Say what you will about Newt or any other politician, but I am sick of people referring to the Republican's 1994 initiative as the "Contract on America". Read thru the actual text, and I defy you to show me something that wouldn't actually make the Federal government better. Just to refresh your memory, here's what it actually said (taken from Wikipedia):
* require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress;
* select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
* cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
* limit the terms of all committee chairs;
* ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
* require committee meetings to be open to the public;
* require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
* implement a zero base-line budgeting process for the annual Federal Budget.
* included tax cuts for businesses and individuals, term limits for legislators, social security reform, tort reform, and welfare reform.
Now what exactly is your problem with any of that?
I understand how Milton would still be responsible for partially funding MARTA, but can someone explain why they would be responsible for Grady? Is Grady a major outstanding debt or is it a yearly expense?
"A first-time club owner, Reese is quick to admit it took her a while to figure out that her downtown location appeals to a predominantly black clientele."
That has to be the dumbest statement I've heard in a long time. You have a city where 60% of the intown population is black, a city sometimes referred to as the "black Mecca", a city at the heart of the Dirty South and you can't figure out that your nightclub might want to target the black population? Whoever gave this woman money to open a club needs to call in their loan immediately on the grounds that she is too stupid to be trusted.
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation