Thanks Loretta, i'll be watching for it

Sure I'll post it if I can get a copy. If there is anything interesting in it there will be another news story forthcoming.

« LorettaNall wrote on Tuesday, Jan 19 at 04:59 AM »

My contact at the AP said they should have the accident report today.

Will you be able to post it? Good or bad either way it would help clear up some of the things we have read here. Well probably not. But might be interesting anyway.

birdsofafeather....I've been keeping up with the REEF story and would like to commend the citizens of Sylacauga on doing such a magnificent job to bring attention to this issue. I wish everyone who cared about an issue would be as committed as the people of Sylacauga have been. Every time I drive through Sylacauga I smell the REEF plant. It's awful. Best of luck on getting this matter resolved. All of those suffering from whatever they have been exposed to will be in my thoughts.

tugboat....The Alex City reporter got his information from the trooper and medical personnel who were on the scene. Does that count as hearsay, since it is where reporters usually get their information when reporting about accidents? My contact at the AP said they should have the accident report today.

Hope Donna Is feeling better, call you tomorrow

Yall know whats more important than a drunk in a car accident?woops im sorry truck slash suv.Its human life and there seems to be a number of people that is either hospitalized or had to go to the er that live around the reef plant .WHY? i guess the politicians dont notice or they spend too much time driving impaired.THERE is unexplained knots in sinus cavities and throats heck MR larry trigg is in UAB rite now and they dont know why he is in the shape he is in .HE may have surgery anytime.SO i for one dont give a hoot what a drunken politician is driving 'Oh im sorry i should have said alleged.I bet these sick people wish they could say that there condition is alleged.Oh and its good to know judge fielding is on the sylacauga hospital board.Because we know what a wonderful job he is doing OH NO I SHOULD HAVE SAID ALLEGEDLY DOING.

I spoke with Steve Hurst and he said he was driving An Explorer Sport Trac. I would think he knows what kind of vehicles he owns. So the Alex City Outlook was just reporting hearsay?

I spoke with the reporter at the Alex City Outlook this morning about what kind of vehicle Rep. Hurst was driving. The reporter said it was described to him only as a 2001 Ford Explorer. I guess we will have to wait for the accident report (which sure is taking a very long time to come out) before we know the answer to the vehicle question.

tug I read that rumor about Hurst switching parties months ago on Doc's Political Parlor. I think his switch would make most Democrats I know very happy because he isn't much of a Democrat.

As to what party I support....I don't support either of them. I support candidates who reflect my values of small un-intrusive government, equal rights for all American citizens, individual liberty and personal responsibility. Sadly, it is rare that a candidate comes along in Alabama that I can support. If I lived in District 35 I'd have to write someone's name in because I could not vote for Hurst or his opponent Crawford in good conscience.

The scuttlebutt has it that Steve is considering a change in parties. A friend of mine mentioned it, but said it was hearsay.

Just hoping it would happen. I would rather sit at home as a GOP'r, than serve in Montgomery as a demo-crite. The old time demo's believed as do the now republicans. What happened, D's in favor of gay marriage, abortion, a health care reform that will break the back of the common people who will have to pay for this mistake. Say what? Yep it is true. I don't know what party Larry Barton supports, maybe the one that Loretta supports. Don't know, none of my bee's wax. As it is none of my business who hooks up with who. Just saying don't open the closet door, you never know what's in there, or who may be in there. We all have skeletons in there somewhere. So i will leave my closet door shut to keep them it there.

« LorettaNall, remember earlier i said i was a GOP man myself. I have voted against Steve before because i had another good friend, and you may know him, Larry Sims that had the same political views that i had. But since my friend Steve beat him, i have always supported him. Like i said he and i may not agree on everything, but we do agree that we serve the same Master. BTW back a few years ago i was Steve's pastor.

tallchick...Exactly. Since no breath or blood test was given scientifically we will never know whether or not Hurst was drunk when he wrecked his vehicle. He and the trooper should both be held accountable. Even if he did show his legislative card traffic violations are not supposed to be covered by that. However, if the video comes out then Steve's constituents will be better able to judge for themselves whether or not he was inebriated. I can't prove it at this point but I still think he was. My source is held in very high esteem in this community and they would have no reason to lie.

tugboat...the local paper here only described the vehicle as a 2001 Ford Explorer. There was no mention of it being a Sport Trac. That isn't surprising as the local paper here is often very sloppy and have left many local readers wondering if anyone on the staff possesses a GED much less a journalism degree, and, if their computer systems are equipped with the most rudimentary version of spell check. I'll ask the local guy who covered the story if it was a Sport Trac and if it was I will concede that point...that he could have been hauling gas (well over a hundred miles each way) in the back. I still say gasoline and alcohol smell nothing alike and a trooper should know the difference. Everyone else does.

Should something come out in the near future that changes your mind about this would you still support him even if he lied to you? I understand he is your friend and that makes this a difficult situation, but friendship aside, lawmakers should be held to a higher standard. This country is in such a wreck right now because we have let those elected to 'lead' us live by a different set of laws. That isn't the American way.

Before I close here I just want to say tugboat, that for someone who is a self-described conservative you have handled yourself well in this conversation. Usually when I come across conservatives on a news forum discussion quickly degenerates into pandemonium. It becomes personal when it isn't personal at all.

I get the feeling this comment is going to all run together like my last ones. Please forgive I do not know how to separate it with line breaks without using HTML and I don't know if I can use that on this forum.

« tallchick49 wrote on Saturday, Jan 16 at 04:06 PM »

tug and loretta, I have one question--

if no field sobriety test, or portable breath test, was given at the scene how will anyone know

'for a fact' that he had or had not been drinking?

I understand that the trooper cars have on board cameras that may or may not show anything. The suv that Loretta refers to was in fact a ford explorer sport trax, which is half pickup truck, that had a gas can in the back. My question is how could anyone get a faint smell of alcohol with gasoline spilled out of the can? Why would he have a can of gas it has been asked? Well Steve lives in the country and country boys often have a gas can in their truck for equipment such as a chain saw, weed eater, or tractor. Question, "is it against the law to have a gas can in your truck"? Answer "no".

Thanks for asking, Tug

tug and loretta, I have one question--

if no field sobriety test, or portable breath test, was given at the scene how will anyone know

'for a fact' that he had or had not been drinking? Confirmation of drinking/not drinking is the purpose of the test. The fact remains that the trooper, for whatever reason (awed by the ID of a legistator?!)failed to give the proper test.

Shame on him, and double shame on Hurst. It seems to me that man of integrity, especially a legislator (or another law enforcement officer or minister, for example) would have INSISTED on the test just to remove any doubt or appearance of impropriety.

Just a thought.

Have a good one.

If it turns out that Rep. Hurst was, in fact, drunk would that change your support of him?

Actually i would still support him because everyone makes a mistakes in life, even you and me, just because someone raided you house and found a marijuana stem and a few seeds would not cause me to support or not to support you. As a matter of fact i would consider voting for you should you run for Governor again, because you don't hide ANYTHING. If you defeat Mrs. Brown i hope you will get along with the other lawmakers.

as far as polls go, it is all dependent on where it was taken and what group of people were polled. I don't put much stock in polls because they can be made to say what a certain group wants them to say.

tugboat I believe just as strongly that Rep. Hurst was drunk when he wrecked his vehicle on Monday night. Everything the person who told me about the wreck has said has been proven to be true. There is no reason for them to lie. If it turns out that Rep. Hurst was, in fact, drunk would that change your support of him? As for my position on marijuana and running for office....it soon won't be as big of an impediment as you might think. Back in 2004 we did a University of South Alabama poll on medical marijuana and found that 76% of those surveyed supported it. Even more telling were the questions that asked about legalization and current laws. 13% said they favored outright legalization and another 70% said they thought a small fine was appropriate for personal use amounts. That's 83% saying the current law is wrong. The law you support isn't working and is, in fact, making things worse than they would be in a controlled and regulated market. The current law does nothing to keep drugs out of the hands of children. The law makes it easier for kids to get than either alcohol or tobacco. Plus, there is the added danger in the black market that what a kid gets could be laced with something that could kill them because there are no safety mechanisms in place to prevent it. You may be against mind altering substances (which is fine as long as you apply the prohibition only to yourself and not the rest of the population) but what you are getting with current drug laws is a negative return on your investment. It makes the situation worse and costs you more as a taxpayer year after year after year.

tug, I considered running against Graham this year but I already have so much on my plate that it would be impossible to collect signatures and run a campaign. I am a full time college student, a full time political activist working towards passage of the medical marijuana bill and I am a full time mom. I don't want any of those very important things to suffer. I may change my mind and jump in anyway but right now that is looking like a no go. I do plan to run against Mrs. Graham in the future. And, with the way things are going in other states with drug policy reform I don't think the marijuana issue will be as prohibitive as you think it will in coming years. In fact, I heard from an insider a few says ago that a decrim bill for marijuana will be introduced this year. According to a University of South Alabama poll we did in 2004 83% of respondents disagreed with the way marijuana is handled now. The breakdown was 13% favoring outright legalization and 70% thinking a small fine was appropriate for amounts for personal use. Marijuana criminalization has never met one stated objective and keeping it illegal just ensures that kids can access it more easily than they can alcohol and tobacco. That is what you are getting with the current law you support....is that what you want?

Loretta, since you live in the same area, have you thought of running against Mrs. Brown? Of course it is hard to defeat an incumbent. But after a run for Governor, that should be a lot easier. But with your view on marijuana it would be a major hurdle to overcome in Alabama. But i wish you success if you choose to run. I will continue to speak against the legalization of mind altering drugs. I will also continue to support my friend Steve. Steve and i talked last night and he assured me he had not been drinking. I believe him and also believe it will be a proven fact when all is said and done. I don't know your source that said he was "dog drunk", and i have only known of 1 drunk dog, but that's another story, but i know Steve. If he told the trooper he was not drinking, as far as i am concerned he was not drinking.

Thanks for your comments, Tug

tugboat...I'm not so sure that getting re-elected is an absolute sign of a good legislator. One, and I hate to say this but its true...many voters aren't very smart when it comes to voting. Many voters vote solely based on the letter beside any candidates name or whoever their preacher tells them is best. Very few of them do research on the candidate or issues. Many times, as is the case with Mrs. Graham, candidates run unopposed. Very little of the populace even participates in elections. Apathy really has nothing to do with whether or not a candidate is good, but it has a great deal to do with who stays in office.