Jay Bookman

By janet

December 5, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this

Once again I am reminded that it is a recsiion when your neighbor is out of a job and a depression when you are.

By TW

December 5, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

Yes, frightening.

How perfect for ‘w’ to do nothing during this time of crisis - the perfect cherry atop his dog doo of a presidency.

Being that he’s thrown in the towel, do we need to pay his last two months salary?

Geez…talk about welfare…

By AJC/DNC Management

December 5, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

This is scary-

The minute president-elect Barack Obama takes office, if not sooner, we must have a gigantic stimulus package of federal spending or tax cuts to get the country moving again. Wait. Better make that a humongous stimulus package. In fact, what’s bigger than humongous? We’d better have a gargantuan stimulus package. Ordering up solutions to this economic crisis is getting to be like ordering a latte from Starbucks: On second thought, we’ll take the bigger one.-Time

Throwing money at the problem when………..there is no money.

By getalife

December 5, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

w and cheney should resign in disgrace today.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 5, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

Look at this crap-

since the economy moved into recession a year ago

Rewriting economic principles so that you can protect Wonder Boy from taking any blame for the economy.

Maybe up in your minds it’ll work, the rest of us know better.

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this

I am glad to see that W has gained parity with his father in destroying jobs. I’m sure that made his day, as he has been such an underachiever for the past 7 years, 10 months.

By Mrs. Godzilla

December 5, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Conservative economics……the gift that just keeps on taking away……

By Joey

December 5, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

I submit the following hypothesis:

Employers, businesses, are rapidly reducing their workforce in preparation for what they fear will be forthcoming from an Obama/Biden admistration.

Employers know they can hire new people down the road if the fears are unfounded.

By tcoach

December 5, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

How is this going to effect the tax cuts and breaks for us all?

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this

omg — W is gonna make a pronouncement on the economy later today. There goes 2 million more jobs.

By Williebkind

December 5, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this

“By getalife

December 5, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

w and cheney should resign in disgrace today.” So do nothing Pelosi and Prince Reid had nothing to do with this huh? Pull the blinders off getalife and getreal. Your biased crap is why we are the situation we are now. And take a shower Prince Reid said you stink.

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 10:52 AM | Link to this

Chill, tcoach. You weren’t gonna get a tax cut, anyway. Obama knows exactly who’s been naughty and who’s been nice — hell, he’s the Anointed One, right? — so you are SOL.

By Taxpayer

December 5, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

tcoach,

The Bush administration approach to giving out tax cuts is to eliminate your job. Look MA, no taxes.

By Mrs. Godzilla

December 5, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

FYI

Former WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers has asked President George Bush to shorten his 25-year sentence.

Whaddya’ think about that!

By Morningstar

December 5, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this

It’s worse than we know.

As we all know, the unemployment rate is based on the number of claims for unemployment. It doesn’t include those who have exhausted their claim, and ineligible to file again, etc. etc. etc.

NOPE, this one can’t be hung on the Obama administration. He ‘ain’t in office yet.’ Remember????

By RW-(the original)

December 5, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this

Writers write tales of outrage about large financial companies entertaining their best customers and top agents at resort facilities even though those things have been paid for well in advance and no refund will be forthcoming. Out of fear of backlash resulting from the writings of writers these companies cancel all these outings resulting in the resort workers and the meeting planners losing their jobs.

The jobs reports come out and the writers write tales of outrage about all the people out of work. Bottom line? It must be Sarah Palin’s err…President Bush’s fault.

P.S. This BS that always gets attached to the writers writings of job number outrage, that it’s always worse because X number of people just quit looking is well….BS. If we added up all the people that just “gave up” from these writers writings over the last few years the number would rival the workforce itself.

By leni

December 5, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this

The company that retained Nobel Prize wiinner Paul Krugman as financial advisor and subsequently crashed—-remember, that company known as Enron—caused a great deal of anguish in the Houston area when all those jobs were lost. But the area recovered quickly, and is now booming. Everyone who wants to work (disregard that thousand or so Katrina surviviors still vacationing at taxpayer expense) everyone who wants to work has a job.

By AJC/DNC Management

December 5, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

By Morningstar December 5, 2008 10:22 AM AJC/DNC @9:41AM I didn’t see the Republicans breaking their necks to try and place the brakes on the banking industry, while the money was good. In fact, neither the D’s nor the R’s did anything.

Yawn-

Despite the Democrats waving the finger blaming the Republicans, the Democrats, not the Republicans, are the ones who defended Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Republicans warned us about what was going to happen andcalled for regulation. And yet the Democrats are the ones that decided against taking the necessary steps to prevent the mess we are in now:

By williebkind

December 5, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this

Mrs. G

He said he was sorry!

By Mike

December 5, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

Anyone who thinks this is the exclusive fault of the Republicans or Democrats is a mindless partisan.

As this comment thread demonstrates, partisanship breeds ignorance.

By RealityKing

December 5, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

Surprised!? It started in October of last year. Because this is what happens when the MSM talks down the economy to get their candidate elected. It’s a ‘Crisis of Confidence’.., remember?? What did you expect? Oh that’s right, you didn’t care did you.

And what the heck was Obama thinking when he promised a $3000 tax cut to re-hire next year!? That August campaign pledge coinsides exactly with the huge increase in layoffs. Funny that.. Even my company is no different. We’re looking to save money in these lean times too and the added bonus of a big tax cut to re-staff in the future gives us a huge incentive to cut more were we would have otherwise retained skills.

It’s the new business model to success in our changing environment. Welcome to socialistic stagnation..

By williebkind

December 5, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this

“Currently more than 10.3 million people are out of work, the Labor Department said.”

Hey do you think it is those rich republicans affecting the stock market by selling and not buying stocks that is causing all this? Why doe not Pelosi and Reid do something? There goes my tax cut and my spread the wealth check. If we only had conservatives leading the house and senate.

By Taxpayer

December 5, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this

At least some of the worst executives from the technology bubble era ended up serving some time. There are a lot more in the financial industry that need to be put behind bars and have their fortunes returned to the tax payers.

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

A tax cut?

How about this for a plan tcoach?

Tell people you will cut taxes first thing.

Once in office, look at the situation then determine all the cutting and trimming in the world might not suffice.

Then announce a tax increase may be necessary. Do it now, and don’t wait until everyone forgets that we did not cause the problem — we only inherited it.

By RealityKing

December 5, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

Watch for December unemployment numbers of historical porportion. Ours included..

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

Does anyone have the figures for the numbers of jobs that illegal immigrants are holding down in this country?

They might not be the best jobs in the world but if they were avaiable ……….. many Americans would not be to proud to take them at least for awhile and then be able to move on to better things.

P.S. Now before some of you get too SNIDE about my question …….. the following is my job history:

Lawn maintenance laborer Clothes salesman Poultry inspector Railroad brakeman Military Railroad brakeman Mobile home construction worker Hatchery worker Chicken catcher Garbage collector !!! College Student IRS criminal investigator Secret Service agent Federal Air Marshal Retired …….. :o)

As you can see, many of the earlier ones are probably held down today by illegal immigrants instead of American citizens.

By williebkind

December 5, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

Cutting taxes should be so easy that a caveman(democrat) could do it…

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

P.S.

The point is that back then most of those menial jobs were not taken up by illegals and I was able (and not too proud) to use them for employment !!!!!!

You make do when you have to and you work your way up !

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this

Headline:

Gulf Oil CEO says gas could hit $1 next year

It’s all in the timing.

McCain would have been President.

By RW-(the original)

December 5, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Mrs G.,

Bernie Ebbers actually liquidated his assets to pay off members of a class action suit that was settled and has virtually nothing left in the way of assets. He’s 67 years old and isn’t eligible for release until he’s 85.

I wouldn’t support a pardon for him, but I wouldn’t have any problem with a shortening of his sentence. For one thing he’s been pretty darn good over his life at building businesses and creating jobs. I say let him out and keep the cookie jar a fair distance from his fingertips.

By williebkind

December 5, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

By “The Corporal” December 5, 2008 11:19 AM

That is the American Way! However there are those who demanded we put those visitors in higher paying jobs such as industry and special trade jobs which pays pretty good. Once again the liberals put America last. Now we are going to suffer because of progressive liberals involvement in the future governemnt. I say we do not go to college but go to trade schools. That way we will put them out of work. I mean what decent liberal would be a plumber.

By Mrs. Godzilla

December 5, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

Here’s an interesting piece….

Do Conservatives Favor a Deep Recession?

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 11:28 AM | Link to this

Headline:

EXCLUSIVE: Another Senator Kennedy? ABC News has learned NY Gov. has talked to Caroline Kennedy about filling Sen. Clinton’s seat.

Good grief! And just what are her qualifications to be a U.S. Senator?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2008/12/the-note-120508.html

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

Pure Unadulterated Bias

You want to see it?

Check out this ABC Headline today:

Be It Ever Not Humble: Bushes’ New Home: George and Laura buy home in exclusive Dallas neighborhood, near Ross Perot.

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this

Corporal, I always figured you for a chickenman. So you’re saying 55-year-olds who lose their executive jobs at, for instance, AT&T should be happy to sling burgers for McDonald’s? And because you worked as a chicken plucker at age 19 or whatever, then the job would be just great for those 30-40 years older who were earning $150,000 a year before AT&T announced an additional 12,000 job cuts yesterday? Get real! It grates my butt to learn you’ve been on the federal teat for decades.

By Mrs. Godzilla

December 5, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for senators: 1) each senator must be at least 30 years old, 2) must have been a citizen of the United States for at least the past nine years, and 3) must be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state they seek to represent

Caroline Kennedy in the senate…..I like that idea better than Jeb….

By tcoach

December 5, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

I just checked back to see what was going on in here and found myself being attacked.

Mike and taxpayer, what exactly was not fair about my question, since you both went after me with mockery and insults.

I think it is a valid question. I admit I did not vote for Pres. Obama, but he did promise me a tax break. I am as middle class as any. So I was not trying to attack our next president or anything like that.

I truely was wondering if this is going to cripple my tax break.

Taxpayer, don’t worry about my job have spoke to those in power and we are all safe.

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this

Caroline Kennedy has made a name for herself as a legal scholar. As such, she is eminently more qualified to serve in the Senate than any Bush I’ve ever heard of. And, no, Corporal, legal scholar does not mean she crossed the border illegally to come to this country. Just so you’ll know.

By RealityKing

December 5, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this

A depession would be better Mrs. Godzilla. And no, it’s not to punish Obama. It’s to give spoiled Americans a needed jolt of reality. Because it’s become down right disgusting to watch spoiled Americans demand more while selfishly ignoring the dire repression of others. Yes, a depression is the attitude adjustment Americans need.

By Taxpayer

December 5, 2008 11:52 AM | Link to this

tcoach,

I was just trying to snap you back to the present since you seem to be stuck in the future — that time when Obama is actually president — instead of the Bush administration present. I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings but don’t you think it would be appropriate to wait until he’s in office and has the power to sign that legislation. There will be plenty of time to complain about his presidency after it starts.

By RB from Gwinnett

December 5, 2008 11:52 AM | Link to this

I’ve asked this before of you partisan liberals and still don’t have a single answer from you. What policy did W implement that caused any of this financial mess?

I’m tired of the “bush’s failed economic policy” talking points from moveon and msnbc.

Bring facts.

By tcoach

December 5, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

Mrs. G,

Would be nice if you applied constitutional logic to all candidates of each party. I believe I have read where you claimed some candidates were not qualified to fill a position, yet according to the constitution the candidate was qualified.

Please clear this up, does the constitution only apply to dem. or do you think it should extend to rep. as well?

By gadem

December 5, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

So to the likes of RK, Andi(girl) and their ilk…this recession is 1) a fabrication of the media to get Obama elected…2) in response to Obama getting elected, companies are laying people off because they are scared that he is a Muslim, 3) when all else fails, it is Bill Clinton’s fault because he got a BJ in the Oval Office…thanks guys I am clear now on why the economy is so bad.

By Williebkind

December 5, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

“By getalife

December 5, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

w and cheney should resign in disgrace today.” So do nothing Pelosi and Prince Reid had nothing to do with this huh? Pull the blinders off getalife and getreal. Your biased crap is why we are the situation we are now. And take a shower Prince Reid said you stink.

By Midori

December 5, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Corporal,

I’ve found something for you

Live, no less.

No need to thank me.

By tcoach

December 5, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Taxpayer, I was not saying anything about an immediate tax break, I was not clear on that in the original post, I was asking if this is going to effect the tax break that we had been promised. Meaning are we still going to get the tax break, once he is in office.

Was not trying to lead anyone into any trap. Was asking a sincere question about what is the likelihood of this eliminating our tax break.

Apologies for the indirect language of my first post.

By norman ravitch

December 5, 2008 12:00 PM | Link to this

We are at the start of a world-wide depression. The sooner we recognize this the better. Right now we have no president: Bush is clueless as he waits out the next 46 days. Obama is acting like FDR who refused to cooperate with Hoover. Someone needs to do something.

By williebkind

December 5, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

By mike hussein smith:

Maybe AT&T had to pass on to consumers too many fees to pay for those eleaborate salaries. What makes you think you should be paid that kind of money? The average pay in GA. $26k!!

By Joey

December 5, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

Mike (11:08): I like that “partisanship does breed ignorance”. And the leader in partisanship for this blog …. Mr. Bookman.

By Midori

December 5, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

LOL, Gadem - talk about mind boggling!!!

How could they lose with such superior logic?

By AJC/DNC Management

December 5, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

By gadem December 5, 2008 11:56 AM So to the likes of RK, Andi(girl) and their ilk…this recession is 1) a fabrication of the media to get Obama elected…

gadumb: I just said there is no recession, lemming, did I not?

You know, most paranoid delusionals hear voices that don’t exist, perhaps you should get checked out, no?

By Taxpayer

December 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

I think Arnold is going to have to give up one of his titles to Bush. It’s no longer Conan the Destroyer — it’s Bush the Destroyer. Destroyer of jobs, wealth, economies, environment, etc. It’s just too long of a list. Of course, Bush would not look right wielding that big blade that Conan carried. Bush will just have to settle for action scenes with his deadly pen being whipped out of his pocket and put to paper. He could always add a little flair by whishing it around in a fancy figure-8 motion.

By mm

December 5, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

Wow. The wingnut geniuses are in over their heads on this one.

Q. Why are companies laying off employees?

A. Because they are not making any profits.

Q. Why are they not making any profits?

A. Because consumers don’t have any money to buy their products.

Economics 101.

Capitalism in reverse.

By getalife

December 5, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

The freepers have their tin foil hats on. Kooks.

Yes lil willie, Pelosi is an accomplice in not impeaching.

w and cheney are not men enough to resign in disgrace and the spineless dems will not demand it.

By RB from Arbys

December 5, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

RB from Gwinnett - Here is the responsibility Bush has for this mess. Public debt matters. It crowds out private borrowing because there is a finite amount of credit in the world. Bush supported fighting a war on credit, funding tax cuts on the backs of our children and otherwise expanding the national debt by $5 trillion. He also supported lending policies that inflated the housing market, which kept the economy from crashing after 9/11. That may have been wise for the first couple of years after the attacks. But postponing the pain in 2005 and 2006 has resulted in today’s headlines. As you were.

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this

tcoach, as I said earlier all Obama has to do is blame the mess on Bush.

Obama promised tax cuts, now understands that may not be possible, and while the past administration is still fresh in everyone’s mind blame them.

Its a simple case of Reaganomics.

The tipoff that Gov. Ronald Reagan had a streak of pragmatism in him came soon after his inaugural speech on Jan. 2, 1967, in which he promised to “squeeze, cut and trim” the cost of state government to close a significant budget gap. Two days later, however, he told aides that all the cutting and trimming in the world might not suffice. A tax increase could be necessary, Reagan said, and, if so, he didn’t want to wait “until everyone forgets that we did not cause the problem — we only inherited it.”

By Mrs. Godzilla

December 5, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

tcoach….

I see what your getting at, so let me clarify my position for you.

I stand by my belief that Sarah Palin is not now nor will she ever be competent to be President. She does however meet the legal qualifications.

Caroline Kennedy is both legally qualified and competent to be the junior Senator from New York.

tcoach….I think the constitution should even apply to Andy!

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this

Tcoach: Your original question struck me as shameless. Republicans told us for months that Obama wasn’t going to cut taxes, and so — given that you didn’t even vote for the man — did you think you were in line for something? Not being named Bush, Obama said he’d cut taxes for the middle class only if economic conditions allowed for such. But, of course, Bush — the only president we got now — screwed the economy (See RB from Arby’s at 12:12).

By Bosch

December 5, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

RB,

One Bush policy that has put us in this economic mess? The Iraq War.

By BDAtlanta

December 5, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this

It would be interesting to see what would happen if an elected leader actually chose to fix a problem instead of protecting his/her backside or passing the problem down the line.

If we had officials who were willing to accept responsibility and put the rubber to the road, those people would probably be heros.

By Paul

December 5, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this

tcoach

The tax ‘cut’ isn’t going to happen, at least not for a while. Pres-elect Obama said he’ll likely postpone implementing the top-tier tax increases, which was, I believe, where the money was going to come from.

We may see other types of stimulus (direct payment) to individuals, though, regardless with what’s going on with taxes.

mike hussein smith

I always figured a job was a job and you do what you have to do. Seems to me your comment about working at McDonald’s is why we have so many illegals filling the void. To illustrate: I’ve written before about a friend who was out of work for going on a couple of years. Burned through his retirement savings, charged cards up the yazoo. Didn’t change his spending habits. Called me one day, bemoaning his fate, while he and his family were having lunch at Subways. I said “so you’re eating out again while you’re broke? (I’m his friend and can talk to him like that). Find the manager and ask for a job.” He said “they already have a manager.” I said “no, hotshot, working the counter. Forty hours at seven or eight bucks an hour will pay your second mortgage.” He said “nawww, something else will come up.”

It didn’t, for months. I don’t care what he was making before - he would not do jobs others would to take care of his family and reduce his debt.

Mrs. Godzilla

I do believe you are turning into a Constitutional scholar! It should be most entertaining watching you engage RW-(the original)!

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this

williebkind: Anyone making $150,000 a year — and this is just an example —working for AT&T presumably are paid that much because that’s what AT&T thought they were worth. Average pay in Georgia doesn’t have beans to do with it. MM’s post at 12:10 nails it. To that I would add: Q: And why don’t consumers have the money to buy their products? A. Because employers are laying off all their workers.

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this

Midori

Whatever the SCOTUS decides. Is that o.k. with you?

Mrs. G. and Hussein

All that means is that the head of the Mafia in New York can be a senator. Some other qualifications would be nice. Here only real one is the Kennedy name which only came about due to the riches accumulated by old man Kennedy by his illegal rum runnning during prohibition. What an American.

By Midori

December 5, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

Corporal,

I was just trying to help you out.

Geez………

By tcoach

December 5, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

Mike, Why was my question shameless? Are you implying that since I did not vote for Obama, that I am now not entitled to the same things as every other American?

Also in the event of being correct, that was not Obama’s first statement about tax cuts, nor did he mention anything about if the economic climate permits his tax cuts until near the end of the campaign.

I do feel it is a question worth asking, since the tax cuts and his words re-distribution of wealth, were focal points in the platform of his campaign. If he knew there was a possibility that this may happen he should have informed the American public that the economy was not going to allow for his plans and they would need t be altered.

That speech came at the end of the campaign and there was never a follow up to tell us where we stood.

So my bad if you found my question that disturbing. However I am much more disturbed that you feel everyone is out to make a point, you know sometimes people ask questions because they are concerned. Since you fail to see that I assume you are NOT truly concerned.

By mike hussein smith

December 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

Paul: My question to the Corporal was: should former execs be happy to work a job plucking chickens that Corporal had when he was a teenager? I was expressing support for the thought-I-had-it-made Republicans with two Humvees in the garage who find their world crumbling because of W’s nearsighted economic policies. I too have slung burgers; I worked in a carpet warehouse that was so bad on my allergies, my eyes would swell shut; and I worked three jobs simultaneously to get thru grad school. But none of that qualifies me to tell people what they should or shouldn’t do.

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

“Whatever the SCOTUS decides. Is that o.k. with you?”

Just like abortion, right Corporal?

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

Midori

I’m sorry, I wasn’t trying to be mean spirited. What I really meant is I don’t like a lot of their decisions but I have to live with them. I’m sure it’s the same for you. The law is the law.

The L.A. Times and Chicago Tribune picked it up yesterday if you want to Google them.

Nothing is probably going to change. The birth certificate may in fact be “unaltered” on its face but it doesn’t prove in and of itself he was born in Hawaii as the law at that time allowed parents to file for a birth certificate after returning to the State. Any mother in her position would have done so (certainly at the advice of her parents) but the catch his the father’s citizenship under the law at that time. A technicality? To be sure ……… but ………

By Paul

December 5, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

mike hussein smith

Thank you for pointing that out. One little word can make all the difference. My friend - it wasn’t a question of happy or not. Unless he got $n he wasn’t gonna do it. Oh well, it’s his life. All I could do was harass him like a friend should.

Hey, OJ got 15 years. Karma. Still and all, if it wouldn’t have been OJ I doubt he would have been prosecuted like that -

now I’m really out -

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 1:45 PM | Link to this

Abomi Nation

Sure. I obey the law until it’s changed.

Just like Dread Scott. Right?

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

Mike Hussein Smith

And that is exactly the difference between liberals and conservative.

As the Bible says, “if a man will not work let him not eat.”

I may not have the right to tell you where to work but I should have the right as a taxpayer to tell you if you don’t - you get nothing from the government.

There are jobs out there! Some are not that nice but they put bread on the table. Former Execs. can sell clothes. And guess what? Nothing is keeping anyone from getting two or three as you did.

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this

Way to back track Corporal!

You put your foot in your mouth on that one. At least you owned up to it.

I surely wasn’t the one implying that one should stop fighting for a cause as YOUR original “Whatever the SCOTUS decides. Is that o.k. with you?”, implied.

Nice try at your deflection though!

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this

Abomi Nation

Your logic escapes me, sir.

The law is the law. That doesn’t mean it is correct or even moral.

If we are to survive as a nation we must work within it’s confines.

However, that means (i.e., Dread Scott and Roe vs. Wade) we are free to work to overturn bad law/bad decisions.

Surely, you comprehend that?

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

if a man will not work let him not eat.

I’m wondering Corporal, do you work?

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Abomi Nation

1) Hey - and I get Social Security also starting in April !! That’s what 40 years of work gets me ………. :o)

Jealous? You should have taken my route.

2) You didn’t address the changing bad law. Should Dread Scott have been changed? It was established law?

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this

“2) You didn’t address the changing bad law. Should Dread Scott have been changed? It was established law?”

That’s because your question has absolutely nothing to do with your original statement to Midori. You were the one that implied “Whatever the SCOTUS decides. Is that o.k. with you?” Then you back tracked.

Nice waiver you have given yourself on that “if a man will not work let him not eat.” You are not working. You shouldn’t be eating. It’s in the Bible.

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 3:19 PM | Link to this

To Abomi Nation

1) It’s sad you won’t debate. “O.K. with me certainly means I obey (not respect) the law at the time and I certainly have the right to clarify any response I make as one’s words can be limited on a blog.

2) You still haven’t answered why Dread Scott should have been changed. It was Constitutional and established law, so I will answer for you. It was only changed through an Amendment. Lincoln did not free the slaves and the Civil War didn’t either. It took and Amendment to bring morality to the question of slavery just like it needs an Amendment to bring morality to the question of killing unborn children.

3) Regarding my working, I’ll play your game. It’s called deferred income but you may call it retirement. Since the government could only pay me a certain amount (vs. the open market) and by law for 36 years I couldn’t work a second outside job (conflict of interest as an 1811), a good retirement system was a fair tradeoff (at least to me)…… and now I am enjoying it !!!

4) By your logic a 99 year old man who can’t work should starve to death.

Thou dost misinterpret and take that verse out of context.

By Abomi Nation

December 5, 2008 3:34 PM | Link to this

“Thou dost misinterpret and take that verse out of context.”

Wow, I guess that makes me a conservative Christian Republican!

Now stop eating until you get a job. Your Bible quote does not say you are allowed a Social Security deferment . You seem strong enough to blog all day. Get a job. I hear McDonalds is hiring.

By "The Corporal"

December 5, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

Abomi Nation

1) I will if or when I need one.

However, if I ever am at McD’s and you come in, don’t tell me who you are while I’m fixing your burger ….. :o)

2) If you are working (unless you are self-employed), while you are on this blog, then you are stealing from your employer!