Comments on: Thomson prison takeover could mean 3,800 permanent new jobs

By: 11bravo

11bravo — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:34:06 +0000

This is not Godwin’s law, the law is about comparison to Nazis and or Hitler not merely citing his name.

By: Billy Dennis

Billy Dennis — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:30:01 +0000

That’s it. I call Godwin. No more comments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:26:08 +0000

The Liberal Pundit back at it.

As with any statistics from either side, they are bullshit, i.e. the museum numbers.

The question I am asking is why has it taken this long for a prison that could hold 1000+ prisoners to be utilized, especially with the “prison overcrowding”.

150ish minimum security prisoners does not a prison make. If they wanted to house Hitler, Bundy, Manson, Mussolini, and Dhamer there so be it. Just use the goddamn thing.

But those job numbers are bullshit.

By: LRG

LRG — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:55:42 +0000

It doesn’t matter. This is NOT going to be a Dept of Justice, Bureau of Prisons operation anyway if indeed it goes ahead. It will be a DOD, Dept of Defense, pentagon operation. Durbin even acknowledged that they would be guarded by military–not civilian prison guards. So these jobs estimates are BS. The government would move military guards to Thomson. The hires would be negligable. And you know what? EVEN IF it was a DOJ, Bureau of Prisons operation, they would hire according to federal hiring rules ACROSS the nation and bring the people in that they need to.

When this Administration creates many fake congressional districts with a phony amount of stimulus money spent to try to document jobs created, they are just as likely to pull numbers out of their butts to push this initiative.

No, the jobs this creates won’t even be anywhere near half of this bogus estimate. Time will tell. But the old saying goes. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Remember, if this happens, lets see if Thomson becomes a DOJ or DOD operation. If it is DOJ there won’t be even half of this estimate but if it is DOD, there won’t be hardly any new jobs at all.

And who wants their grandma to serve on the jury of an AlQaeda leader? A leader whose followers cannot get anywhere near Guantanamo where the military tribunals should take place. But their followers sure as hell can get anywhere in Illinois. Especially grandma’s home if she finds em guilty. Sounds like fear mongering but it is the absolute truth. Real jurors, judges and prosecutors will become targets and are indefensible, and they don’t live behind security at Thomson prison.

By: AnotherExJSer

AnotherExJSer — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:45:40 +0000

“And where is that stat from anyway?”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33936279/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-troop-costs23-2009nov23,0,3233273.story

Afghanistan obviously is a separate issue, but Murrel apparently was making a point about government expenditures.

By: Sud O. Nym

Sud O. Nym — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:03:24 +0000

I think he’s trying to say that it often costs the government a lot to employ someone (1 soldier = $1M). Spending a lot of money is not a reason NOT to employ someone.

By: 11bravo

11bravo — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:33:03 +0000

Gitmo detainees aren’t kept in Afghanistan they’re kept in Gitmo so what does the cost of keeping a soldier in Afghanistan have to do with anything? And where is that stat from anyway?