BUSH: HOLDING THREE JOBS 'UNIQUELY AMERICAN'

[conjur]

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashss.htm

Last Friday when promoting social security reform with 'regular' citizens in Omaha, Nebraska, President Bush walked into an awkward unscripted moment in which he stated that carrying three jobs at a time is 'uniquely American.'

While talking with audience participants, the president met Mary Mornin, a woman in her late fifties who told the president she was a divorced mother of three, including a 'mentally challenged' son.

The President comforted Mornin on the security of social security stating that 'the promises made will be kept by the government.'

But without prompting Mornin began to elaborate on her life circumstances.

Begin transcript:

MS. MORNIN: That's good, because I work three jobs and I feel like I contribute.

THE PRESIDENT: You work three jobs?

MS. MORNIN: Three jobs, yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that. (Applause.) Get any sleep? (Laughter.)

Such a "compassionate conservative".




:| :| :|



Fvck Bush!

 

[Darkhawk28]

What a jackass! :| :thumbsdown:

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
What a jackass! :| :thumbsdown:

I don't like conjur that much either, but that's pretty harsh.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashss.htm

Last Friday when promoting social security reform with 'regular' citizens in Omaha, Nebraska, President Bush walked into an awkward unscripted moment in which he stated that carrying three jobs at a time is 'uniquely American.'

While talking with audience participants, the president met Mary Mornin, a woman in her late fifties who told the president she was a divorced mother of three, including a 'mentally challenged' son.

The President comforted Mornin on the security of social security stating that 'the promises made will be kept by the government.'

But without prompting Mornin began to elaborate on her life circumstances.

Begin transcript:

MS. MORNIN: That's good, because I work three jobs and I feel like I contribute.

THE PRESIDENT: You work three jobs?

MS. MORNIN: Three jobs, yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that. (Applause.) Get any sleep? (Laughter.)

Such a "compassionate conservative".




:| :| :|



Fvck Bush!

Well its better than telling her "sucks to be you"

We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

 

[Gunslinger08]

What do you think he should have said/done?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...

I thought wages were rising?

That's according to the P&N Elitists, so why the hell would she need to work 3 jobs???

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashss.htm

While talking with audience participants, the president met Mary Mornin, a woman in her late fifties who told the president she was a divorced mother of three, including a 'mentally challenged' son.

Georgie's dad must have worked three jobs too.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.

This woman also is in her late 50s so odds are all of her children are grown.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.

Why didn't they go to school and learn to be self-sufficient the first time through? People are either lazy, dumb, or couldn't afford the time/money for higher education. I think welfare isn't the answer. Subsidized/low cost/free higher education is.

 

[imported_tss4]

He could have said that he commends her hard work for her family and that he was working with congress to make sure there were more beneficial opportunities available to her.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.

That won't happen, Conjur, not under the compassionate conservative's rule.

She'll work three jobs until she drops then find out her Social Security is gone.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.

Why didn't they go to school and learn to be self-sufficient the first time through? People are either lazy, dumb, or couldn't afford the time/money for higher education. I think welfare isn't the answer. Subsidized/low cost/free higher education is.

There's that compassionate conservatism shining through yet again!

Perhaps there were reasons she couldn't attend college (such as caring for three kids and a household while her husband worked.) Then, once she's divorced, her standard of living drops through the floor.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: tss4
He could have said that he commends her hard work for her family and that he was working with congress to make sure there were more beneficial opportunities available to her.

Exactly.

But, Bush prefers to talk in soundbites which is why he comes off looking like an idiot most of the time.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

Presumably he works three jobs because the employment market under Bush has been horrific, making it difficult for honest, otherwise hard-working Americans to find solid middle class jobs. That is the irony.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
We dont know the full story on why she works three jobs...for a while my dad worked three jobs when I was growing up...times were tough and he did what it took so that we could have a decent life...we still lived "in poverty" but it could have been worse.

True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.

Why didn't they go to school and learn to be self-sufficient the first time through? People are either lazy, dumb, or couldn't afford the time/money for higher education. I think welfare isn't the answer. Subsidized/low cost/free higher education is.

There's that compassionate conservatism shining through yet again!

Perhaps there were reasons she couldn't attend college (such as caring for three kids and a household while her husband worked.) Then, once she's divorced, her standard of living drops through the floor.

Never said I was compassionate. Compassionate != logical.

Well, she shouldn't have gotten married/pregnant so young if she wanted to live an affluent lifestyle. People need to plan their lives.... and these are the types of things you can plan for. It's not the government's job to cleanup after you when you screw up your own life. Also, being divorced, she should be receiving alimony and child support (assuming she has custody of any children under 18).

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: joshsquallWhy didn't they go to school and learn to be self-sufficient the first time through? People are either lazy, dumb, or couldn't afford the time/money for higher education. I think welfare isn't the answer. Subsidized/low cost/free higher education is.

Ah, The Education Myth rears its ugly head again. Do you realize how many unemployed/underemployed MBAs (advanced degree holders) lawyers (advanced degree holders), Ph.D. scientists, computer programmers, and computer technicians we have in this country? Many of the people who lost their jobs during the Bushcession had college degrees. A huge amount of those over age 45 will not find college-education-requiring jobs again due to age discrimination and an oversupply of college-educated Americans.

A supply of college-educated people does not create an economic demand for college-educated people, at least not a demand at middle class wages (which is required in order to justify the expenses and opportunity costs of the college education).

Today's cries of "Let them educate" and "Let them retrain (and take Prozac)" are modern day versions of "Let them eat cake!". Retrain and re-educate for what? A huge number of college-education-requiring jobs were given to foreigners on H-1B and L-1 visas or sent overseas.

 

[imported_tss4]

Dude, she's over 50. Most people that age did not go to college. It was a different world. Sure someone today is an idiot for not going to college, but a lot less people went to colleg in her time. They grew up in a world where you could get a good job and lead happy productive lives without going to college.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: joshsquallWhy didn't they go to school and learn to be self-sufficient the first time through? People are either lazy, dumb, or couldn't afford the time/money for higher education. I think welfare isn't the answer. Subsidized/low cost/free higher education is.

Ah, The Education Myth rears its ugly head again. Do you realize how many unemployed/underemployed MBAs (advanced degree holders) lawyers (advanced degree holders), Ph.D. scientists, computer programmers, and computer technicians we have in this country? Many of the people who lost their jobs during the Bushcession had college degrees. A huge amount of those over age 45 will not find college-education-requiring jobs again due to age discrimination and an oversupply of college-educated Americans.

A supply of college-educated people does not create an economic demand for college-educated people, at least not a demand at middle class wages (which is required in order to justify the expenses and opportunity costs of the college education).

Today's cries of "Let them educate" and "Let them retrain (and take Prozac)" are modern day versions of "Let them eat cake!". Retrain and re-educate for what? A huge number of college-education-requiring jobs were given to foreigners on H-1B and L-1 visas or sent overseas.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: conjur
True. But it sure seems, on the surface, to be a case of a single mother having to work herself to the bone just to keep a roof over her head and food on the table.

This is where my opinion on a hand-up type of welfare comes into play. People like this should be given a livable sum each month in order for them to attend school (and cover costs of childcare) to better themselves by getting learning and acquiring a skill or being able to get a better-paying job.

Once they've become self-sufficient (which should be within 3 years - 2 years of schooling and 1 year of building a buffer should hard times fall upon them in the future), all welfare benefits are ended. If they're still not self-sufficient after 3 years, then it's time to fall back on family, friends, private charity, etc. not the government.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You're right, education isn't the only solution, and won't work completely... but either are free rides. Conjur's comment is why I started discussing education.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: conjur
There's that compassionate conservatism shining through yet again!

Perhaps there were reasons she couldn't attend college (such as caring for three kids and a household while her husband worked.) Then, once she's divorced, her standard of living drops through the floor.

Never said I was compassionate. Compassionate != logical.

As is readily apparent in your posts.

Well, she shouldn't have gotten married/pregnant so young if she wanted to live an affluent lifestyle. People need to plan their lives.... and these are the types of things you can plan for. It's not the government's job to cleanup after you when you screw up your own life. Also, being divorced, she should be receiving alimony and child support (assuming she has custody of any children under 18).

Sure, blame it on her for, possibly, wanting to be a stay-at-home mom. Isn't that what you social conservatives prefer? Keep the women barefoot and pregnant?

Geez, dude, come out of the Stone Age.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: conjur
There's that compassionate conservatism shining through yet again!

Perhaps there were reasons she couldn't attend college (such as caring for three kids and a household while her husband worked.) Then, once she's divorced, her standard of living drops through the floor.

Never said I was compassionate. Compassionate != logical.

As is readily apparent in your posts.

Well, she shouldn't have gotten married/pregnant so young if she wanted to live an affluent lifestyle. People need to plan their lives.... and these are the types of things you can plan for. It's not the government's job to cleanup after you when you screw up your own life. Also, being divorced, she should be receiving alimony and child support (assuming she has custody of any children under 18).

Sure, blame it on her for, possibly, wanting to be a stay-at-home mom. Isn't that what you social conservatives prefer? Keep the women barefoot and pregnant?

Geez, dude, come out of the Stone Age.

Now Conjur, you know that the Right Wingers have upgraded to wanting women to be pregnant and wearing slippers!

 

[Ozoned]

Omaha is not that big. Surely it would not be that hard to find one Mary Mornin if you really were concerned about her and wanted to help her out. :roll:

Heh heh...

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: conjur
There's that compassionate conservatism shining through yet again!

Perhaps there were reasons she couldn't attend college (such as caring for three kids and a household while her husband worked.) Then, once she's divorced, her standard of living drops through the floor.

Never said I was compassionate. Compassionate != logical.

As is readily apparent in your posts.

Well, she shouldn't have gotten married/pregnant so young if she wanted to live an affluent lifestyle. People need to plan their lives.... and these are the types of things you can plan for. It's not the government's job to cleanup after you when you screw up your own life. Also, being divorced, she should be receiving alimony and child support (assuming she has custody of any children under 18).

Sure, blame it on her for, possibly, wanting to be a stay-at-home mom. Isn't that what you social conservatives prefer? Keep the women barefoot and pregnant?

Geez, dude, come out of the Stone Age.

Wow, good job assuming a load of crap. NOWHERE in my posts have I commented on women in the workplace. Stop trying to stereotype my political agenda.

By the way, who else do you blame the disappointments of your life on? God? The government? Someone else? You make your life what you want it to be. All blame is squarely on yourself.

 

[PatboyX]

Why didn't they go to school and learn to be self-sufficient the first time through? People are either lazy, dumb, or couldn't afford the time/money for higher education. I think welfare isn't the answer. Subsidized/low cost/free higher education is.

yes...why didnt they, indeed.

 

[BBond]

Here's something else that has become "uniquely American" under these right wing radicals. Only in America can a woman who is WORKING THREE JOBS raising three kids on her own be attacked for doing what the right wingers always claim people should do -- be responsible and provide for their family.