tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post3168953275068634224..comments2023-10-24T09:06:30.200-04:00Comments on No More Mister Nice Blog: Steve M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-20122855847902704292012-11-27T14:47:56.989-05:002012-11-27T14:47:56.989-05:00This point ended up above, in my own post, but the...This point ended up above, in my own post, but there is a major error in guilt attribution in the essay about the woman who suddenly needs foodstamps because her boyfriend leaves. The writer of the essay argues that she "needs" this money because she sluttishly chose to have children with someone who didn't stick around to pay for his own children--that by ending her marriage (something he presumes she did unilaterally) or by having children without being married, she "chose." So the kids are a lifestyle choice, an expense she couldn't afford, like the apartment itself or an expensive car.<br /><br />But although children are certainly expensive, and like any other expense one might take them on at one time (with one set of social circumstances, one good job, health care coverage) and later find them to have been a bad decision ONE CAN'T DOWNSIZE OR SELL THEM--anymore, or after a certain age. In the old days people who had too many children--especially people from communities that forbade family planning--used to turn children over to orphanages or have them adopted out or apprenticed out in order to take the burden of support from the biological/social parents. <br /><br />Whether the woman was married to their father or not she and he could both have ended up in the same financial place: strapped, without enough income to support the children or feed them.<br /><br />But in any event it is also the case that marriage or not the biological father actually has a duty to support his own children and can be sued for support. The implicit argument that the slutty lady with two kids lost her right to support for the children because she was not, or is not, married to their father is factually incorrect. The law considers that the biological child has an absolute right to support from the male biological parent--or the adoptive parent--regardless of the marital status of the parents.<br /><br />But if you were to acknowledge the fact that the children have a deadbeat dad in the picture, not a worthless mother, you might end up having more sympathy for the woman, rather than less. So the author prefers to ignore reality and the law and blame the woman for failing to maintain a conventional marital relationship with the children's biological father, as though only such a relationship could guarantee his duty to support them.<br /><br />aimaiaimaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956073425680585780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-10503193087714650352012-11-27T14:34:11.657-05:002012-11-27T14:34:11.657-05:00MTV Mom is probably divorced because a) she's ...MTV Mom is probably divorced because a) she's a woman and b) she's probably a slut. She should have been more submissive. That's what women these days are not doing enough of.Cranky Fanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15343147299813463530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-18869298183419759022012-11-27T13:10:54.141-05:002012-11-27T13:10:54.141-05:00I wish I could agree with you, Chris, but only 2 y...I wish I could agree with you, Chris, but only 2 years ago the R's won a whole shitpot of elections using that very theme (with its subtext of racism) - and quite possibly would have taken the Senate with it, had they nominated 3 or 4 better-camouflaged people instead of Day-Glo headcases like Christine O'Donnell. At a minimum, I see nothing to keep them from riding "makers/takers" for a long time yet here in the south, keeping enough Congressional power to hobble even moderate, much less liberal, national policy.BHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12991272246814476124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-71473033201786540732012-11-27T12:44:25.959-05:002012-11-27T12:44:25.959-05:00Mark my words, the "makers vs. takers" t...Mark my words, the "makers vs. takers" theme of the modern Republican party will be its destruction. You don't win elections on the theme that anyone who might not agree with you *must* be a moocher.Chris Andersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18139817527808942227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-18147528166292032352012-11-27T11:49:14.621-05:002012-11-27T11:49:14.621-05:00VDH is a national treasure, who should be pickled ...VDH is a national treasure, who should be pickled in amber. And buried. Alive.Petehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03830774223073462725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-61466027243179475532012-11-27T11:25:04.937-05:002012-11-27T11:25:04.937-05:00It's the framing, the relentless framing. We&#...It's the framing, the relentless framing. We're all supposed to be outraged that a few people might get a package of lamian noodles they might only deserve about 4 of the 5 ounces, yet someone like Mitt Romney has over two hundred million dollars and has only done a couple hundred thousand dollars worth of actual work his entire adult life. We have 10% of the population getting filthy rich off riding on the backs of millions of American workers, the real producers. But there will be no outrage editorials about that in the WSJ because we're not talking about economics, we're talking about what the cult of conservatism believes in.Johansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00923547617578123736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-47549962197709829132012-11-27T10:44:17.778-05:002012-11-27T10:44:17.778-05:00"Get me a m-fcking ice tea" never gets o..."Get me a m-fcking ice tea" never gets old. Never. I still laugh hysterically.<br /><br />aimaiaimaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956073425680585780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-88140715955784158052012-11-27T09:41:10.688-05:002012-11-27T09:41:10.688-05:00Too bad Mitt no longer has Secret Service protecti...Too bad Mitt no longer has Secret Service protection. "The Albino Lance" would have been a great code name!<br /><br />And boys, let me tell you something about food stamps - or, SNAP, as it's known in the Liberal paradise of NY State:<br />My mother and I get a whopping $16 a month in Food Stamps - for the two of us - together. That ain't even one good T-bone!<br />Actually, that's not even enough for a 1/2 gallon of milk and a dozen eggs, a week.<br /><br />I keep being told we Liberals and Democrats were promised 'gifts.'<br /><br />WHERE ARE MY ME AND MY MOTHER'S GIFTS, PRESIDENT OBAMA?!?!<br /><br />At least bring me another MFing iced tea!Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06609452382111686086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-55128296632370313712012-11-27T09:34:17.484-05:002012-11-27T09:34:17.484-05:00He should definitely have sold off one of those cy...He should definitely have sold off one of those cylinders to pay for food. <br /><br />The fact that people have lost hteir jobs but hung onto assets that they can't, in fact, sell other than at a loss, seems to have totally escaped these guys like Hanson and the first one. You make commitments to your family when you have a good job and then you can't easily downsize or sell off what you own, or change the situation, in a way that makes sense. In the case of that woman she can't break the lease without a high cost, in the case of the guy in the car (even presuming he exists) he may be living out of the car.<br /><br />aimaiaimaihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956073425680585780noreply@blogger.com