New Policy For Transgender Homeless

[Caleigh]

February 6, 2006


After years of negotiations with QEJ and other organizations, on
February 3rd, the New York City Department of Homeless Services (DHS)
formally announced a new policy that will allow homeless transgender
individuals to determine their placement in the city’s homeless shelter
system.

The new policy will allow transgender homeless individuals to specify
whether they prefer to be housed in women’s or men’s shelters.
Previously, they were mandated into facilities based on their biological
sex. In accordance with DHS’s new commitment to “a policy of respect
for all shelter clients”, shelter staff will be obligated to address
transgender individuals with their preferred “names, titles, pronouns,
and other terms appropriate to their gender identity.” The new policy
will begin as a pilot program at six homeless shelters across the city.

“No one, regardless of whether they are homeless, should be denied their
basic dignity, their gender, least of all within our city’s shelters,”
said Queers for Economic Justice (QEJ) shelter organizer Jay Toole.
“With the inauguration of DHS’s ground-breaking new policy, we move one
step closer to ensuring the safety and well-being of all New Yorkers
regardless of class or gender identity.”

In the city’s shelters, transgender individuals are at high risk of
verbal, physical, and sexual harassment and abuse, including rape.
Transgender women in particular report being threatened with such
extreme violence in men’s facilities that many opt not to utilize the
shelter system at all, feeling safer instead remaining on the streets.

This policy change represents the culmination of a long negotiation
between DHS and LGBT community organizations. Toole began coordinating
meetings more than three years ago between DHS, QEJ, the Sylvia Rivera
Law Project, and the Gender Identity Project of the LGBT Community
Center. The organizations worked to educate DHS about the experiences
of transgender and gender nonconforming people in the shelter system, as
well as to urge DHS to adopt a written policy allowing such individuals
to determine their own placement within the system. QEJ and fellow
advocates are now working to ensure that the new regulations mandate
transgender-sensitivity training for shelter staff and that the trainers
themselves be either transgender or advocates from transgender
communities.

“The respect and protection of transgender shelter residents will only
happen if shelter staff receive the training they need,” said Toole.
“DHS must now enlist transgender communities and advocacy organizations
in this training to ensure that shelters truly become safe, welcoming
and respectful of homeless transgender people.”

This policy, which was just made available to the public, represents the
culmination of a long negotiation process between QEJ and DHS and a
critical provision that brings us one step closer to ensuring the safety
of all shelter residents regardless of our sexual or gender identities.
The new policy will begin, as a pilot program, at six homeless shelters
across the City.

QEJ expresses its gratitude to the Gender Identity Project and Sylvia
Rivera Law Project for their partnership on this issue, and also to the
many organizations which have helped our three organizations make this
new policy a reality, especially , but also including: Lambda Legal
Defense and Education Fund, the New York County Lawyers' Association
Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Issues, the
Coalition for the Homeless (CFTH), and the New York Transgender Rights
Organization (NYTRO), as well as the many members of the Queer Economic
Justice Network, coordinated by QEJ, which have provided invaluable
support and assistance.

[InvisibleTS]

Good to hear :) Thanks for sharing as always

[Ecstatic]

Good to see some enlightened perspective!

[Vicki Richter]

So what does that say about a TG who still wishes to be housed with the boyz?

[brickcitybrother]

It is a start... but does nothing to address the root cause of homelessness or of the abject proverty in this country.

[Felicia Katt]

It is a start... but does nothing to address the root cause of homelessness or of the abject proverty in this country.

are you saying the tax cuts aren't enough??? LOL

FK

[Vicki Richter]

It is a start... but does nothing to address the root cause of homelessness or of the abject proverty in this country.

You are right. Clinton totally solved that problem in his 8 years.

[Felicia Katt]

He didn't solve it, but he sure did a lot to improve it
The poverty rate fell from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 12.7 percent in 1998. That's the lowest poverty rate since 1979 and the largest five-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1965-1970).

The African-American poverty rate dropped from 33.1 percent in 1993 to 26.1 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level ever recorded and the largest five-year drop in African-American poverty in more than a quarter century (1967-1972).

The poverty rate for Hispanics fell to the lowest level since 1979, and dropped to 25.6 percent in 1998.

African-American unemployment fell from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in March 2000 -- the lowest rate on record.

The unemployment rate for Hispanics fell from 11.6 percent in 1992 to 6.3 percent in March 2000 -- and in the last year has been at the lowest rate on record.

For women the unemployment rate was 4.3 percent in March 2000, nearly the lowest since 1953 [when few women sought employment outside the home].

In 1999, the homeownership rate was 66.8 percent -- the highest ever recorded. Minority homeownership rates were also the highest ever recorded.

Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, child poverty declined from 22.7 percent in 1993 to 18.9 percent in 1998 -- the biggest five-year drop in nearly 30 years.

The poverty rate for African-American children fell from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 36.7 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level in 20 years and the biggest five-year drop on record.

The rate also fell for Hispanic children, from 36.8 percent to 34.4 percent - and is now 6.5 percentage points lower than it was in 1993.
http://www.mikehersh.com/President_Clinton_Eight_Great_Years.shtml

Reagan and Bush had 12 years. Clinton had only 8. Instead of 4 years, Gore got 4 votes in the Supreme Court.

Under the guy who got 5 votes...

The number of Americans living in poverty or lacking health insurance rose for 4 straight years in 2004, while household incomes stagnated and earnings fell, according to the Census Bureau
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35175-2004Aug26.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/30/AR2005083001727.html

FK

[Vicki Richter]

I'll concede defeat here if you can clearly articulate what programs Clinton employed to make such sweeping changes... and what changes the present administration did to reverse the improvements. You will also comprehend in your summary that Clinton handed off the economy in a bag of shit recession which lead to a huge stock market collapse and a massive terrorist attack caused partially by a lacksadasial approach to terrorism by the administration. There was nothing Bush could do to avoid the gears that had already been set into motion... What do you think that did to companies and their bottom lines? Ahhh global work forces, etc. Do you try to restrict the already struggling US auto industry by placing tarrifs on moving jobs off-shore? The airline industry was also hugely affected...

You might be able to blame the high fuel prices on him as well as the extremely expensive war, but historically war is the best way out of a recession.

So IMHO you are talking apples and oranges. As some might argue, due to "Reagonomics" Clinton inherited the easiest 8 years in office any President could hope for. I'm not saying that is fact, but of course I enjoy playing the devil's advocate.

V

[Felicia Katt]

The myth of the Clinton recession was already raised and thoroughly debunked on here
http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?p=69751&highlight=clinton+recession#69751
As far as specific programs:
15 million working families enjoyed tax relief under President Clinton's expanded Earned Income Tax Credit. Thanks to Clinton, the EITC lifted 4.3 million people out of poverty in 1998 alone.
1.5 million children benefited when Clinton more than doubled federal funding for child care.
Clinton forced the minimum wage up from $4.25 to $5.15 per hour and demanded an increase to $6.15.
Clinton's Workforce Investment Act reformed the nation's employment and training system.
Clinton's policies helped to create 22 million net jobs in eight years. During six years under two different Bushes the economy failed to create even one net private sector job. Not even one!
http://www.mikehersh.com/President_Clinton_Eight_Great_Years.shtml

Other specifics of Clinton's successes:
Signed the Economic Package, August 10, 1993.
Passed the largest deficit-cutting plan in history -- saving more than $1 trillion over seven years. That massive deficit was Reagans only real legacy
Cut federal spending by $255 billion over 5 years.
Made new tax cuts available to over 90% of small businesses.
Lowest combined rate of unemployment and inflation since 1968.
1994 real GDP growth was the highest in a decade.
Proposed a plan to balance the budget while protecting critical investments in education
http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm

Bush's record compared to every presidency since Nixon:
Bush's term saw the absolute worst job creation, both in the private-sector and in the economy as a whole.
Bush's term has yielded the absolute worst growth in employee compensation.
Bush.'s term has produced gains in after-tax income that, while not the absolute worst, are the third worst of the last 9 presidential terms. This despite what Bush has billed as "the largest tax cuts in history."
Bush's term has also produced the fastest growth in discretionary government spending of all 9 presidential terms.
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2004/10/bush-economy-in-context.html

Bush focused on his tax cuts, gving the richest even more. He focused on right wing and right to life issues. His very first act in office was an executive order withholding federal funds from international organizations that engage in abortion-related activities. Energy, Medical, Pharmaceutical industries all enjoyed record profits, at the expense of consumers, under Bush's policies.

I will agree that there was a lackadaisacal approach to terrorism by the administration. The Bush Administration. The month before 9-11 (after geting a briefing which suggested there would be attacks on the US using airliners, Bush was on vacation at his ranch, pondering stem cells. Richard Clark, a holdover from Clinton's administration who briefed the Presidents people cancelled all his staff's vacations that same month.
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020812/story.html

Bush has had 5 years, its time for him to accept some responsiblity. Clinton has been out of office for 5 years, its time for him to be able to reject some.

FK

[Jamie Michelle]

He didn't solve it, but he sure did a lot to improve it
The poverty rate fell from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 12.7 percent in 1998. That's the lowest poverty rate since 1979 and the largest five-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1965-1970).

The African-American poverty rate dropped from 33.1 percent in 1993 to 26.1 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level ever recorded and the largest five-year drop in African-American poverty in more than a quarter century (1967-1972).

The poverty rate for Hispanics fell to the lowest level since 1979, and dropped to 25.6 percent in 1998.

African-American unemployment fell from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in March 2000 -- the lowest rate on record.

The unemployment rate for Hispanics fell from 11.6 percent in 1992 to 6.3 percent in March 2000 -- and in the last year has been at the lowest rate on record.

For women the unemployment rate was 4.3 percent in March 2000, nearly the lowest since 1953 [when few women sought employment outside the home].

In 1999, the homeownership rate was 66.8 percent -- the highest ever recorded. Minority homeownership rates were also the highest ever recorded.

Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, child poverty declined from 22.7 percent in 1993 to 18.9 percent in 1998 -- the biggest five-year drop in nearly 30 years.

The poverty rate for African-American children fell from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 36.7 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level in 20 years and the biggest five-year drop on record.

The rate also fell for Hispanic children, from 36.8 percent to 34.4 percent - and is now 6.5 percentage points lower than it was in 1993.
http://www.mikehersh.com/President_Clinton_Eight_Great_Years.shtml

Reagan and Bush had 12 years. Clinton had only 8. Instead of 4 years, Gore got 4 votes in the Supreme Court.

Under the guy who got 5 votes...

The number of Americans living in poverty or lacking health insurance rose for 4 straight years in 2004, while household incomes stagnated and earnings fell, according to the Census Bureau
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35175-2004Aug26.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/30/AR2005083001727.html

FK

Governments don't give a flying fuck about the homeless. Governments create homeless people through taxes. If a person doesn't pay the taxes the government extorts via guns and chains from them then the government doesn't have the slightest qualm about stealing that person's house and making them homeless. They don't even give a shit if you're elderly and infirm, they'll kick you out on the street without having a second thought about it.

Governments simply act like they give a shit about common people as a publicity stunt. But when it comes down to it all, governments will rip you a thousand new assholes just as soon as give you a second glance.

Setting governments the task of reducing homelessness would be akin to setting Jeffrey Dahmer the task of reducing serial-murder.

As well, Bush-loving Bill Clinton's government staged the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. For more on that, see the below documentation resources:

---

It was the FBI that bombed the World Trade Center in 1993:

None of this would be known today if it were not for the FBI's undercover agent Emad A. Salem taping his conversations with his FBI handlers (unbeknownst to them). Salem thought that the FBI might try to pin it on him so he took measures to protect himself. Indeed, without the FBI the '93 WTC bombing would never have happened, as it was agent Salem who built the bomb for the would-be Muslim "terrorists." Salem wanted to use fake ingredients for the "bomb" but the FBI ordered him to make a real one. When the making of the bomb was complete Salem told the FBI that they could now arrest the would-be terrorists, but the FBI told Salem that the bombing is to go forward. After agent Salem went public with his tapes in a news conference the FBI found it necessary to pay him over a million dollars just to shut him up.

For more on the above, see the below New York Times article:

"Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast," Ralph Blumenthal, New York Times, October 28, 1993:

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b3c830e34de.htm

And see also:

"Who Bombed The World Trade Center? FBI Bomb Builders Exposed," Paul DeRienzo, Frank Morales and Chris Flash, The Shadow, October 1994/January 1995 Issue:

http://pdr.autono.net/WhoBombedWTC.html

On the above webpage you can find the below two audio clips from one of Emad A. Salem's recorded conversations with one of his FBI handlers, FBI Special Agent John Anticev:

http://nwo.media.xs2.net/tape/emad%20salem.mp3

The above clip is an excerpt from the below longer clip:

http://nwo.media.xs2.net/tape/SalemWBAI.mp3

The above clips were recorded from a broadcast on WBAI Radio in the city of New York which aired this taped conversation between Emad A. Salem and FBI Special Agent John Anticev.

The below transcript is from 2:57 to 4:31 min:sec from the longer clip (SalemWBAI.mp3):

FBI Special Agent John Anticev: But, uh, basically nothing has changed. I'm just telling you for my own sake that nothing, that this isn't a salary, that it's--you know. But you got paid regularly for good information. I mean the expenses were a little bit out of the ordinary and it was really questioned. Don't tell Nancy I told you this. [Nancy Floyd is another FBI Special Agent who worked with Emad A. Salem in his informant capacity.]

Emad A. Salem: Well, I have to tell her of course.

Anticev: Well then, if you have to, you have to.

Salem: Yeah, I mean because the lady was being honest and I was being honest and everything was submitted with a receipt and now it's questionable.

Anticev: It's not questionable, it's like a little out of the ordinary.

Salem: Okay. Alright. I don't think it was. If that's what you think guys, fine, but I don't think that because we was start already building the bomb which is went off in the World Trade Center. It was built by supervising supervision from the Bureau and the D.A. and we was all informed about it and we know that the bomb start to be built. By who? By your confidential informant. What a wonderful, great case!

Anticev: Well.

Salem: And then he put his head in the sand and said "Oh, no, no, that's not true, he is son of a bitch." [Deep breath.] Okay. It's built with a different way in another place and that's it.

Anticev: No, don't make any rash decisions. I'm just trying to be as honest with you as I can.

Salem: Of course, I appreciate that.

Anticev: And as far as the payments go, and everything like that, they're there. I guarantee you that they are there.

########################################

Concerning the Oklahoma City bombing, see the below links:

"The Oklahoma City Bombing--PROOF there were additional explosive charges," WhatReallyHappened.com:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/bombs/bombs.html

WhatReallyHappened.com Oklahoma City Bombing page:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/ok.html

"Bomb Damage Analysis Of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building" by Brigadier General Benton K. Partin, retired Commander of the U.S. Air Force Armament Technology Laboratory, July 30, 1995:

http://jeffhead.com/liberty/okcbomb.htm

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/okm.htm

"Was FBI early arrival in Oklahoma City?--Hotel receipt shows top terror man showed up 9 hours before blast," Jon Dougherty, WorldNetDaily.com, January 19, 2002:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26115

Iraqis were definitely involved in the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City. There is quite a lot of evidence demonstrating this. We even know the names of some of those Iraqis, like Al-Hussaini Hussain, who was also working as a baggage-handler at Boston's Logan International Airport during the 9/11 attacks, which is where American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 originated from.

Al-Hussaini Hussain is the person that witnesses identify as John Doe No. 2 who was with Timothy McVeigh in dropping off the Ryder truck in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building. He was arrested by the FBI trying to leave the U.S. and his release was ordered by Bill Clinton through the Justice Department. Found in his custody during that arrest was the blue jogging suit that witnesses described.

Al-Hussaini Hussain is former Iraqi Republican Guard, and four other former Iraqi Republican Guard members were arrested soon after the bombing of the Murrah Federal building, but their release was ordered by Bill Clinton. These former Iraqi Republican Guard members are part of the 3,500+ Iraqi military members and their family brought into the U.S. after the Gulf War by George Bush, Sr. and further continued by Bill Clinton. For more on this transfer of Iraqi military into the U.S., see the below major media news articles:

"Iraq POWs Paid to Resettle in U.S.; Lawmakers Protest," Richard A. Serrano, Los Angeles Times, August 24, 1993:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_082493_iraq.html

http://sf.indymedia.org/uploads/iraqlatimes1.gif

"Resettling Iraqi POWs in U.S. Criticized; Lawmakers Urge Clinton to End 'Potentially Dangerous' Policy," William Claiborne, Washington Post, August 25, 1993:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/news_alert_082593_iraq.html

Many of the confiscated tapes of the twelve video survailance cameras that were in front of the Murrah Federal building record exactly what witnesses described: Al-Hussaini Hussain dropping off the Ryder truck with Timothy McVeigh--Al-Hussaini Hussain as the passenger and Timothy McVeigh as the driver. And this according to high-level FBI sources who have seen the tapes, as quoted by the Los Angeles Times and Oklahoma City KFOR-TV news. These video survailance tapes were confiscated by the U.S. government under the National Security Act.

For more on this evidence which I have been relating to you, I urge you to watch at least the first part (which deals with the Oklahoma City bombing) of the video documentary "911: The Road to Tyranny" by political talk radio host Alex Jones, of which can be viewed below in its entirety for free:

http://conspiracycentral.net:6969/?search=tyranny

http://911.mazesoftware.com

http://100777.com/doc/30

http://www.c0balt.com/resources/911/download.shtml

http://infowars.com/video_clips.html (There is only the first part of the video on the Infowars website.)

And see:

"Search For The Missing Iraqis: Ask Daddy Bush And Clinton" by Wade Inganamort:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_inganamort_012803_iraqis.html

See also:

"The real story of Iraqis at OKC bombing. Not the one you think!":

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/11/1542199.php

As well, see the below book which is online in its entirety and for free:

The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror by David Hoffman, foreward by Oklahoma State Representative Charles Key (Feral House; 1998), ISBN: 0-922915-49-0 (0922915490):

http://www.constitution.org/ocbpt/ocbpt.htm

The above book by David Hoffman is very thoroughly referenced, and is introduced by Oklahoma State Rep. Charles Key. For more on this book and its author, see the below webpage:

http://www.beachnet.com/~hoffman/BookAd.html

[Felicia Katt]

Jamie, I am sure you are sincere, but to bring up all that conspiracy crap in in a thread about homelessness suggests that your lights are on, but no one is home

FK

[Jamie Michelle]

Jamie, I am sure you are sincere, but to bring up all that conspiracy crap in in a thread about homelessness suggests that your lights are on, but no one is home

FK

Unlike you, I do not believe in any conspiracy theories, such as the U.S. government's lying, self-serving, a-historical, a-factual, and provably false official fairy tale conspiracy theory concerning the 9/11 attacks.

Rather, I believe in conspiracy facts.

For more on this, see the below documentation resources:

"Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse?," Prof. Steven E. Jones, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University, to be contained in "The Hidden History of 9-11-2001," Research in Political Economy, Vol. 23, Paul Zarembka, editor (Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, Spring 2006):

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

"Thinking About 'Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK," Prof. James H. Fetzer, University of Minnesota, to be contained in 9/11 and the American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, editors (Northampton, Massachusetts: Olive Branch Press [an imprint of Interlink Publishing Group, Inc.], 2006):

http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/fetzerexpandedx.doc

"The Destruction of the World Trade Center: Why the Official Account Cannot Be True," Prof. David Ray Griffin, based on a lecture given in New York, New York on October 15 and 16, 2005:

http://www.911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

For more on government-staged terrorism, see the below post by me:

"Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism," September 30, 2005:

http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth

[chefmike]

FK rules! :claps :rock2

[Jamie Michelle]

FK rules! :claps :rock2

I agree. Fucking is wonderful.

[Caleigh]

Arnold, it's really uncalled for to start using an
obviously unwanted gender designation for
someone just because you don't believe the same
things as them.

Kudos to Felicia for doing her research. This idea
that Clinton not Bush somehow dropped the ball
on national security which contributed to 9/11 is
one of the worst lies the neocons have promoted.

[Vicki Richter]

The myth of the Clinton recession was already raised and thoroughly debunked on here
http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.php?p=69751&highlight=clinton+recession#69751
As far as specific programs:
15 million working families enjoyed tax relief under President Clinton's expanded Earned Income Tax Credit. Thanks to Clinton, the EITC lifted 4.3 million people out of poverty in 1998 alone.
1.5 million children benefited when Clinton more than doubled federal funding for child care.
Clinton forced the minimum wage up from $4.25 to $5.15 per hour and demanded an increase to $6.15.
Clinton's Workforce Investment Act reformed the nation's employment and training system.
Clinton's policies helped to create 22 million net jobs in eight years. During six years under two different Bushes the economy failed to create even one net private sector job. Not even one!
http://www.mikehersh.com/President_Clinton_Eight_Great_Years.shtml

Other specifics of Clinton's successes:
Signed the Economic Package, August 10, 1993.
Passed the largest deficit-cutting plan in history -- saving more than $1 trillion over seven years. That massive deficit was Reagans only real legacy
Cut federal spending by $255 billion over 5 years.
Made new tax cuts available to over 90% of small businesses.
Lowest combined rate of unemployment and inflation since 1968.
1994 real GDP growth was the highest in a decade.
Proposed a plan to balance the budget while protecting critical investments in education
http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm

Bush's record compared to every presidency since Nixon:
Bush's term saw the absolute worst job creation, both in the private-sector and in the economy as a whole.
Bush's term has yielded the absolute worst growth in employee compensation.
Bush.'s term has produced gains in after-tax income that, while not the absolute worst, are the third worst of the last 9 presidential terms. This despite what Bush has billed as "the largest tax cuts in history."
Bush's term has also produced the fastest growth in discretionary government spending of all 9 presidential terms.
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2004/10/bush-economy-in-context.html

Bush focused on his tax cuts, gving the richest even more. He focused on right wing and right to life issues. His very first act in office was an executive order withholding federal funds from international organizations that engage in abortion-related activities. Energy, Medical, Pharmaceutical industries all enjoyed record profits, at the expense of consumers, under Bush's policies.

I will agree that there was a lackadaisacal approach to terrorism by the administration. The Bush Administration. The month before 9-11 (after geting a briefing which suggested there would be attacks on the US using airliners, Bush was on vacation at his ranch, pondering stem cells. Richard Clark, a holdover from Clinton's administration who briefed the Presidents people cancelled all his staff's vacations that same month.
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020812/story.html

Bush has had 5 years, its time for him to accept some responsiblity. Clinton has been out of office for 5 years, its time for him to be able to reject some.

FK

The shared income thing is BS. No offense but that is giving money from the middle class to the lower class for nothing other than them being lower class. Now if I didn't personally know women (yes more than one in this general description) born of lower-middle class upbringing who have had 3 kids from different fathers, then I might say I feel bad about it. These girls have just adversely impacted their social class and that of their children, and the government is enabling them to do it through free money. By enabling these girls and others in society who abuse this system to do that, it teaches their children that people don't have to work to make it. "Why work hard in school. Look my mom sits on her ass and does nothing... who knows where my father is... etc etc". So fuck that part about Democrats. I am all for job creation, increasing minimum wage, etc.

However, if you are going to say Clinton "created" those jobs, here is a document which says Bush created x jobs as well. If you recall, job creation was a big reelection thing in the Bush camp right?

http://www.atr.org/content/html/2004/nov/pr_octoberjobs_11-5-04.htm

The recession was already in progress. It didn't happen in a few months. Clinton had the reigns for the prior 8 years, he is responsible. I do not agree with your "debunked" comment.

That is the problem with both political parties, they deflect blame. The only reason there are two parties is so the right hand can point to the left hand when things aren't going right. Politics are retarded. It is finger pointing about whose fault the bad things are and who gets credit for the good things... If jobs are created, it is because of the Republican congress, if they go away, it is because of the Democratic President,... obviously none of that is true.

Therefor, I discredit all of your comments here as giving your prefered party preferential treatment. You are part of the problem with all things good (even when they aren't) over here, and all things bad over there.

[chefmike]

:lol:

[Vicki Richter]

That is pretty funny. I'll give you that.

I am not Republican though. Maybe I am a conservative independent.

I'm pro-abortion, for the legalization of marijuana (which I don't even use), and also believe prostitution should be legal.

[chefmike]

That is pretty funny. I'll give you that.

I am not Republican though. Maybe I am a conservative independent.

I'm pro-abortion, for the legalization of marijuana (which I don't even use), and also believe prostitution should be legal.

I'm glad that you enjoyed it, VR...and I commend you for your enlightened views on some matters...

As for the kind bud, I haven't partaken myself for about 3 years. although I think that I may be ready to start again...It's not like I don't get enough offers in my line of work...

If and when I do... I would invite you to join me, except for the fact that I wouldn't want to incur the J Hinckley like wrath of a certain member of this forum who is obsessed with you... :wink:

[hondarobot]

Actually, I'm feeling much better now. I too quit smoking pot a few years ago, I was beginning to think it was causing my lack of motivation, but I have since discovered that I was just being extremely lazy. Getting high was fun, and left me with a gazillion hilarious stories, but it got old after awhile.

At least I think they are hilarious stories, I also use to find people drinking until they puked at parties a laugh riot, so perhaps I have different standards for comedy.

[Quinn]

I too quit smoking pot a few years ago, I was beginning to think it was causing my lack of motivation, but I have since discovered that I was just being extremely lazy.

LMFAO. Well done.

-Quinn

[Felicia Katt]

However, if you are going to say Clinton "created" those jobs, here is a document which says Bush created x jobs as well. If you recall, job creation was a big reelection thing in the Bush camp right?
http://www.atr.org/content/html/2004/nov/pr_octoberjobs_11-5-04.htm
Now you are comparing apples with oranges, or maybe Apples, with Apple sauce, because jobs numbers refer to net growth, not gross.
Unemployment has averaged 5.8% over the past year, and most recently hit 6.1%, two points above the 2000 rate of 4%. Since then, over 3 million more persons have been added to the ranks of the unemployed. Private-sector payrolls are down 260,000 this year and are down by 3.1 million, or 2.8%, since the recession began in March of 2001, the largest percentage decline in any post-WWII recession.Persistently high unemployment has caught up with wage growth; for the first time since the 1990s, real median earnings fell for the last four quarters in a row.
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_jobs_growth_testimony
George Bush is the first president since the Great Depression to lose jobs. Unemployment rates have increased in 46 states under Bush. The national unemployment rate has increased from 4.2 percent to 5.4 percent. A total of 46 states have higher unemployment rates today than when Bush took office. If millions of Americans had not given up looking for work and dropped out of the labor force entirely, the national unemployment rate would be 7.4 percent. This is according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Recent job gains lag far behind historical norms. Last year's 2 million new jobs represented a gain of 1.5%, a sluggish growth rate by historical standards. Over the last half century, the only 12-month spans with job growth as low as 1.5% were those that actually included recession months, occurred just before a recession, or were during the "jobless recovery" of 1992 and early 1993
http://www.jobwatch.org/

The recession was already in progress. It didn't happen in a few months. Clinton had the reigns for the prior 8 years, he is responsible. I do not agree with your "debunked" comment.
By every standard economic definition, the recession did not start until after Bush was in office. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the recession began in March 2001, two months after President Bush took office. NBER is widely recognized by economists as the official arbiter of the start and finish of economic recessions. The Economy was still growing, albeit more slowly, when Clinton left office.

Clinton took office with the first Bush recession's effect still lingering. He turned that around to 8 years of unprecedented prosperity. The Budget Deficit was $290 billion deficit in 1992 -- the highest dollar level in history Clinton turned that into the first budget surplus in a generation -- the largest dollar surplus on record. Unemployment was 7.5% when Bush was in office and 4.5% in 1998 -- the lowest in 29 years and lowest peacetime rate in 41 years. Median Family Income was down $1,835 under Reagan Bush and up $3,517 under Clinton. Real Hourly Wages were down 5% under Reagan Bush and up about 2.5% under Clinton-- the fastest real wage growth in over 20 years. Private-Sector Growth 2.4% under Reagan Bush and 3.9% -- the fastest rate since Johnson was President, under Clinton. Business Investment was1.9% under Reagan Bush and 12.1% -- the fastest rate since Kennedy was President, under Clinton. Inflation was 4.2% under Reagan Bush and 2.5% -- the lowest since Kennedy was President, under Clinton. If you want to be cute, you can say M O N I C A was under Clinton, but he screwed a chubby intern, not the poor and the middle class. And don't try to impugn my source here, its from the official White house web site.

You don't know what my political party is. Since I am a registered independent, I don't really have one. If it looks like I favor a party on an issue, its because the facts or principles do, not because of partisanship. Given your professed positions on abortion, drugs, prostitution, pornography and gay rights, your viewpoints favor the Democrats too.

FK

[Felicia Katt]

[a bunch of off topic, irrelevant conspiracy facts
Jamie, if we stipulate that compared to you, we are all just sheep, will you get the flock out of this thread?

FK

[chefmike]

:roll: