tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post114204502184016877..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1142177391511979142006-03-12T10:29:00.000-05:002006-03-12T10:29:00.000-05:00Ooops, my reference was to ALLEN not Smith.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1142177156795955862006-03-12T10:25:00.000-05:002006-03-12T10:25:00.000-05:00Yep, by definition, kleptomaniacs have an obsessive impulse to steal regardless of economic need. <BR/><BR/>Given Smith’s resources and public position, illness aside, he needs to be held to a higher standard with maximum sentencing imposed but I doubt that will happen. <BR/><BR/>As for the Bush&Co ability to tap the best person for the job—a key component of competent leadership—we can only hope he’s now bottom scraping from their barrel of monkeys…Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1142158519136375232006-03-12T05:15:00.000-05:002006-03-12T05:15:00.000-05:00He actually earned $161,000/year in his White House job.<BR/>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/11/AR2006031101358.htmlGary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1142100889210357442006-03-11T13:14:00.000-05:002006-03-11T13:14:00.000-05:00A.I.: “Or, could it be that it was more like: Hey--I've got a law degree from Duke, I work for the President and I deserve more than this lousy $130,000/year I'm earning allows me to live on.” <BR/><BR/>Ok, that’s close enough to the kelptomania definition to work for me. <BR/><BR/>A.I.: “Stealing is stealing…”<BR/> <BR/>Absolutely agree.<BR/><BR/>A.I.: “…-it's only when it's a more educated or more affluent person that people want to make excuses for their behavior.”<BR/>Stereotyping… <BR/><BR/>A.I.: “I don't see why he should be treated any differently than a poor inner city guy who gets caught stealing.” <BR/><BR/>I made no judgment on how either should be treated by the justice system. Rather, I simply addressed how I thought a lawyer would best serve his/her clients interests.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1142093783763237412006-03-11T11:16:00.000-05:002006-03-11T11:16:00.000-05:00Or, could it be that it was more like: Hey--I've got a law degree from Duke, I work for the President and I deserve more than this lousy $130,000/year I'm earning allows me to live on. Stealing is stealing--it's only when it's a more educated or more affluent person that people want to make excuses for their behavior. I don't see why he should be treated any differently than a poor inner city guy who gets caught stealing.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1142092982855977022006-03-11T11:03:00.000-05:002006-03-11T11:03:00.000-05:00Without question, anyone using the descriptor “queer” in 1984 intended it as slur on queer folks.<BR/><BR/>If I were a lawyer, I’d definitely what to check the most likely/least likely thinking. I’d be concerned that it just might detract from my ability to determine motivation. Such as, the high probability that the suspect is suffering from the mental illness kleptomania. <BR/><BR/>Isn’t determining suspect motivation/intent critical to effective defense and prosecution—or am I just guilty of watching too much TV...lol!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com