Page One header image 1

Julian Carroll Must Be Tripping On Columbian Coke And Mary Lou Marzian Must Have Been Drunk

February 14th, 2013 · 3 Comments

Corrupt old codger Julian Carroll strikes again. The state could pay for 2 percent raises for state workers through a designated pool of money funded by doubling fines for traffic violations and other misdemeanors, said state Sen. Julian Carroll, D-Frankfort. [Ryan Alessi]

President Obama reiterated his call for Congress to pass an immigration reform bill in his State of the Union address Tuesday, something both chambers are already working on. A bipartisan band of senators announced plans to tackle the issue two weeks ago, and a bipartisan House of Representatives effort, long cloaked in secrecy, is also in the works. [ProPublica]

Steve Beshear says Kentucky’s horse breeding farms have been added to the ventures eligible to seek certain federal relief from disasters affecting agriculture. [H-L]

The dramatic recent decline in Arctic sea-ice cover is illustrated in new data from Europe’s Cryosat mission. The spacecraft, which uses radar to estimate the thickness of marine floes, has observed a deep reduction in the volume of ice during autumn months. [BBC]

Steve Beshear is continuing his push for a statewide smoking ban in public places, calling on lawmakers Thursday to pass it without delay. [WKYT]

Jack Lew, President Barack Obama’s pick to be U.S. treasury secretary, on Wednesday defused heated questions from lawmakers about his work at Citigroup and managed to find common ground with critics over the need for tax reform. [Reuters]

Melinda Elkins Dawson’s mother was murdered and her 6-year-old niece brutally raped in 1998 in Canton, Ohio. [Ronnie Ellis]

After more than five years of recession and painfully slow recovery, President Obama has sent a powerful signal that he thinks the U.S. economy is now in much better shape — good enough, at least, to provide workers with raises. [NPR]

Was Mary Lou Marzian drinking when she wrote this piece of legislation? Because we all know you should have to be considered guilty until proven innocent. The negatives far outweigh the positives. A House panel approved a measure Wednesday that would allow police to collect DNA swabs from people arrested for felony crimes without getting a court’s permission. [H-L]

The National Rifle Association may have tried out a softer tone this week in an online video criticizing the President’s gun proposals, but the underlying message represents a longstanding view of the gun rights group that the Obama administration insisted Wednesday is just plain wrong. [TPM]

A bill that would maintain the state’s prohibition on sales of wine and liquor in grocery stores and ban sales in new pharmacies passed the House Licensing and Occupations Committee on Thursday. [C-J/AKN]

Tags: Barack Obama · Corruption · Economy · Environment · Immigration · Steve Beshear · Takin yer guns!

3 responses so far ↓

  • 1 JBM // Feb 14, 2013 at 9:14 pm

    Curious what the negatives you see in the DNA law are? If you get arrested for anything, you get fingerprinted, and those go into AFIS forever. A buccal swab is no more invasive, and the law allows expungement of the sample from CODIS if there is not a conviction. Something not available with prints.

    What’s the negative? That you’re DNA might expose the rape you previously committed? If I had to wager, my money would be on SCOTUS saying there is no 4th amendment problem with these laws when it considers Maryland v. King.

  • 2 jake // Feb 14, 2013 at 9:39 pm

    Really?

    We say that Julian was on Columbian Coke in the subject along with saying Mary Lou was slurpin some juice… and you still don’t get that we’re just giving them both a hard time?

    (Okay, so Julian really is a corrupt old fart)

  • 3 JohnQPublic // Feb 15, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    The problem is, as anyone who has followed this at all can tell you, is that in most cases expungement does not happen. And as recent case studies have shown DNA testing is not as infallible as TV shows would have you believe. They only test on certain markers, they dont do a full strand DNA mapping. And these markers are more in common that was originally thought. ie they are NOT unique in anyway.