now i feel sick: a message from Haiti

[Terry in Crapchester]

See, Terry's attempting to compare the plight of modern day Americans with that of modern day Iraqis. They don't compare, not even a little. We don't do genocide, we don't see mass beheadings in the streets . . .

That's where you're wrong, Van. The only comparison is that both need help. Personally, I'd rather give that help to the Americans.

Disagree with that if you want, but don't mischaracterize what I'm saying.

I'm not mischaracterizing anything you said.

You said...

Just saying that there were, and are, plenty of people here who have it just as bad here as do those in Iraq.

...and that's patently absurd, on any level. You wrote it, I refuted it. In terms of any measure of quality of life, whether it be the ability to feed one's self and one's family, civil rights, women's right, personal security, religious freedom, the opportunity for improving one's lot in life, you name it, there's no comparing modern American society with modern Iraqi society.

Our poorest people still have it world's better than most Iraqis.

All right, my bad. You're right about that.

Not that we've really made it much better. From your argument, our poorest people are still much better off than the poorest Iraqis.

And that doesn't even address my previous point -- that I'd rather give the aid to poor Americans than poor Iraqis.

. . . and even our lowest welfare bums still live much higher on the hog (you don't get that fat from wondering where your next meal is coming from) than the average $4.98 per week income Iraqi...

Been to the supermarket lately? Junk food is cheaper than healthier alternatives. Same for fattier cuts of meat. Nor surprising, then, that some people living on an extremely limited budget would make those choices, and would have to battle a weight problem as a result.

Please. A 350 lb welfare lady can afford to eat better (and a whole lot less, to boot) and not become a disgusting slob. She chooses to eat the way she does.

Disagree. You're stereotyping here. I do a fair amount of assigned counsel work, and these people can't exceed certain maximum income requirements for eligibility. Many of these people get food stamps, but often what they get isn't enough to fairly feed a single person, let alone one with dependents.

All in all, I'm amazed at the extent to which some of these people are able to support themselves based on their stated income, although I suppose it's possible that they're not always being 100% truthful with me.

The bottom line is that nobody in America who isn't enormously self destructive need ever wonder where the next meal will come from...

Dunno about that. Many of these people have profound mental health issues, to the point where they couldn't possibly hold a job. Many have no families, or are estranged from their families. Many could find work, and are capable of working, but have dependents who would require care while they worked.

I could go on, but I hope you get the point. The obstacles these people have to overcome are potentially as numerous and as diverse as these people themselves are. To engage in stereotypes -- e.g., all poor people are lazy/fat/self-destructive, etc. -- is disingenuous and, when push comes to shove, mean-spirited.

[

[Terry in Crapchester]

although I suppose it's possible that they're not always being 100% truthful with me.

What?? You mean that an indigent criminal defendant is not always 100% truthful with their own attorney?

Shocked, absolutely shocked.

Some of the income levels I've heard, if they're shading the truth, there's really no need to worry on their part. I've done (rough estimate) about 100 of these in the past year, and only three came up high enough that I considered it necessary to contact the Assigned Counsel Program over -- one had gotten a job since his initial interview, one was 17 and her mother earned enough to concern me about her eligibility, and one had very low income but owned a house and had enough home equity to concern me.

At least one, I know almost for certain, was truthful with me. He was 17 and called me after his initial interview to let me know his mother went back to work at a job that paid $7 per hour 25 hours a week. That wasn't enough money to affect his eligibility, but most don't even bother to tell me if they've moved.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Van,

Don't expect Terry to admit he misspoke. He’d sooner spend six pages spinning and denying. Just re-read the creationist thread, you’ll see.

I see that my ankle tastes really good to you. What a whiny cunt.

[Terry in Crapchester]

And I'm sure they're truthful with you re the merits of their case also. ;)

Well, considering that most plead, the one I cited as having evidence of his honesty had his case dismissed when the so-called "victim" (who, btw, had yelled ethnic slurs at my client, a Muslim from Somalia, and attempted to run him over with his car) failed to cooperate with the DA's office, and the one case that actually went to jury trial resulted in an acquittal on the most serious charge . . .

[Goober McTuber]

Van,

Don't expect Terry to admit he misspoke. He’d sooner spend six pages spinning and denying. Just re-read the creationist thread, you’ll see.

I see that my ankle tastes really good to you.

Funny how every time someone smacks you up side your little pin-head with a solid dose of the truth, they’re ankle-biting. Really funny stuff there, Corky.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Van,

Don't expect Terry to admit he misspoke. He’d sooner spend six pages spinning and denying. Just re-read the creationist thread, you’ll see.

I see that my ankle tastes really good to you.

Funny how every time someone smacks you up side your little pin-head with a solid dose of the truth, they’re ankle-biting. Really funny stuff there, Corky.

Not intended to be funny.

You've followed me around, what is it, three threads now? The facts speak for themselves.

[Goober McTuber]

I bash Cicero in that many threads every day. That’s not ankle-biting, that’s tard bashing. I started two of those three threads, and I’m following you around?

[Terry in Crapchester]

I started two of those three threads, and I’m following you around?

Considering that in one of those threads, you mentioned me right out of the gate, in a thread that had nothing to do with me, and wasn't (at least nominally, wasn't) directed at me . . . That would seem to make it two out of three, then.

And in the third, I hardly sauntered in looking for a fight. Just a little lighthearted smack, although you apparently took it personally.

[Van]

I suppose it's possible that they're not always being 100% truthful with me.

Ya' think?

Man....You just gotta love Terry.

Heart as big as Texas, and a mind that's always open to even the CRAZIEST of possibilities too!!

:-)

J/K, Terry...

Btw, had you caught even a fraction of the Katrina footage you surely saw buttloads of morbidly obese 9th Ward "victims" who were supposedly indigent yet somehow still bigger than the rescue boats many of them ignored in the first place...

"Morbid obesity" and "welfare recipient" are hardly mutually exclusive terms in America; no more so than "blind shit faced drunk/high on crack" and "welfare recipient" or "obstinately and continually pregnant" and "welfare recipient"...

[Goober McTuber]

I started two of those three threads, and I’m following you around?

Considering that in one of those threads, you mentioned me right out of the gate, in a thread that had nothing to do with me, and wasn't (at least nominally, wasn't) directed at me . . . That would seem to make it two out of three, then.

More than anything, that was a throwaway smack line. We've all done the "Terry’s a fucking retard" take at one time or another on this or another board. I was just throwing it out there because it makes your pussy hurt.

I really started the thread to get some humorous input from Fester, who always has a good take on ultimate frisbee. Maybe even elicit an appearance by I Just Made Sweet Love To.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Btw, had you caught even a fraction of the Katrina footage you surely saw buttloads of morbidly obese 9th Ward "victims" who were supposedly indigent yet somehow still bigger than the rescue boats many of them ignored in the first place...

"Morbid obesity" and "welfare recipient" are hardly mutually exclusive terms in America; no more so than "blind shit faced drunk/high on crack" and "welfare recipient" or "obstinately and continually pregnant" and "welfare recipient"...

Not disputing any of that, but it doesn't mean that you can categorize all welfare recipients into one of these categories, let alone all of them.

Not to mention that not all poor people receive welfare, of course. Food stamps technically are not welfare (unless they changed the categorization of food stamps recently), although many tend to think of them as that. And most of the homeless people you see don't collect welfare. IIRC, you need to have a permanent address to collect welfare, and most of them do not.

[Van]

I can categorize all American welfare recipients as being WAY better off in every way than their counterparts in Iraq, and that's where this begins and ends.

As for the truly fat ones, yeah, the fact they're both morbidly obese and on welfare isn't exactly a surprise. Both conditions indicate the probability of low self esteem, willful ignorance and sloth.

[Moorese]

I will pray for them to get real names someday, though. I might even call in if there was a telethon or something.

I can respect that, but don't forget to pray for Annie's Grandmother and Grandfather too. I just did. I don't know if they are still alive. They might be dead. But I just prayed for them. It went a little something like this...

Dear God,
Hi again, it's Moorese...you know, the guy that's been praying for Quartlepican and Werfis to come home safely. Anyhoo, I also need to pray for Annie's Grandmother and Annie's Grandfather. It sure would be swell if you could see fit to doing something nice for them. Now, don't get me wrong. They might be dead. I don't know. But even if they are dead, I'm sure you can figure out something that would be kinda special...maybe something like Verizon's new family talk plan so that they could call Annie and tell her to shut the fuck up. If they are dead, it might be a little more difficult to get this accomplished, but maybe you could zap them with a bolt of lightning or something so that they would be up and twitching long enough to make a telephone call. By the way, I'm pretty sure the call would be free so long as everyone is listed on the family plan. Thanks.

Your friend,
Moorese

P.S. Could you give me a sign or something when you send Quarnalicious and Plebis home safely because I'm really starting to worry.

[Smackie Chan]

[Van]

Oh my god!!!

Bwaaahaaa!!!

Moorese though...dude...

....please....


OFF that avatar!!!! GAH!!!

[Moorese]

Quarktrilion is a cause for which I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill.

(o.k. that's kind of a lie)

[Van]

Moorese, call me crazy but my guess, from that picture, is that Quarkenon there is either a midget, or a retard, or a fun luvin' midget retard.

Yep, that'd be my guess. Therefore, it wouldn't surprise me if you were his abductor. It's rainy and the Mariners aren't going anywhere and you're probably still bitter over the Super Bowl and, well, with boredom settling in and your predilictions being what they are the timing just seems right and all the stars seem perfectly aligned.

[jtr]

hey van you should check out this band particularly the song The Joy of Smoking. Good stuff. http://www.larsenandfuriousjane.com/default.htm

[Van]

hey van you should check out this band particularly the song The Joy of Smoking. http://www.larsenandfuriousjane.com/default.htm

Why?

[jtr]

Good stuff for getting mellow with ya know.

[Van]

Who's the guitarist?? Is there a guitarist??

Otherwise, they don't sound like they're either jazz or blues players, which would be my preference for "getting mellow".

:-)

[JCT]

Jesus Christ, what a fucking unreadable trainwreck.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I do a fair amount of assigned counsel work, and these people can't exceed certain maximum income requirements for eligibility.

* * *

Some of the income levels I've heard, if they're shading the truth, there's really no need to worry on their part. I've done (rough estimate) about 100 of these in the past year, and only three came up high enough that I considered it necessary to contact the Assigned Counsel Program over -- one had gotten a job since his initial interview, one was 17 and her mother earned enough to concern me about her eligibility, and one had very low income but owned a house and had enough home equity to concern me.

At least one, I know almost for certain, was truthful with me. He was 17 and called me after his initial interview to let me know his mother went back to work at a job that paid $7 per hour 25 hours a week. That wasn't enough money to affect his eligibility, but most don't even bother to tell me if they've moved.

I started reading this thread and Terry's statements ^^^^^ struck a nerve with me. Unless I'm misreading his take, Terry is saying that his clients make a concerted effort NOT to make enough income to affect their eligibility to obtain a government benefit.

No, that's not what I said.

What I said was that, based on the income levels certain of these people report to me, I believe that some of them may be underreporting their income. I don't think there's any possible way they could support themselves in the manner they do and have as little income as they report ($100/month or less in many instances). The irony is that their underreporting, in most cases, probably doesn't affect their eligibility for assigned counsel, as most of them are probably still considerably below poverty level.

And btw, for assigned counsel purposes, "income" has a much broader meaning than is ordinarily assigned to it. It includes not only employment income but any other source of money to the recipient, so it could also include unemployment income, social security or disability, welfare benefits, income from rental property, investment income (although people with investment income probably don't qualify for assigned counsel in most instances), etc.

I am sure you are aware that the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, mandates assignment of counsel for indigent defendants. In that regard, it's not really a "welfare" benefit.

[Terry in Crapchester]

This is even more confusing, Terry. You say you suspect that your clients may be underreporting their income in order to maintain their eligibility to receive assigned counsel. If that is true, then your clients are purposefully stealing benefits from the government that they should otherwise be required to pay for. Again, its sickening.

I'm not condoning that behavior, but the point I tried to make is that it's ultimately irrelevant. Even if they were completely truthful with me, they'd still maintain that eligibility.

And just because the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution as requiring that indigent defendants be provided with counsel at the government's expense does not mean its not social welfare. Social welfare, at least insofar as I understand the definition, is a personal benefit paid to an individual from the public coffers.

I understand where you're coming from here, but your definition of social welfare strikes me as about as broad as humanly possible. In any event, whether it's a welfare benefit or not, this is one that can't be taken away anytime soon.