ROGER November 21, 2007 at 4:40 p.m.

Tom Thompson has the allure of a mysterious death to help the marketing.

Maybe people don't like owning stuff Black and Amiel previously owned? It is somehow sullied goods.

ROGER November 21, 2007 at 5:02 p.m.

AS AN ARCH VILLAIN, BLACK IS A FAILURE

Black failed at business, failed as a media tycoon, failed in head to head competition with Thompson, with Murdoch, with everyone else he encountered, from Australia to Israel, to Britain to Canada to the USA. Black failed at court room battles, failed at keeping up with the Joneses, failed at scholarship and now people are rejecting his taste in art! How much failure can one person have in life? Just by the laws of probably, one would think that Black would have won at something, but, alas, the poor Lord had none.

In the last great struggle of his life, Black lost to Radler. Black lost to Breeden, Paris, Savage, Seitz and the board of directors. Black lost to Fitzgerald's team.

When they auction off Amiel's shoe and couture collection, will the market turn its nose up at her taste?

Will some newly invested lord or lady buy the painted rabbit skin gown to wear to some ceremony--perhaps some former African colony imitating the Brit trappings of pomp?

bubbo November 21, 2007 at 5:04 p.m.

R's hateful comments shows his anti-semitism

ROGER November 21, 2007 at 5:05 p.m.

BIG WIN FOR ABORIGINAL PEOPLE IN THE COURTS IN BC TODAY!! CHILKOOT HAS HUGE IMPICATIONS!

BRAVO!

ROGER November 21, 2007 at 5:06 p.m.

LOL! Black called the prosecutors nazis with a toilet seat around their necks!

ROGER November 21, 2007 at 5:07 p.m.

FAILED PEOPLE LOOK TO BLACK WITH ADMIRATION AND AN OUTPOURING OF EMPATHY

Black is the leader of failed losers everywhere!

bubbo November 21, 2007 at 5:23 p.m.

Then Conrad Black must be Roger's Great Leader. Who would have thought?

ROGER November 21, 2007 at 5:52 p.m.

LOL! BABIES CAN SPOT BLACK AND RADLER IN A CROWD!

>Babies, it seems, have a lot more social intuition than we may have assumed. According to new research, they can already show a preference for those who help others over those who either do nothing or interfere with others' goals. <

http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStor...

Skeeball November 21, 2007 at 7:19 p.m.

Assuming Black is incarcerated for even, say, five years, it's inevitable that in 2009, 2010 and so on, probably on the anniversary of his reporting to prison, Canadian (and maybe British) reporters are going to want to do "How's Conrad Black doing?" stories. How easy would it be for them to find out? Could they get interviews with Black - assuming he was willing to give them? (I could see him talking to the National Post, but not to the Toronto Star.) Could they talk with guards and other inmates familiar with him? Or do the federal prisons turn down requests like these? There could be other sources beyond the control of the Bureau of Prisons, such as recently-released inmates and members of Black's family, but those on the inside would have the best info.

On a related note, what if Black wanted to do a piece for the Canadian media describing his new life? "At the risk of disappointing Peter Newman, I must report that I have not been raped in the shower - or anywhere else." Assuming he does well in prison, I could see him wanting to do that, an upraised middle finger to the people who are hoping his life turns into a living hell. Would the prison authorities allow it? Would the decision depend on the people involved and the culture of the prison, or it there a blanket policy? And if the latter, it is, shall we say, flexible, depending on how much money changes hands?

jade_lee November 21, 2007 at 8:20 p.m.

Generally speaking most media outlets are not interested in lending any felon a voice with the exception of the national post<<<a first as I see it. CB while in prison is free to talk to anyone who will listen. We will see who assists him. There are always people who visit criminals while they serve their sentence but most visitors don't broadcast their loyalty to the said criminals because it's shameful, and thus very low key.

W101 November 21, 2007 at 8:38 p.m.

Most unlikely Black will be able to publish anything from prison, according to regulations dating back to the 70s, when they didn't want jailed anti-war protestors from expressing their views in the media.

In terms of adjusting to life behind bars, the prospects for Black are exceedingly grim:

http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~jthomas/class...

<<Two years is a lot of time. Twenty or 30 years is a Mount Everest of
time, and very few can climb it. And what happens to them on the way up
makes one not want to be around if and when they return.

The first thing a convict feels when he receives an inconceivably
long sentence is shock. The shock usually wears off after about two years,
when all his appeals have been denied. He then enters a period of
self-hatred because of what he's done to himself and his family.

If he survives that emotion - and some don't - he begins to swim the
rapids of rage, frustration and alienation. When he passes through the
rapids, he finds himself in the calm waters of impotence, futility and
resignation. It's not a life one can look forward to living. The future is
totally devoid of hope, and people without any hope are dangerous - either
to themselves or others.

The criminal justice process operates in a vacuum of public understanding.
Legislators and penal officials are shaping criminal justice policies based
on stereotypes and half-truths, on anger and fear, on political propaganda
and crackpot theory. Nevertheless, much of the public appears to be
comfortable with its state of ignorance. It is far easier to barricade
one's problems and fears behind walls of concrete, rolls of razor wire and
reams of clich=E9 than to deal with the realities of criminal experience in
our society.>>

jade_lee November 21, 2007 at 10:45 p.m.

I wonder what CB will do with his FDR collection? So interesting that FDR encountered joseph kennedy sr, a man who did not have any guilt what so ever while he stock pooled the entire country into a depression, and then CB commits an act of larceny to secure FDR information (hollinger paid 8M for CB book research but would not profit in anyway from the sale of CB's book?) , only to be a part of a larger social economic meltdown, todays credit crunch due to greedy lenders and greedy buyers of junk bonds. Truth is much stranger than fiction once again.

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 7:19 a.m.

W101

Excellent post at 8:38.

Jade-Lee

Although I have looked at (won't say studied) the causes of the Great Depression, that is the first I have read anywhere that Kennedy Sr caused the whole thing! Aren't you going to pass a little blame to Jesse Livermore who shorted the market in 1929 and made $100 million while everybody else was going broke? The apocrypha is that Kennedy sr overheard shoeshine boys talking about their stock holdings and that decided him to get out. Incidentally, I don't think the euphoria today is anything like it was in the booming twenties just before the smashup.

Whoever owns those FDR papers, and I thought it was Hollinger, they're a one-off and valuable. And BTW, Even if you do all your research at the Library of Congress, it doesn't expect any part of your royalties.

jade_lee November 22, 2007 at 9:34 a.m.

W101
Why do you think FDR appointed kennedy sr as the first person incharge of regulating the stock exchange? BTW you can't stock pool by yourself. FDR was well aware of the immoral behaviour of those who were able to do what they did because they had the means to do it. Hence the new regulations and why not put a crook incharge of other potential crooks? Kennedy was well versed in the tricks of the rich.
I often think that what CB was doing was perfectly acceptable to his peers provided he did not take from them. CB ripped off the rich, Tweedy, but was too stupid to recognize how powerful Tweedy and others were.

jade_lee November 22, 2007 at 9:37 a.m.

sorry that message was for lit. All you posters look the same to me....LOL<<<<I must be roger.

Marilyn November 22, 2007 at 10:08 a.m.

Interesting story in the Globe about the legal costs that are mounting up for Black and his co-defendants: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/s...

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 10:42 a.m.

Quite agree with your message of 9:34, but not your earlier one. Abuse of the gold standard, major mistakes by central banks manipulating money supply and credit, widespread unrealistic optimism, etc etc etc. It wasn't just Joe and others manipulating stocks (JP Morgan was in on that). Was it Hoover who called up Livermore and said "I do hope you won't be selling any more stock today, Mr. Livermore"

jade_lee November 22, 2007 at 10:51 a.m.

I think it's ridiculous that hollinger and others have to foot the legal bills of CB and the others, just like I don't agree with police paying for legal fees to defend guilty cops. I still don't understand why the public paid Wills legal fees and others forked out a police pension to a convicted killer. Where is the justice in that? Why is it that everytime a cop is found not guilty they think they should sue, what about citizens who are found not guilty? They don't get their legal fees back nor do many of them sue (too pricey) and have a newspaper document it.

jade_lee November 22, 2007 at 10:54 a.m.

I am just relating what Nigel Hamilton, a JFK scholar has related lit. I trust what he has to say about the matter compared to all the rumours out there.

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 11:46 a.m.

Good idea there Jade Lee: Choose the historian you like and deride all the others as... what? gossips and rumor mongers?

Jeanne November 22, 2007 at 12:15 p.m.

jade_lee: I often think that what CB was doing was perfectly acceptable to his peers provided he did not take from them.

A very perceptive comment. And it was not just acceptable to CB's peers. It was acceptable to the politicians and the legal system too. As long as he was not ripping off anybody who really "counted," CB was allowed to continue. No wonder CB became greedier and more overt as time went on. His behavour was rewarded.

It kind of reminds me of Mulroney a bit. How could a lawyer, a public figure, and an apparently intelligent man accept envelopes stuffed with cash handed over in hotel rooms by a known sleaze artist? Why didn't Mulroney know he was stepping over the line?

Because he thought the line was different for a big operator like him. As did CB.

jade_lee November 22, 2007 at 12:40 p.m.

It has nothing to do with liking the historian lit but all to do with the documented factors that came into play, plus the who said what to who and when they said it. I bet you think joe kennedy made all his cash from bootlegging right?
That rumour floats around as truth but it's not.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 12:52 p.m.

What Jeanne said re: Mulroney's thievery:

"Because he thought the line was different for a big operator like him. As did CB."

It all comes down to "power corrupts" -

"Nixon's Views on Presidential Power:
Excerpts from an Interview with David Frost
aired on television on May 19, 1977."

"Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal." replied Nixon.

http://www.landmarkcases.org/nixon/nixon...

Jeanne November 22, 2007 at 2:15 p.m.

B in BC: Thanks for the Nixon quote - I'd never heard it before. My jaw dropped when I read it.

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 2:37 p.m.

Jade_Lee

What do you say about this?

"After Prohibition ended, Kennedy amassed a large fortune when his company, Somerset Importers, became the exclusive American agent for Gordon's Dry Gin and Dewar's Scotch. Anticipating the end of Prohibition, he assembled a large inventory of stock, which he later sold for a profit of millions of dollars when Prohibition was repealed in 1933. He invested this money in residential and commercial real estate in New York, and Hialeah Race Track in Hialeah, Florida. His most important purchase was the largest office building in the country, Chicago's Merchandise Mart, which gave his family an important base in that city and an alliance with the Irish-American political leadership there."

leaf November 22, 2007 at 2:42 p.m.

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 11:46 a.m.

Good idea there Jade Lee: Choose the historian you like and deride all the others as... what? gossips and rumor mongers?

Very rogeresque of jade lee to do so, isn’t it? Even to the point of naming ‘her’ source after the fact…
Jade lee sounds like a cowgirl’s name. you’re a cow girl, jade lee?

ROGER November 22, 2007 at 3:10 p.m.

JADE-LEE AND JEANNE AND BARBARA IN BC AND MARILYN AND W101 PRESENT SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTARY, THOUGHTFUL POINTS OF VIEW THAT ARE INTELLECTUALLY STIMULATING, MIXED IN WITH FACTUAL MATERIAL.

LIT 200 and lEAF have no argument, nothing substantive. All they are capable of doing is making comments about other posters, not comment about the ideas expressed.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 3:20 p.m.

just like that, roger appears, with his continuous wisdom...

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 4:17 p.m.

What you have said is: those who agree with me, good; any who disagree, stupid.

Which is the description of an intellectual bankrupt, unwilling or unable to learn.

We heard your footsteps and thought: "what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Doug Bell's heretofore excellent blog."

Lit 200. November 22, 2007 at 4:21 p.m.

Roger complains that his intellectual superiors are incapable of anything but commenting about others and then posts this:

"JADE-LEE AND JEANNE AND BARBARA IN BC AND MARILYN AND W101 PRESENT SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTARY, THOUGHTFUL POINTS OF VIEW THAT ARE INTELLECTUALLY STIMULATING, MIXED IN WITH FACTUAL MATERIAL.

LIT 200 and lEAF have no argument, nothing substantive. All they are capable of doing is making comments about other posters, not comment about the ideas expressed."

Completely unaware that he is committing the very sin he accuses of others.

Waterloo November 22, 2007 at 4:26 p.m.

Brian, Brian, Brian. And I voted for you twice.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 4:41 p.m.

Lit200 snapped about Roger:

"Completely unaware that he is committing the very sin he accuses of others."

But Roger only does it once in a while...

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 4:55 p.m.

Barb

Too, too precious!

"Roger only does it once in a while"

Heck, I don't think he does it at all.

W101 November 22, 2007 at 4:59 p.m.

ROGER: " Just by the laws of probably, one would think that Black would have won at something, but, alas, the poor Lord had none.
-------

LOL! It's almost as if a mysterious force has been guiding Black down the path to oblivion, could mere bad luck be responsible? Even if Kharma concentrated all it's forces, Black broke every mirror in his Florida mansion on Friday the 13th, and everyone stabbed pins into their Conrad Black voodoo dolls all at once, even that would not account for the scale of the debacle and the attendant misery about to descend on PCN's Embezzlement Man. Compared to Black, General Custer must count himself a lucky man, and Generalmajor Wolf von Stutterheim (http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.p...)
would no doubt sigh with relief at his comparitive good fortune.

What could that mysterious force be? An evil of unimaginable heartlessness that stole into his life and, spewing incredibly bad advice, led him down the road to hell.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 5:03 p.m.

BBC, you seem to be, according to yourself, a model citizen with moral high ground.

can you explain what is special about yourself that you are above honoring a deal?

W101 November 22, 2007 at 5:06 p.m.

Twit: "Roger only does it once in a while"

Heck, I don't think he does it at all.

----

With this kind of post, along with his "I want to be Conrad Black raped in jail" fixation, Twit is lucky Freud has been so discredited in recent years, or we'd really be worried!

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 5:14 p.m.

leaf complained:

"can you explain what is special about yourself that you are above honoring a deal?"

As far as I'm concerned, you are Alannah Black. The deal you came up with was that I'd have to pay $100. if you were NOT. You're just painting yourself into a corner and making the Black family look worse.

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 5:23 p.m.

W101: lighten up. We all know who is fixated upon advocating prison rape for Conrad Black, and calling it humor. Sooo very funny.

You should forget about Freud and reflect rather on Jung's emphasis on the primacy of affect as the central organizing principle of psychic life—-not the drives.

This will give you a better insight into Roger's personality disorder: his affect
leads inevitably to dissociability.

All the symptoms are there. Textbook case.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 5:29 p.m.

BBC dear…. Who, better than myself, knows if I am alanah or not?

Bubba November 22, 2007 at 5:30 p.m.

Wal fry mah hide, all thet speculashun about th' price of pitchers is gittin', ah reckon, further fum th' reality of life in a federal pen than a ho'ny alligato''d hoof it fo' a tasty snack. Shet mah mouth! T'other thin' thet ah see as mighty amoosin' is all thet talk about who is a-gonna screw who hyar in th' pen, as enny fool kin plainly see. Even eff'n thet thar Kinadian English lo'd don't ind up as someone's bitch, ah reckon someone is in real danger of bea-comin' his. Human urges doesn't jest disappear. An' thet Kinadian dude sho'nuff inough likes his sex. Thet English lady he married up wif was foxy once. Bit past it now, but when he's in hyar, he's sho'nuff a-gonna miss his bit of jiggy-jiggy in th' bed, o' on th' barhide carpet o' wharvah they does it. ah sure hope ah can git some sleep whut wif his waxin' his maple leaf - by which ah mean carrot - ev'ry night. ah reckon they sh'd respeck th' feelin's of decent folks like me an' keep them lo'ds an' other high-falutin' folks in a separeete pen, as enny fool kin plainly see.

Jeanne November 22, 2007 at 5:31 p.m.

Thanks for the diagnosis, Dr. Lit. Heal thyself...

leaf November 22, 2007 at 5:37 p.m.

BBC, ask yourself 1 question: would i have proposed a deal which i was SURE to lose?

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 5:38 p.m.

leaf: I'm not sure I should take your word on it. So far, your role here is a very peculiar one: attacking Black's attackers with no defense of Black himself. You shouldn't be surprised that some think you are a relative rather than a random befuddled onlooker.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 5:39 p.m.

leaf asked:

"would i have proposed a deal which i was SURE to lose?"

The strategy of faking someone out is a common one, especially in the anonymous world of the internet.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 5:50 p.m.

Ok BBC… how about making sense?

Does it really make sense that Conrad Black’s daughter, or anyone from his family, be regular posters on this site?

Do you really think that this blog, populated by less than 10 regular posters, has ANY significance to the Black family?

What would be their interest? Do you think they care about the opinions of roger, donna or yourself?

Please BBC, get some perspective, quick!

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 5:56 p.m.

I've often wondered the same thing leaf... why are members of Black's family attracted to this blog? The Public Relations angle is there of course, the oft repeated "Black has more character than anyone here" routine. Is it hero worship or just family loyalty? A question that only the site administrator has the answer to.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 6:03 p.m.

You want to talk public relations?

Do you really think any of the Black family would take the RISK of posting here?
Have you any idea of the field day TL would have with such a scoop?

How CAN you be so naïve?

jade_lee November 22, 2007 at 6:08 p.m.

"After Prohibition ended, Kennedy amassed a large fortune when his company, Somerset Importers, became the exclusive American agent for Gordon's Dry Gin and Dewar's Scotch. Anticipating the end of Prohibition, he assembled a large inventory of stock, which he later sold for a profit of millions of dollars when Prohibition was repealed in 1933"

The booze was sold legally in the states. That my friend is good business sense and not bootlegging. BTW joe was in britain at the time where he did stock pile his product.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 6:09 p.m.

I'm sure Doug Bell knows what a scoop he'd have on his hands if my theory is true... As for the Black family taking risks, it HAS been known to happen.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 6:16 p.m.

Ok so you admit the scoop would not be favorable to the Black family and would rather benefit Douglas Bell.

Are you saying Alanah Black is stupid enough to take such a risk?

W101 November 22, 2007 at 6:25 p.m.

Leaf isn't Nala, unless she spent the summer in electroshock. Nala was acidly bitter, set off the geiger counter every time. Nala could be insanely nasty, wonder where that came from, and wasn't a complete idiot like leaf, who registers no activity on the gieger counter or brain monitor whatsoever. No doubt about it, Leaf is the offspring of a pigheaded lawyer or stockbroker type who by high school had already learned all the wrong things.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 6:26 p.m.

I learn as I go along that anything is possible leaf. I used to think Conrad Black was a respectable businessman and now I've learned otherwise. Nothing would surprise me at this point.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 6:29 p.m.

W101: Nala was the one who posted BEFORE Conrad was convicted. leaf is the one who posted after. Perhaps that was the equivalent of electroshock?

leaf November 22, 2007 at 6:30 p.m.

and no doubt about it, 101 is really donna.

i hope i'm not responsible of donna's 'disappearance' with my reports.

W101 November 22, 2007 at 6:33 p.m.

If you heard of a place where a bunch of wirdos were talking about you, making fun of you, insulting you, discussing your legal predicament, the only place left on earth where there were a dozen people with apparently nothing better to do, would you be curious?

leaf November 22, 2007 at 6:34 p.m.

anything is possible but is anything probable?

leaf November 22, 2007 at 6:44 p.m.

101/donna… It is possible that some of the Black family has, at one point, been aware of this blog and even checked it out.

BBC: Any of the Black family becoming a regular poster: ABSOLUTELY improbable

W101 November 22, 2007 at 6:44 p.m.

W101: Nala was the one who posted BEFORE Conrad was convicted. leaf is the one who posted after. Perhaps that was the equivalent of electroshock
-----

You could be right. The first two or three messages posted by Nala struck me like Leafs ... ie how can anyone be such a complete idiot. But once in a while the razor blades came out. I've yet to see anything impressively bitter from Leaf, no fire at all, maybe you're right, it's died out now that the trial is over, with any chance that Black might get away with his crimes finally extinguished.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 6:50 p.m.

speculate all you want. i'm not nala anymore than alanah anymore than anyone but leaf.

i have my integrity.
unlike others...

W101 November 22, 2007 at 6:52 p.m.

"Any of the Black family becoming a regular poster: ABSOLUTELY improbable
----

At the rate Black family members are being sent to prison, where internet access is limited at best, you could be right.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 7:06 p.m.

Does BBC wish to persevere in her affirmation that I am alanah black?

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 7:08 p.m.

I persevere... that's just the kind of gal I am.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 7:26 p.m.

BBC…You’re not afraid of ridicule, are you?

Then I will have to defend and prove my integrity as well as rule out your allegation of ms. Black’s participation to this blog.

Phone call will do, BBC? I think when you hear my voice, you shall be satisfied that I am NOT alanah black.

Lit 200 November 22, 2007 at 7:47 p.m.

"Fortune’s ebb and flow is never more apparent than at auction. Joyner Waddington’s fall sale of Canadian art last night was no exception."

This is very, very good magazine writing.

Kudos from me.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 7:59 p.m.

are we getting cold feet BBC?
let's wrap this up!

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 8:35 p.m.

leaf: I seem to remember you ridiculing Fintan for suggesting you call him. You doubted he lived in Finland, etc.

If I called you and heard a male voice, I'd assume trickery.I'm the Doubting Thomas of the internet.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 8:46 p.m.

BBC... you certainly are not doubting when accusing someone of being alanah black!

leaf November 22, 2007 at 8:53 p.m.

and by the way, how do you know which gender i am?

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 9 p.m.

Oh no! leaf has learned that the best defense is a good offense. All I can say is you must be a lonely person to keep coming back here, having nothing to add to the conversation.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 9:05 p.m.

pardon me? where am i being on the offense?
PLEASE EXPLAIN!

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 9:17 p.m.

I find you too offensive leaf... challenging me, calling me blondie, saying I have to "pay up", etc.

According to you, jade_lee is Roger.
According to you, W101 is Donna.
Silly.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 9:29 p.m.

as far as i know, i have no deal going with either of them.

i got so sick and tired of your stupid accusation that i proposed a deal to you which you accepted of your own free will.

so yes, a deal's a deal. you lost. you pay up.
that's how it works with people who honor their word.

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 9:46 p.m.

leaf: get a job.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 9:55 p.m.

Barbara the great mind, the intuitive woman from BC, the blond who has been posting on this blog for 9 months, endlessly linking a cheeseburger site to add to the conversation, is now realizing that she knows nothing about leaf: gender, age, location, occupation, nothing.

All this self-proclaimed Doubting Thomas of the internet KNOWS, is that leaf IS alanah black.

Any attempt to demonstrate the opposite will be rebuffed as ‘trickery’ by BBC.

BBC is between a rock and a hard place. How will she get herself out of this very uncomfortable position while managing to preserve her dignity, her credibility and her honor?

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 9:57 p.m.

Don't be embarrassed leaf. You are to be pitied more than censured.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 10:12 p.m.

i am not embarassed in the least. where do you get off saying such a thing?!!!

i am, on the contrary, taking much pleasure in exposing you for the coward and the ignorant you are.
for also demonstrating your lack of credibility, honor and dignity.

you are NOT a woman of your word!
you have NO right to criticize anyone.

Shut your insignificant mouth!

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 10:14 p.m.

offensive leaf.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 10:18 p.m.

BBC shall be sent to prison debtors!

Barbara in BC November 22, 2007 at 10:35 p.m.

Will end our charming conversation - my work day is just ending and I am about to go home. Yes, there was an evening class tonight which is why I had time to argue with you.

leaf November 22, 2007 at 10:41 p.m.

9 months and counting, posting on this blog while being paid by a private school to WORK.

this woman is going to be in debtors prison for a looooooong time.

stop displaying your stupidity already!

Waterloo November 23, 2007 at 5:06 p.m.

Brian, Brian, Brian. And I voted for you twice.