they are given the Earned Income Tax Credit!! They get free money for contributing nothing federally. Great vote buying scheme! I want me some of that!

          • gcp says:

            Everyone does not pay into the system. Husband /wife whose only income is social security (below a certain level) pay no income or payroll tax. They may pay Medicare tax but by then it’s more of a user fee than a tax. Pensions pay no payroll tax, and only pay income tax after a certain income level. And those that get EITC, child tax credit and other credits may receive more than paid even after including payroll tax. And of course the millions that don’t file, pay nothing.

        • Ed says:

          “Everyone should pay into the system. The number of people not paying some federal income tax should be zero.”

          As someone who has received a hefty refund every year (due to a penury for a salary), I agree.

  2. John Vestal says:

    Link to liveblog of today’s SCOTUSblog panel discussions on upcoming term sponsored by UGA Law and Peabody awards here.

    “This morning the University of Georgia will live-stream a series of panels on the Court and the upcoming Term, featuring Pete Williams of NBC News, Tony Mauro of the National Law Journal, Janet Murray of Georgia Tech, Sonja West of the University of Georgia Law School, and Tom Goldstein and Amy Howe of SCOTUSblog. The first panel, from 9:00 to 10:15 a.m., will discuss SCOTUSblog’s coverage of the court and will be moderated by Jeffrey Jones, director of the Peabody Awards. The second, from 10:30 to 11:45 a.m., will focus on coverage of the Court in the digital age and will be moderated by Bill Lee of Grady College. The third, from 1:30 to 2:45 p.m. and moderated by Sonja West, will explore the Roberts Court and the upcoming Term. This event is co-hosted by the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, the Peabody Awards, and the University of Georgia School of Law. (We are very grateful for the kindness and generosity shown to SCOTUSblog by the entire University of Georgia community, including particularly the staff that administers the Peabody Awards.)”

    H/T: Amy Howe, Link to UGA panels on coverage of the Court and the upcoming Term, SCOTUSblog

    • Eric The Younger says:

      1) We were an established university in 1801, California was still Spanish at that point. We are the “real” and original USC no matter what that damn 9th circuit court case says.
      2) How about Chattanooga?

  3. Noway says:

    Yeah, we gotta put a stop to all of those blind folks who’ve been arrested for those accidental shootings. Can’t let them exercise their 2nd amendment rights.

    • xdog says:

      Hey, I support the 2nd amendment too but that doesn’t mean I think having blind folks handle loaded weapons in public is a good idea.

      • Noway says:

        Doesn’t matter if you think it’s a good idea or not. It’s really irrelevent what you think. It’s their right to own a gun if they want to. What if they are collectors of firearms? You gonna deny them the right guaranteed by the constitution? Don’t think so, thank God!

        • xdog says:

          Sorry, it’s laws not rights that are the question here. It’s Iowa law that says it’s OK for the blind to carry, just as it’s Iowa law that says it’s not OK for the blind to drive. Doesn’t matter if you think it’s a good idea or not.

          • Noway says:

            Wrong, xdog. Feeble attempt but thanks for playing. Driving ain’t a constitutional right. An army of Stevie Wonders has the right to own a gun, concealed or on the hip, no law will prevent that. None. Try writing one and see if one of those Stevie’s doesn’t hall your backside all the way to the Supremes, if necessary. You’ll lose…badly.

          • Noway says:

            Hey xdog, what if a county in Iowa doesn’t think 18 year olds are mature enough to vote. And they write a law that says voting is now raised to 21! that’s the LAW, xdog. What do you think is gonna happen? Oh, yeahhhhh….

            • xdog says:

              You’re not making sense. Try to pay attention. I never claimed driving was constitutionally protected but then neither is ready ownership of machine guns, to mention one legal limitation. Similarly, voting age in non-Federal elections vary according to state/local laws.

              Legally blind people in Iowa can carry concealed weapons because that’s what Iowa law says. If Iowans change the law their carrying privileges are done.

              • Noway says:

                I stick with my earlier response. If you try to limit a blind person’s ability to have a toters permit, you’ll lose on constitutional grounds. It wouldn’t even be a contest.

                • xdog says:

                  Come on Noway. There’s a whole raft of Supreme Court decisions, federal and state laws and local regs limiting gun usage. Just to name a few: licensing requirements for guns vary from state to state; except in special circumstances you can’t carry a gun into a federal building; there’s no conceal permit that lets you walk around with a shotgun under your raincoat; you can’t make a machine gun.

                  I don’t think blind people are capable of handling guns safely, just as I don’t think palsy victims are. You can disagree but don’t act like Iowans couldn’t change the law if they wanted to. It’d be the same as the feds changing the laws allowing pistols in national parks.

                  • Noway says:

                    I see your example but I can also see some Hellen Keller suing the dog squeeze out of the jurisdiction doing the law. Using the ADA , for one. “They’re discriminating against me ’cause I’m disabled.” Emotion wins every time it’s tried. In this instance I see the blind person winning, that’s all.

  4. TPNoGa says:

    I got to sit in that steam bath known as Sun Life Stadium and watch my Gators self destruct. I can’t believe I flew all the way to Miami and endured riding in a car with all Miami fans just to see that. Disgusting.

    Who would have ever thought of my two colleges, Baylor would be the one with the good football team.

Comments are closed.