Georgia Republican Who Wanted Drug Testing For Welfare Recipients Gets DUI

I find this story quite appropriate:


Law-maker A wants to make receiving welfare money contingent on being drug-free. Other law-makers makes laws requiring that having a driver's license is contingent on being alcohol-free.

Of course its important that Law-maker A now lose his license! Is that any less a draconian punishment that losing the money you require for housing/food? Or is this a case of one law for them and another for the rest of us.

Perhaps Law-maker A can use the money that his company will make conducting the drug-tests on welfare recipients to hire a chauffeur? (That is the biggest part of the scandle here that no-one else has mentioned - that Law-maker A is not only a drunk driver, he also owns shares in the company that does the drug tests and stands to gain a bundle if his law is passed).

Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill. There is the difference. Completely different from the sopa story. He is not on welfare, and he hasnt failed a drug test. I dont remember the welfare screening having anything to do with alcohol anyway...
Invalid point!

What? This guy costs us more in taxes that at least 20 welfare recipients. He's a representative. Those guys are the biggest welfare cases of all.

I think there is also some added irony that these guys are called "representatives" when they only represent a very small demographic. The single moms on food stamps represent a greater cross section of America than any "representative".

really?
This same guy?
The lawmaker who proposed the drug test law has shares in the drug test company?
Isnt this deemed conflict of interest?
How can this freaking hypocrit even be in office?
Makes one want to puke!

As to the conflict of interest, only if it conflicts him i guess, and it apparently doesn't. Also the law is only there for punitive action AFTER the fact, it never stops the action from happening. Oh and also the higher up in office you get , the less the laws apply to you.

The Law only applies to the poor people. He will get off of the charges. Like they all do.


In the military if an enlisted gets a DUI, lose a stripe.
NCO gets a DUI....no stripe lost.
Officer gets a DUI...he gets promoted.

We have allowed a society where the law only applies to the poor.

Originally posted by Muttley2012

Originally posted by Max_TO
At least he has a job and most likely paid for the booze himself.

One could argue that anyone working for the government on the taxpayer's dime is, in deed, on welfare. Or, at a minimum, they should be held to the same standard as welfare recipients, as the money that pays them comes from the same source.

edit on 17-1-2012 by Muttley2012 because: (no reason given)

Not to mention all those who have received corporate welfare and bailout money from the government. These entitled entities have cost the tax payer way more than those collecting social welfare.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


What does one have to do with the other? A Georgia Republican getting a DUI has nothing to do with drug testing for welfare recpients....I'm honestly not seeing the connection here...

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

What does one have to do with the other? A Georgia Republican getting a DUI has nothing to do with drug testing for welfare recpients....I'm honestly not seeing the connection here...

You don't see the connection?

In one hand, you have a struggling single mom who may partake occasionally in order to cope and she gets just enough of our tax money to get by.

In the other, you have an affluent man who likes to partake and then drive, endangering the taxpayers lives. And he gets just enough of our tax money to live extremely comfortably.

I'd rather see my money go to the single mom (or just about anybody) than a "representative".

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

 

What does one have to do with the other? A Georgia Republican getting a DUI has nothing to do with drug testing for welfare recpients....I'm honestly not seeing the connection here...

You don't see the connection?

In one hand, you have a struggling single mom who may partake occasionally in order to cope and she gets just enough of our tax money to get by.

In the other, you have an affluent man who likes to partake and then drive, endangering the taxpayers lives. And he gets just enough of our tax money to live extremely comfortably.

I'd rather see my money go to the single mom (or just about anybody) than a "representative".

I'm all for giving people who deserve welfare money, I just dont see what the issue is with drug testing them. If you want a Govt. handout you should definitely not be a drug addict, if my taxes are going to these programs I want to make sure that I'm not supporting someones drug habit. What's wrong with this struggling mom to just take a drug test so she can receive her welfare??? In my hometown the hardest DUI states attorney was pulled over for DUI, now that's funny...

How do you know he isn't on welfare?
Answer: Did you even bother to read? I dont think they allow District representatives in a State House of Reps to be on welfare. He probably make more than anyone on this blog.

He did fail a drug test, it's called a breathalyzer.
Answer: Perhaps... however, the difference is that the test he failed was for a Legal drug. Regardless of what you and I think, alcohol is legal. mj, crack, heroine, lsd etc are all illegal. So, he did not fail a test for an illegal drug.... and he's not asking for govt handouts.

The fact that welfare screens wouldn't test for alcohol (yet would for other drugs) is part of the point.
Answer: What's the difference between drinking too much and eating too much? I dont mind a few of my welfare dollars going to buy the guy a drink every once in a while. But alcohol is legal, therefore I (nor the system) has the ability to monitor how much they consume of a legal product. If they take every cent of that weekly welfare check and buy 5000 boxes of twinkies or 15 cases of beer, thats up to them. But I should have the right to say they cant use my dime for illegal activities. perhaps they shouldnt be able to use my dime to drive drunk...? I dunno.

Somewhat related to this, is this episode of Judge Judy. I find it very interesting. I believe it to be situation dependent, in that his 'roommate' is suing him over unpaid rent. Nevertheless, the court can end up telling you how TO spend your welfare check. However, the question at hand is how NOT TO spend your check.

Judge Judy

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill. There is the difference. Completely different from the sopa story. He is not on welfare, and he hasnt failed a drug test. I dont remember the welfare screening having anything to do with alcohol anyway...
Invalid point!

What? This guy costs us more in taxes that at least 20 welfare recipients. He's a representative. Those guys are the biggest welfare cases of all.

I think there is also some added irony that these guys are called "representatives" when they only represent a very small demographic. The single moms on food stamps represent a greater cross section of America than any "representative".

Perhaps he is overpaid... Nevertheless, he earned the position he has and he works for the people. Now, his performance and pay are another story. If he poorly represents the people, its up to them to elect someone else. As far as the pay, there is little we can do about it. When done well, that is an extremely position to Achieve and Maintain. But its not like I can go into my boss' office and tell him, "you make too much, I deserve to have 10% of your salary added to mine". Aint gonna happen.

But that is all beside the point. There is no irony in this for me. The bill that he has become known for supporting, if passed, would Not have had any effect on his current situation, quite simply because he does not fall into the said category.

See this is mere proof that Karma DOES Exist.

Unfortunately being part of the "Insiders Club" he'll likely get his charges reduced to community service and paying for more Tee Shirts for M.A.D.D. which he'll write off on his taxes as a charitable contribution.

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill. There is the difference. Completely different from the sopa story. He is not on welfare, and he hasnt failed a drug test. I dont remember the welfare screening having anything to do with alcohol anyway...
Invalid point!

He get's his salary from taxes, he is not on welfare, but he definitely get's his money from the exact same place as those who are on welfare.

All politicians should be required to have drug testing and if they fail, then they don't get paid AND they lose all health care benefits, which we also pay for.

Harm None
Peace

The great tragedy in this story is that people are comparing the private use of drugs to the act of operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol. I'm not going to get into a discussion about drugs and drug-users, (I'm not one myself) needless to say most people do it in the privacy of their own homes and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone "acting dangerously" under the influence of such drugs, that wasn't already dangerous to begin with.

The tragedy lies in the fact that driving under the influence of alcohol is one of the most dangerous and selfish acts a human can do. People crash, and people burn. Automobiles filled with families get wrecked and the occupants burned alive because a selfish individual decided to drive drunk because they decided they shouldn't control themselves.

Said person just happens to be a government official, an elected representative of the people, a supposed professional of the highest order. Said person also happens to lament the rights of people to use substances as an adult. Said person makes a living out of arguing people who do this are irresponsible and shameful, and action needs to be taken against them. Hypocrite doesn't even begin to describe it. More like cosmic justice, and a lesson to be learned to any people willing to pay attention.

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill. There is the difference. Completely different from the sopa story. He is not on welfare, and he hasnt failed a drug test. I dont remember the welfare screening having anything to do with alcohol anyway...
Invalid point!

You need to go back to school then...seeing as how we pay well, Georgia Citizens DO pay him his paycheck...Simple American Government 101...
DOH!
So indeed the State does "Foot his bill".

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill. There is the difference. Completely different from the sopa story. He is not on welfare, and he hasnt failed a drug test. I dont remember the welfare screening having anything to do with alcohol anyway...
Invalid point!

You need to go back to school then...seeing as how we pay well, Georgia Citizens DO pay him his paycheck...Simple American Government 101...

DOH!
So indeed the State does "Foot his bill".

edit on 17-1-2012 by ldyserenity because: fix emoticon

He is also giving us a service, what are welfare recipients giving us? They are just leaching off us, the GA Republican has a job, how do you not see the difference here...

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill.

As an elected offical, he is very much having the taxpayers foot the bill..where do you think his paychecks come from? McDonalds?

Now, Alcohol is legal, but drunk driving isn't.
Whats his deal? caught doing illegal drugs (or legal drugs illegally) and your cut off? ok, so then he needs to step down from his office in order to walk the talk

Originally posted by jhn7537
He is also giving us a service, what are welfare recipients giving us? They are just leaching off us, the GA Republican has a job, how do you not see the difference here...

edit on 17-1-2012 by jhn7537 because: (no reason given)

Many on welfare are also doing services also...such as holding down crappy ditch digging jobs or whatnot...arguably more important than a politician

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Originally posted by TomServo
I dont see your angle with this post. He broke the law and is paying the price. I dont see him asking me to foot his bill. There is the difference. Completely different from the sopa story. He is not on welfare, and he hasnt failed a drug test. I dont remember the welfare screening having anything to do with alcohol anyway...
Invalid point!

You need to go back to school then...seeing as how we pay well, Georgia Citizens DO pay him his paycheck...Simple American Government 101...

DOH!
So indeed the State does "Foot his bill".

edit on 17-1-2012 by ldyserenity because: fix emoticon

Blast...didn't see your post before I wrote it (low hanging fruit makes me jump before reading the thread).

But no matter, "they" will always find a reason why hypocracy is perfectly acceptable so long as its their party that is the hypocrites.

Sorry, not seeing the hypocrisy. Booze is legal. If he had been under the influence of something else THEN there would be hypocrisy.