March 5, 2019 6:00 AM
Morning Reads for Tuesday, March 5
It’s Tuesday in most of the world, but today is Mardi Gras in New Orleans.
- Here are 15 suggestions for how to celebrate in Metro Atlanta (but really all you need is to have the right attitude and the soundtrack from the link above).
- Meanwhile, it’s Women’s History Month. Learn more about famous Georgia women.
- We should treat Georgia’s hip-hop like the export it is.
- A Morehouse professor helped a father in his class.
- The Vatican will unseal its secret WWII archive.
- Mercedes-Benz Stadium is going cashless.
- The complicated legacy of blackface in the historically black Zulu Social Aid and Pleasure Club.
- Confidential to all my fellow Papists: here’s a review of every fish sandwich on a fast food menu near you (yes, even Bojangles’ has a fish sandwich during Lent – and it deserves our respect and consideration, as well as a slow clap, because it is actually called The BojAngler).
About Author
Teri
Teri Anulewicz is a Democrat who represents House District 42 in the Georgia General Assembly. She previously spent nearly a decade on the Smyrna City Council. A native New Orleanian and quasi-Texan, Teri graduated from Agnes Scott College in 1998. She's been a front page contributor since 2015, and she compiles each Tuesday's Morning Reads.
33 Comments
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
*
*
Fish link
there have been numerous studies that indicate people tend to spend more on a card than they do cash…i would presume the same is true of apps, but i’ve never seen research to that effect…we always prefer to spend cash at places like stadiums for that reason…probably gonna be good for their bottom line…
All these Sheriffs in North Georgia are coming out against HB 324. You can read there letter on WRCB’s Website. I am disappointed. One it allows only a limited amount 60 I believe of pot shops as they would call it. How many Counties are there in Georgia? 159. Come on. So now a person has to buy marijuana on the street and make there own low thc oil. Or buy the oil from someone else. All illegal. This makes total nonsense for the sheriffs to be against it. After this passes there will be a legal way for someone to get the oil. One were it is regulated. Of course in a perfect world we would have SB 232. Or better yet let’s just stop wasting money trying to fight it and oppressing people by just totally legalizing it. For transparency sakes I have crohn’s which is legal for me to get a prescription for it. However working for the man it wouldn’t matter for me as it would still be illegal in my job. Mine is in remission right now but I would like to have the option to legally obtain if it did kick back in and I was retired.
Happy Mardi Gras https://chamblee54.wordpress.com/2019/03/05/mardi-gras-4/
Just a reminder… Again.
https://www.axios.com/measles-vaccine-study-no-link-autism-68dc8197-33eb-401e-8f07-aeeabc7ca5e5.html
My Mardi Gras soundtrack is all Zydeco. The ultimate accompaniment to dancing like no one is watching.
+100
http://westchester.news12.com/story/40067049/im-not-running-hillary-clinton-rules-out-2020-bid-for-first-time-on-camera-in-exclusive-interview-with-news-12
Take with a grain of salt, but it looks like she’s really out for 2020. This is cause for many tears for the Democrats and an actual sigh of relief for the Republicans. She was the only one within the group of Democrat candidates that wasn’t a total off the charts embracer of the AOC doctrine. If she ran again she’d have turned out her base with a white hot fever. It would have been the revenge vote. There is no groundswell for Biden. Kamala? Forgetaboutit…No name ID at all for anybody else.
To quote James Lovell, “Dems, we have a problem.”
http://westchester.news12.com/story/40067049/im-not-running-hillary-clinton-rules-out-2020-bid-for-first-time-on-camera-in-exclusive-interview-with-news-12
See if the link takes this time.
Give it up Noway, this obsession of yours with Hillary Clinton is unseemly. She was never going to get the Democratic nomination for 2020. Period.
1) “The AOC doctrine” isn’t a thing. She’s 1 woman in a body of 435 people. The amount of influence Republicans seem to attribute to her is mind-numbing.
2) Hillary would have been a strong candidate, but I don’t think she’d have sparked a “white hot fever” among a Democratic base that is moving away from her brand of centrism (see Biden, Joe)
3) The current crop of nominees (and the names that haven’t yet declared) represent a pretty broad spectrum of ideas, there isn’t a single one that I would consider an “off the charts embracer [sic]” of this fictional AOC doctrine.
4) The Democrats are going to have a competitive primary that, hopefully, will produce a nominee that the base can get behind and get excited about. It may be Joe Biden, it may be Cory Booker, it may be Pete Buttigeg. It’s way too early to anoint or write-off anyone. At this point in the 2008 primary (the last time Democrats had a big primary field) Obama was running behind John Edwards and Hillary Clinton and people were wondering if Gore, Bayh, and Kerry were going to jump in to the field.
Looks like all of the main candidates for the democrats have indeed embraced the Green New Deal! If we have only 12 years to live why bother? No more cars, planes, cows or kids and killing kids after birth….sounds a little extreme and depressing or is that the New Democratic normal? Is that an upbeat, inspiring, get out the vote message?
There you go again, DTM.
If you ask anybody who knows, the Green New Deal is more of a theory, a vision if you will, and I don’t think anybody’s (or anybody serious) has bought into the details of that vision— but everybody wants to tap the spirit of it, and say that we can be good stewards, maybe even champions, of protecting our world and natural resources.
“I don’t think anybody’s (or anybody serious) has bought into the details of that vision— but everybody wants to tap the spirit of it..”
…”buying” and “tapping”
What does Robert Kraft have to do with any of this?
Great vision and spirit! Nothing like freedom, lower taxes and no one controlling every aspect of your life.
Large-scale public sector investment in clean energy technology isn’t “new” or “radical,” it’s an idea that’s been around since the early 2000s. Public polling shows that a green jobs guarantee is widely popular among Democrats and has a net -1 support among Trump voters. That’s why – instead of actually debating the policy outline – folks are intentionally misrepresenting it and claiming the government wants to “take your a hamburgers.” The Green New Deal doesn’t propose getting rid of cars… or planes… or cows… or children. Anyone saying that it does either hasn’t read it or is intentionally misrepresenting it.
Count me down for not reading it.
And it seems the media- all media- has done a lackluster at best job of presenting the real meat and potatoes of it, instead of some oddity about cows.
I think the pitch of the Deal generally hits the same frame as the Contract w America, except there is also a tinge of prejudice bc FDRs New Deal reset the board of government and politics forever, tilting it towards progressive Democrats, and you know Repubs hate that. They especially hate Social Security bc anything Social is socialist and if you want social security, move to Venezuela.
Except most all Repubs- esp 65and olders- support Social Security, even if they want you to retire at 75.
The Green New Deal supporters need to refresh their rhetoric and approach- and maybe any substance- to show the connections to the infrastructure, employment. You can’t have a Deal unless you have two willing parties, and that means a party of the American ppl.
I’ll respectfully disagree on your point number 2. I genuinely believe that many Dem supporters will be deflated by this. They badly wanted that do-over. And despite all of his bravado, Trump knows he was a lucky SOB in ’16. If not a haymaker, he just avoided a huge body blow.
Most democrats are going to have a 2×4 whacked over their heads when it comes to these liberal pearls of wisdom! It should help give Trump a McGovern -Dukakis like rout.
It’d be like hitting the Undertaker with a 2×4 then. Not gonna do much damage. Democrats already ran on a very progressive message in 2018 and retook the House and crushed it in the very places Trump needs to win if he wants to have any hope in 2020.
Some of these ideas are actually pretty popular outside the Carlson-Hannity-Shapiro bubble.
Hillary would lose Wisconsin and Michigan again. The progress wing hated her and voted Stein last time. They will do it again.
I wouldn’t go that far. Progressives – like most folks, including Donald Trump – thought Hillary would win in a rout. I don’t think there are as many protest votes in a hypothetical do-over.
In addition, a lot of Clinton’s message about how much of a failure Trump would be was lost on folks who thought an outsider might be able to “shake things up.” Now that Trump has demonstrated that he’s both an idiot with no concept of how government or economics works and a ill-tempered wannabe despot, I don’t imagine the “let’s give him a shot” camp is as big as it was in 2016.
The true long term progressive left friends I have in Wisconsin refused to vote for Hillary and wrote scathing letters to the DNC over crowning her before primary season even started. I read editorials in Madison papers from local progress companies that basically stated if voting for Stein means Trump wins Wisconsin, it was what the old guard DNC centrist war hawks deserved for forcing Hillary on the world. There was never a ‘lets give him a shot’ camp in the progressives. The centrists and the aggrieve HS educated white males who hate Hillary might switch back to a democrat.
I don’t think anything would have changed on the wingnut fringe and I understand your points about the things Progressives were saying back in 2016. But the 2020 calculus is different. Trump is no longer a hypothetical. He’s a reality. Kids being separated from families down at the border with no organized system for re-uniting them with their parents. That’s a reality. Those same kids being sexually abused by folks working in the detention centers. That’s a reality. Farmers getting absolutely worked over by a trade war that was supposed to be “good and easy to win.” That’s a reality. Any Progressive still pissing a vote away on Stein because Clinton is a “centrist war hawk” in 2020 needs their Progressive credentials stripped.
I do think that Democrats who stayed home because they assumed Clinton would win probably show up to the polls in a do-over. Same of the “they’re both bad” crowd… that tune changes when Trump’s ineptness is no longer hypothetical.
I also think the Obama-Trump voters – working class folks who thought Trump’s trade protectionism would mean economic growth in dying/dead industries – probably vote Clinton after seeing Trump’s failure to do anything remotely positive for them (particularly given the developing Foxconn fiasco).
A do-over would provide some of the best statistical evidence on swing voters, and be interesting in a lot of other ways. None of which would justify it as a reality. Can’t we just run a simulation election? Like a scrimmage.
In recent times neither party has been willing to run a losing presidential candidate over again and with historically good reasons. Stevenson and Dewey are a couple of exceptions with Nixon the rare exception pulling off a couple of wins after a loss. So rare in fact he was the first to succeed in a do over since William Henry Harrison in 1840.
To cite that Hillary is not running and categorically state “This is cause for many tears for the Democrats and an actual sigh of relief for the Republicans” sounds as if it was ripped right from Minister of Propaganda Sean Hannity’s teleprompter.
If Sowell believes this, I need a Tums!
https://m.washingtontimes.com
The link didn’t take. Sowell thinks Socialism might be inevitable here.
Noway, if you think you can keep creating accounts and posting you should really think about using another IP address…
You know the Chili Dog reference gave you away… it’s your stated favorite order at Varsity.
I thought it was obvious because he started addressing public figures with pejoratives instead of their names. Which immediately shows such lower standards.