I see people writing [that] they have cars tailgating them all the time or it’s their right as Americans to drive in any lane they want and if you don’t like it, too bad. Well, I was in court recently just observing, and a woman was ticketed for going too slow in the left-hand lane of the interstate. The judge found her guilty and fined her. She argued that she was going 64, not the minimum of 45, but the judge cited Georgia law about riding in the left-hand lane. I went home did some research on the internet and I found the law that he cited to her. It reads like this: “Official Code of Georgia Annotated: Title 40, Chapter 6, Section 40 (40-6-40): (a) Upon all roadways of sufficient width, a vehicle shall be driven upon the right half of the roadway, except as follows: (b) Upon all roadways, any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.” I too get behind people who park in the left-hand lane all the time and traffic backs up behind them several car lengths. If you don’t like being tailgated, get over! It’s the law! Of course, the worse ones are the people in the left-hand lane doing 40 to 45 because they are on the cell phone. They haven’t a clue as to what’s going on behind them and they really don’t care. As you can see, there are laws in Georgia about riding in the left-hand lane, and there are laws for a reason. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for poor driving habits. So, stay in the right-hand lane, and don’t cause traffic to back up. It’s the safest and smartest thing to do.

Fayette County Attorney Bill McNally’s defense of a secret land swap sounded a lot like Bruce Jordan defending the private use of deputies and equipment (“County attorney defends secret land deal vote” Citizen 02/13/2007). “There’s nothing sinister going on here,” McNally said. “There’s no smoking gun here,” he added. Boy, that sounds just like Bruce Jordan when the Sheriff got an audit done and Bruce said, “You didn’t catch me doing anything ... My conscience is clear on this.” Is our County Commission gonna wake up and take a look at this? I guess all those campaign promises went out the window with all the rest.

The Citizen’s historical role: Wow. Cal the Journalist has been a great success. No one detests the Fayette Daily News because they are bland, clinging desperately to the legal advertising contract with the county, getting to advertise every name change, corporation and foreclosure at set fees. Thus, they step on no toes. This is the ironclad strategy of their parent company. The only sensational story that the News ever runs is about a 20 count bank robber. They have a specious website with no participation but, understandably, they can ill afford to rock anyone’s boat and they do not and they will not. That’s [why] Martha and the Courthouse Gang is so fond of them. If a politician comes under fire, the Fayette Daily News is always a safe haven. Now, Cal the Businessman is succeeding and congratulations to you and to Joyce, a successful publisher in her own right, a great and important member of this team. Maybe an indulgent and supportive ownership has something to do with this success also. I am not sure The Citizen even wants the county’s legal ad business. First, let’s address those charges of bias. As an example, look at Cal’s involvement with Steve Brown. It was not blind loyalty. It essentially was rooted not in love for Brown but disdain for the PTC establishment that would have dismantled the free press given half the chance and continue the chicanery unearthed during the Development Authority scandal. Council member Annie McMenamin actually made a motion that no council member would write any letters to the editor. Cal and Co. were sued over the printing of letters to the editor. Previous bureaucrats even bandied about the threat of “criminal slander.” Beverly’s endorsement of Steve Brown made sense. Say what you want about the politics of that race, but Beverly has been consistent. He cannot be challenged as a free speech journalist of epic proportions. Even with the blogging he is consistent. He only censors in the rarest of instances and one would imagine that it pains him greatly in each instance. Recently a user’s screen name and postings came under fire, so vile and blasphemous that it cannot be repeated. The messages were not instantly removed and I don’t believe ever. But attacks on private individuals or references to unacceptable subjects (i.e., explicit references to sexuality or drug use because there are teenagers on line) are oftentimes redacted. Otherwise, Beverly lets the discussion continue. The Founding Fathers would give all thumbs up. Print v. Electronic: what an interesting debate. The continuing resilience of the print market (although predominantly senior citizens) was a significant factor in the surprising passage of the PTC library referendum. Will the print market die off along with America’s greatest generation and Social Security? I doubt it. I don’t ever imagine doing other than reading a book. The criticisms of John Munford are a tad harsh but true. Understand though the pressure he faces to get the story fast and full. If Fayette has a car wreck and The Citizen does not have the story on line in six hours, bloggers revolt. So, Munford has to live in a virtual 24-7 world. Lest I appear too sympathetic, this is in fact the job he accepted. John does tend to be “incumbent-centric” because that is the source of his news. If the incumbent is a “sure thing” Munford is somewhat predictable. Mudcat’s criticism is accurate in that regard. Congratulations to Cal the Journalist and to Cal the Businessman.

Hey, Chief Murray, you continue to boast about your Internet sex sting and Webster’s defines sting as a scheme by police for entrapping lawbreakers.

I am glad that the Tyrone Public Works Department has noting better to do than to call local businesses pretending to be an interested customer. You would think there is enough work to be done around this town to keep them busy, but why is it that there are at least two vehicles parked outside of the office 80 percent of the time? I am glad to see that my tax dollars are hard at work.

A Fayetteville USPS mail carrier was observed on three separate occasions throwing packages from his vehicle on to my driveway with enough force that the packages bounced/slid across my driveway until they hit my garage door, finally coming to a stop. These three separate incidents of rough handling of my mail was reported to the Fayetteville postmaster via three separate letters. It has been almost four weeks since the incidents were reported and no response from the postmaster. I suggest that this is a good indication that our postmaster is not concerned with proper handling of our mail nor cares anything about good service.

Judge Floyd is wrong; Rep. Lakly is right. The story in the AJC about the boy who went to prison for 10 years was what should have happened. Even if you are an athlete with good grades, if you are a high school student at a drunken and drugged orgy after midnight and there are minors involved, you pay the price. I hope people realize that Rep. Lakly speaks for most people in Fayette. Judge Floyd and District Attorney Ballard do not.

Rep. Dan Lakly’s email response to the Texas attorney printed in this past Sunday’s AJC certainly gives all of PTC something to think long and hard about. Thank goodness that state representatives serve only a two-year term. He also showed us clearly who the real moron was.

I am writing in regards of the hunter for shot the dog while hunting on private property. I am not a hunter in any ways, but love the outdoors and understand why he does hunt deer. The funny thing about that is when I was reading his article in The Citizen this week and saw that the owner of the dog wanted to press charges against the hunter, but in Fayette County don’t we have a leash law for all dogs and cats? I am a dog owner, but if my dog was running around and happen to get killed by a hunter or a car I would be upset at the person who did this, but wouldn’t press charges because I know that I should have kept my dog in a fenced area or on a leash. I know a animal can be a family member, but follow the laws of having them fenced in or on a leash and you will have your dog to this day laying around your house being a part of the family.

Get out the violin. Shame on you, Tommy, for trying to twist the story around and make it sound like you are the victim. How mature is that? You made a conscious decision to shoot that dog and now you are paying the consequences for your actions. How can you possibly see a collar on a dog that is chasing full speed after a deer? You can’t. And you should not have shot that dog because it was no threat to you. You shot that dog because it was chasing away “YOUR” deer. End of story. Quit trying to justify it because you can’t. Give Mr. Edwards a break. He is paying for his actions by mourning the loss of his pet by the hands of you. You obviously can’t get over it either or you wouldn’t have written your long letter to the paper. And your fiance is NOT obligated to shoot ALL dogs chasing deer. What? Is she going to shoot them in residential areas?

Hunter and fiancee’s Critter Control, wild or domestic, free delivery.

To the dumb drivers on Robinson Road who regularly disregard a school bus’s red lights at bus stops, keep it up; the PTCPD were waiting Monday morning. I hope they saw you. Keep up the good work, PTCPD.

This nation was founded on the principle of governance by consent, not coercion. To secure these rights governments are instituted, derive their just powers, from the consent of the governed. When did you consent to have millions of illegal immigrants be given benefits not available to citizens?

If the U.S. population continues to grow at the rate of last decade, even without another amnesty or other increases in immigration, by 2070 — within the lifetimes of today’s children, we will have more than half of India’s current population. Most future U.S. population will result from immigrants and their U.S.-born children.