Lots of opinionating going on about the ruling by Judge Constance Russell on the single-sex marriage amendment. Only one dared to print what the State Constitution says about amending the Constitution – Mr. McKee of Marietta.
Meanwhile, the Augusta Chronicle thinks it is an outrage that a judge should make us follow our own Constitutional rules for amending the Constitution… Of course, the editors in Augusta want you to think that this "activist" judge made up the reasons for her decision (At least Wooten understands), instead of actually doing the job a judge is supposed to do and applying the Constitution.
At least the Augusta Chronicle's sister publication, Savannah Morning News, (both owned by Morris Communications) gets it right:
Lawmakers should have broken it into two different pieces, which is what a few legislators (including State Rep. Tom Bordeaux, D-Savannah) suggested that year. Then Georgia voters who were split on these two issues would have had a choice. But more importantly, the state wouldn't have wound up on the losing end Tuesday in Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance Russell's courtroom.
But, don't literally interpret the word activist — Ms. Fields will define it for you.
The headlines on the KIA plant for West Georgia remind me of an old George and Gracie Burns routine where Gracie describes how her brother got run over by a truck. Seems he was wearing two pairs of pants and the driver couldn't tell if he was coming or going (hey — the material is almost 70 years old!)
Anyway, here are the headlines:
Jim Wooten’s editorial today briefly mentions “social contract” – which is one of the center principles that our Founding Fathers based this country’s governance upon. We, all of us, need to remember it’s all about us and not so much about “me”.
Here, in a concise nutshell found in Tom Friedman's column today, is how the economy will work this century:
Mr. Raju said: "We told ourselves: if business process outsourcing can be done from cities in India to support cities in the developed world, why can't it be done by villages in India to support cities in India. … Things like processing employee records can be done from anywhere, so there is no reason it can't be done from a village." Satyam began with two villages a year ago and plans to scale up to 150.
There is enough bandwidth now, even reaching big Indian villages, to parcel out this work, and the villagers are very eager. "The attrition level is low, and the commitment levels high," Mr. Raju said. "It is a way of breathing economic life into villages." It gives educated villagers a chance to stay on the land, he said, and not have to migrate to the cities.
Any town, any place with bandwidth can play — but, you have got to have the knowledge workers to do it…
Of course, you also have to change the model for intellectualy property management. Dana Blankenhorn nails it in his column defining Open Source:
Think about it. You make more money sharing your knowledge than trying to control it. You deliver more value, you sell more equipment, you earn more money through support and infrastructure, if you end your obsession with "Intellectual Property".
Postscript : Friedman's column talks about Google Finance – (which I posted a couple a months ago) as an idea conceived and executed by Indians.