Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Tuesday, December 27, 2011

A Democratic state lawmaker in Illinois has introduced a bill to forbid candidates from seeking office in the state if they owe $10,000 or more in delinquent child support. Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) has been sued by his ex-wife, who claims he owes more than $100,000 in back child support. State Rep. Jack Franks filed the bill Tuesday. "I think it's important for people to take care of their families first, and preclude people from public office if they fail to take care of their primary obligations," Franks said.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

reinheitsgebot

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

*Inspiration*

...would forbid people owing more than $10,000 in back child support from running for office in Illinois.

[okaywiththis.png]

Be Well.

"Walsh has not been found delinquent or in contempt of court in the ongoing dispute"

Reinh-dude .. they were divorced in 2002, you be promoting your own irrelevance, along with that of the left
y'all have evolved from just plain wrong to 'sadly pathetic'

I can't speak for the court so I won't comment on his child support payments but I've seen this asshole on TV enough to know he is clearly a POS. If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised.

It is a shame we would need a bill like this. Joe Walsh better have a good legal reason for this or I would hope the good people of Illinois should throw him out of office and in jail. I think we should not allow any convicted felon to run for Congress.

www.wwco.com

Hell of a list. Shows the Politician / Crook paradigm is strong

I've seen this asshole on TV enough to know he is clearly a POS. If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised.#4 | Posted by danni

Interesting, I said just the same thing about Obama the other day

but I've seen this asshole on TV enough to know he is clearly a POS. If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised.
#4 | Posted by danni
translation: a POS is a guy who does NOT parrot partisan talking points ad nauseam ..
ie: NOT a Lib-drone

WOW, a bitter ex-wife claims the man owes her money! That is some amazing never seen before news! Come back when innocent until proven guilty has been satisfied. That being said, deadbeat dads are scum. If he is a deadbeat dad, then he should not be elected.

Got no problem with this.

I got tossed in jail for being behind 6k. How is he not locked up?

shame on him... dead beat dad...

Next time fool, just pay the $350 at the abortion clinic...

How about a law disallowing anyone with a criminal record of any kind from running for office.

dorks

"Got no problem with this."

I do: they're separate issues. Let the voters decide.

Deadbeat parents should be in prison.

I think everyone should be required to take a citizen test every 10 years. Even if your born here,that shouldn't make any difference. If you don't pass you get deported..

I got tossed in jail for being behind 6k. How is he not locked up?

#10 | POSTED BY JACKASS

Different states, better attorney, and karma

Got no problem with this.
#9 | POSTED BY MARYTYLERWHORE AT 2011-12-27 06:52 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Can't figure out why not. This has nothing at all to do with running for office. But I guess anything that keeps a guy who doesn't like gay marriage out of office is fine by you, damn the long term consequences and the precedent it sets and full speed ahead!

I got tossed in jail for being behind 6k. How is he not locked up?

#10 | POSTED BY JACKASS AT 2011-12-27 07:09 PM

His X is CLAIMING, but he has not been found in arrears.

BTW, pay your fucking child support you fucking deadbeat.

It's paid up now. I had some cocaine issues that made it tough to pay a couple of years back.

#19 | Posted by jackass

You have so many issues I "almost" don't feel good bitch slapping you anymore.

Thankfully for socialism I was able to get back on my feet again. I was unable to work but I'm thankful I still got a check with free section 8 housing during that rough patch of my life.

"Can't figure out why not. This has nothing at all to do with running for office. But I guess anything that keeps a guy who doesn't like gay marriage out of office is fine by you, damn the long term consequences and the precedent it sets and full speed ahead!"

First, it does have something to do with running for office. If someone found to be responsible for paying child support does not pay it, that someone is in no moral position to be writing laws or enforcing them.

Second, if child support goes unpaid, the spouse with custody may have to tap public assistance to help raise the kid. The last fucking thing I want in public office is a politician who made me pay for the kid they should be responsible for.

Third, I don't just want deadbeat politicians to support their progeny - I want every man who can't figure out how a rubber works to face the consequences of his actions, one paycheck at a time, until the child is an adult.

Fourth, if you think I have harsh words for deadbeat dads, you should hear me on the subject of today's supersluts who have several kids who all have different fathers. That is another thing we need to put a stop to.

#21 | Posted by jackass

I do acknowledge the need for support systems and I'm glad they worked for you. I always roll my eyes when libertarians and some social conservatives think that this is not the job of government.

#22 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

A rare moment of complete agreement. Are you sure you don't want to reconsider your views?

I had some cocaine issues that made it tough to pay a couple of years back.

#19 | Posted by jackass

You shoulda stopped by, JA..there are lots of old horny hillbilly wimmen near here that would gladly pay you to eat them out....

How about a law disallowing anyone with a criminal record of any kind from running for office.

That would have eliminated Bush and Cheney.

Anyone who talks about character being important in running for office (remember the campaign promise argument?) should be in agreement with a law like this.

(Yes, I know there are reasons people don't always keep up. So maybe it should be based on how much one is in arrears, not whether you've missed A payment.)

Are you sure you can take this woman's word?pay back can be a bitch.Not that any body that reads this has had an ex-wife that lied.I mean other than mine.But she was Catholic so it didn't count,or that's what she told me.

That would have eliminated Bush and Cheney.
#26 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3 AT 2011-12-27 09:00 PM |

And George Washington, but it did not you fucking idiot.

On the bright side,we got another big gun sale here in town next week end. Yea every 6 weeks another big gun show. Oh what fun, I have seen more people there, then walking into a local church on sunday.. Maybe these local church's should start weekly gun sales, its wouldn't hurt. Do you believe,yes I believe I need more guns..

America lock and load!

Bad idea if the folks who are gonna be represented want to elect someone who is dishonest that's just a reflection of the electorate's lack of commonsense Exhibit A 90% of the present US Congress on both sides of the aisle

LAWMAKERS = PIGs (Power Infliction Government). Like give me a fucking break like yet another law to fuck over fathers is going to do anything good for any children. Its just another fucking 1% congress method to extort even more $ for their friends and prevent non-incumbents from competing with the politicians already in office.

Its clearly corrupt - so why aren't ALL the FUCKERS under arrest for promoting something so TREASONOUS? (preventing votes or candidates... just like the war on drugs - fucking racist alcoholics).

Most of em are republican anyway. i.e. Newt Gingrinch

"That being said, deadbeat dads are scum.
#8 | Posted by freechoice"

Fuck you. Some of us were just young and free. We had other priorities at the time, but things are great with the little bastard now.

Goatman

and drug tests for ALL judges, cops, politicians, mayors or anybody who wants to make me have to jump thru a damn hoop that THEY oughta jump thru FIRST.

Sure - lets take it one step further.

Anyone that is behind on support payments can not vote as well. Kind of in the same vein; not paying can be elevated to crime level. Many of the same arguments apply.

Already professional licenses are in the mix, now this.

It is not worth it!!!

36--I'd say the same arguments do not apply. But anyway, the bill sets a dollar amount, not just being "behind." Many good citizens are commonly behind on a payment or two of one kind or another. Being late with a payment is not the same as being a deadbeat dad. (No, I'm not divorced and I don't pay child support to anyone. The only kids I have--that I know of :)-- were conceived after marriage, and that marriage remains healthy.)

And I think there's a substantive difference between limiting a person's right to run for office and limiting his/her right to vote.

They'll be required by the courts to amend the Illinois constitution.

The only thing it says now is you have to be 25, and at least a 3 year resident to run for an Executive position.

No requirments for good behavior, tax status, or views on global warming are currently in the governing legal document.

Being a father who's just finishing up 21 years of CHILD EXTORTION,... I'm certain this trend will push many fathers to say fuck it and fuck you. Put me in jail and feed me if you don't like it. I'd rather not work than pay that bitch and the govt - even if it means death, that's better than living for Satan. Oh and going back 30 years, bro fathered 9 kids and did the fuck-you-bitches approach. Comparing notes before he died in 2007 he was quite satisfied with his life and reproduction. He was intelligent so bucked the trends which the government is increasing. Its...

Just like in Idiocracy (intro-clip) - the results are obvious.

Idiocracy is a pretty interesting flick, Reitze, at least for about the first third.

But really, you don't think one should contribute financially to the children one had with one's ex-wife (or ex-husband)? Or do you just not want the gov't involved? You do know that many parents wouldn't contribute without being forced, don't you?

Rbot, you forgot that Democrat lawmakers want convicted felons who owe much more than $10,000 and are delinquent in more than child support to vote.

Hi Prag.

NO FUCKING WAY! If the bitch is divorced, $ being directed is an incredible OFFENSE - to the extent a man MURDERING an X or a set of lawyers is "self defense" in the minds of many men.

IMHO the ONLY appropriate state action would be if the child's time weren't being shared appropriately by the parents involved. Parents (especially mothers) intentionally fuck that over all the time motivated to extort the support money. False drug/abuse accusations are too common too. Smoke pot? Well that'll get you fucked good. The system's rigged/biased too to give mom custody and extort the cash from the father. THAT's TOTALLY FUCKED OVER!

IMHO, if parents split - each would be self-responsible and have their own ability to participate. If mom had nothing and dad had $$$ - then tough shit to the BITCH - the father should take the kid or just move on after donating sperm.

I'd rather see such wealthy fathers paying higher taxes for extreme cases of wealth rather than extortion methods that add up to a message of "don't even bother with that job or business concept or the bitches will get the money anyway - and you'll still get nothing". I've met many men with that experience/attitude.

The other attitude I often see is like bro - "I fuck the bitches, make the baybes and the state can fuck off". Bro died in 2007 with 10 kids - and the nurses hated him (they wanted him to die in his scheduled 3 months but he survived 5 years). The hate at the funeral was bizzar too - WTF were they even at his funeral for anyway?

It seems our government is bent on owning people and reproduction - Obamacare already features 666 beast marks and mandated insurance just to be allowed to live. SATAN STOLE THE USA via guilty assholes, extortionists, and intends to own your ass too - via HCR (which includes 666 marking of people). The HCR law "certifies" the "biometric" that's used to buy/sell via a future 1 world currency.

BTW, imho that's a "libertarian" view of divorce and $.

"Obamacare already features 666 beast marks"

Some posts defy comment.

44--Yeah, someone's been reading too many J. Chick comics.

But Reitze, I agree with you on some aspects. For instance, I've seen for years the favoring of the mother. (My brother has gone through custody issues with his children.) But again, if a couple were to raise children together, then the money to pay for said raising (rearing) would come from income generated by each/both. So when they are split, it makes sense to share some of that money. There are lots of factors in custody battles, not just money. What if mom is more attentive and has more free time, for whatever reason, and dad has money and can share? If dad is wealthy 'cause he's a workaholic and is never home, and isn't willing to change that, I would suggest that mom is the better choice. (This assumes both parents care and are reasonable human beings. ;) ) Of course, the ideal would be for both parents to raise the kids together and live together. But we know that's not realistic.

#44 Danforth if it "defy comment" because its "too true" then good. But if it's that you don't get it - then fucking read moron! (or just be another "outed shill")

Will the Mandatory Microchip in ObamaCare End Up Being the Mark of the Beast?

There's a lot of 666 vs HCR POV articles out there - and its pretty clear how the concept applies too. Biometric = 666 = medically certified = approve'able to buy/sell in lieu of and then w/o cash. Bernanke already said "gold isn't money" (WTF, he lied to congress since NFW would he not know gold = money since money began and persists to this day as the "standard" for "value").

"then fucking read moron!"

From an "End of Days" sight?!?

Good God, we've got JeffnReitzeville.

What if mom is more attentive and has more free time, for whatever reason, and dad has money and can share? If dad is wealthy 'cause he's a workaholic and is never home, and isn't willing to change that, I would suggest that mom is the better choice. (This assumes both parents care and are reasonable human beings. ;) ) Of course, the ideal would be for both parents to raise the kids together and live together. But we know that's not realistic.

#45 | Posted by pragmatist at 2011-12-28 11:17 AM | Reply | Flag: FUCK-OVERS!

Prag, if 2 parents work together in those ways fine. But trying to legislate that as though it's an expected morality has gotten us exactly what we have no. A system that's most often manipulated to EXTORT MONEY from MEN.

If I were ever in that situation again I'd not pay a fucking dime and let the fucking state feed me in jail if they wanted too. My adult years were just as bad - slaving for the money while being treated like a problem. Even my daughter was trained to treat me like shit - and only changed that way herself as she went to college and realized what's really going on for herself.

My best advice to any HS aged man is to impregnate as many women as possible and then let the state feed you the rest of your life. Otherwise everything you ever earn will be taken from you based on bullshit and lies.

No one should lose their right to vote because of a debt to anyone. If you can take away their rights for child support then it is a slippery slope until you can lose your right to vote over a late payment to a credit card company. Felons should have their rights restored immediately upon serving their sentence.

Thankfully for socialism I was able to get back on my feet again. I was unable to work but I'm thankful I still got a check with free section 8 housing during that rough patch of my life.
#21 | Posted by jackass at 2011-12-27 08:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

And thanks to the same socialism I've struggled my whole life just to have a roof over my head and food on my table while my uneducated X lives in a mansion, in spite of having an MSEE and "good jobs".

My daughter even looked down at me most of her childhood for living in poverty - even called my house yucky in going along with her mom's reasons to shorten her visits (I usually got about 5 days/year and a few weekends).

I would have had more self-respect if I had simply stopped paying and went to jail. Instead I'm 2 months from finishing my payments and feel like all I got for it was ridicule and disrespect. The remaining payments still hurt too - but are less than lawyers would be if I didn't pay them.

New dad? divorcing? BE A FUCKING DEADBEAT! at least you'll keep your self respect.

#46 | Posted by reitze

...psssstttt!! reitze! REITZE!! can i get some of what your smokin'? that shit has you trippin' bro..

No one should lose their right to vote because of a debt to anyone. If you can take away their rights for child support then it is a slippery slope until you can lose your right to vote over a late payment to a credit card company. Felons should have their rights restored immediately upon serving their sentence.
#49 | Posted by danni at 2011-12-28 11:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

I agree with that Danni! But expect the banking cabal to re-institute debtor's prisons in spite of what the votors want. The 1%'s write and promote the legislative initiatives with lobbying $ to go with it.

We've already got prison-slavery in the USA again - with full jails thanks to the racists/globalists War On Drugs (minorities).

Going back to fatherhood - the choice is be a slave and pay the bitch or just be a slave. Sharing my regrets I think it would have been better to have just be a slave while finding ways to retaliate - including costing all the FUCKING VOTERS who went along with crap like that all the money possible. That's called "conscientious objection" - and it's why the people in jail for drug crimes are more righteous than the people who put them there.

Reitze, send them both a bouquet of black roses.

With a card saying sorry for your sudden loss...of my FUCKING CASH!!

Make sure a homosexual delivers the flowers to their door.

Reitze, I give up. I was seeking rational discourse. Clearly, your experience has soured you enough that such is impossible. You have my sympathy for the rough times you've had.

ALCEE HASTINGS...democrat rep from FLORIDA...

lets see now..what can i say about this punk who was impeached from the bench but who gets reelected every time in florida

HEY I KNOW>>>>>HERE"S something I read not long ago that applies to him..

I can't speak for the court so I won't comment on his **** ******* ******** but I've seen this asshole on TV enough to know he is clearly a POS. If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2011-12-27 07:51 AM

hee hee hee heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

...psssstttt!! reitze! REITZE!! can i get some of what your smokin'? that shit has you trippin' bro..
#51 | Posted by BloodSacrafice at 2011-12-28 11:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

Sorry, its just called having a brain. What you call "trippin" is actually a glimpse of some "thinking". That's a benefit of an immeasurable IQ (the tests only scored to "above 160").

If I did smoke a joint or drink some coffee it would calm me a little (but wouldn't change much about that). But of course that association is good for government liars... and its why they drug-down the ADHD kids in schools so much (escaped that via dad's lessons in going along to get along like don't even try and get an A).

BTW, if you have a hyper active boy the best thing you could do is get him to smoke pot every day before school. Otherwise the school shrinks will try n put em on "OPIODS" (opium based tranquilizers - as baaad as heroin).

Meanwhile back at the PHARM (youtube playlist of "Psyc Labeling" and a few "Psychiatry Drugs Foster Care Children")

psychiatric-disorders/ 20 Million Kids & Adolescents are labeled with "mental disorders" that are based solely on a checklist of behaviors. There are no brain scans, x-rays, genetic or blood tests that can prove they are "mentally ill", yet these children are stigmatized for life with psychiatric disorders, and prescribed dangerous,life-threatening psychiatric drugs. Child drugging is a $4.8 billion-a-year industry. Get the facts about this multi-billion dollar industry that is labeling and drugging kids for profit.

We agree on Big Pharma, Reitze. Some kids, however, do need meds--or at least seem to benefit from them. However, if such were prescribed to my kids, I would think twice. And Ritalin is waayyyyy overprescribed.

"I can't speak for the court so I won't comment on his **** ******* ******** but I've seen this asshole on TV enough to know he is clearly a POS. If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised."

I don't remember who that rant was referring to but it was not Rep. Hastings....he's actually my congressman.

Reitze, I give up. I was seeking rational discourse. Clearly, your experience has soured you enough that such is impossible. You have my sympathy for the rough times you've had.
#55 | Posted by pragmatist at 2011-12-28 11:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

Thanks for the sympathy but the rational discourse was just getting started. Unless you'd prefer to ignore the rational aspects of what's wrong with fucking over fathers to extort their money and adding yet another law to keep such fathers from ever getting elected unless they pay adequately.

Believe me there are times when extorted like that when a man just might not be able to come up with all the required cash. I did - but went in debt doing it - and dug my way out thanks to the MSEE-level engineering career. If it weren't for that I would have given up. As it was I had the cash of an auto-mechanic's career. Not gr8 but "livable".

So IMHO - I've offered anecdotes that demonstrate the FOUL of this proposed law. Enough? I doubt it since Amerikans are brainwashed... but I do try.

If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised."
I don't remember who that rant was referring to but it was not Rep. Hastings....he's actually my congressman.

#59 | Posted by danni at 2011-12-28 12:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why be surprised? Isn't it obvious our electronic voting machines and mainstream media are totally corrupt? Do you really think your vote counts - especially after the DEM/REP and $ power manipulations of who gets to be candidates. Do you really think anyone can become president? Or is it really any CRIMINAL can become POTUS?

60--It's not that you don't have rational arguments, Reitze. It's that you couch these arguments (the child support stuff) in so much anger and hyperbole that anything rational is buried. Consider the comment about a HS kid impregnating as many women as possible. I have no problem with criticizing the system; we have a fundamental disagreement, but that's okay. And the restriction on a candidate? Come on, if a candidate can hire campaign managers to handle all the cash and organize an election, if he can make all those decisions and keep that shit on track, he damned well ought to be able to find a way to make payments on time. And if he doesn't like the child-support laws, he should work to change them. Would you really argue that we should elect people who flout the law, or who work outside it to their own satisfaction? If they're doing those things based on principles, they should put those principles to work challenging the status quo.

(I had never thought of owing money being a barrier to election before this thread. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but I can't make sense of your reasons against it. It seems that the thread has just given you another reason to go off about another issue that is painfully--I mean that literally--important to you.)

I don't think they should be barred from the ballot, but their opponent can make any issue out of it they choose and the voters should decide. When push comes to shove, child support issues break down to a private family matter.

I can't speak for the court so I won't comment on his child support payments but I've seen this asshole on TV enough to know he is clearly a POS. If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised.

#4 | Posted by danni

I think you would be surprised in you opened the refrigertor door and the light went on....wwwwooooowwwww ccccooooooollll.

......NOPE in 2012.....the the unions of the teachers, billions and billions wasted year after year.

#62 those points are caled a personal frame of reference . If you dont get the "obserd" points then it must be nice to have such a perfect life. I hope you pay atention before waking up in hell.

62, 65 and the thread isnt about not following laws... no its abiut making oppressive laws worse. FUCKING FATHERS EVEN MORE, so that even less of them stand a chance effecting laws that fucked them when they were young.

Reitze, I get your personal frame of reference. That's why I said what I said about the issues and your handling of them in these posts. Yes, you can make your points, but you seem unable to hear others. And you are putting words in my mouth; I'm not saying I have a perfect life, but rather that things have gone well. I was sincere when I offered you my sympathy--it sucks to go through that shit; my brother has had to deal with similar, so I get it.

And right, there's talk of a new law, and that's why we're having this conversation. My point about "following laws" was referring to that as-yet-unpassed law: If a candidate can't follow even that "oppressive" law, I can't imagine how he could manage a campaign, etc. It's only hard to make your payments if you don't have the money. And most people (vast majority) who run for office have plenty of money.

I'm not dismissing your opinions, Reitze; I'm trying to engage in a conversation. If you can't or won't do that, fine, but to accuse me of not paying attention is pretty fucked up. I'm quite clear on your points (I think), and I'm quite clear on the dangers of child support, alimony, palimony, etc. If my wife and I were to divorce, I would pay the child support because I believe it would be my responsibility (and because I have no interest in the penalties for not paying).

#67 so it seems here our only dii in pov is if its ok to make the bad situation worse... in your view sure bc it already costs too much to be elected without help of political and financial cronys. Right?

Dii was dissagree.

I was not really taking a stand on the issue. I think it makes more sense when it comes to candidates than voters. I don't think voting rights should be restricted for late payments/arrears on child support; there are enough other punishments. I had never thought of restricting a candidacy for this reason until I read this thread.

At this point, I would say I would vote no on this bill if I were in the legislature. At the same time, if you (generic you, not you, Reitze) are one who claims that character matters, I'd say you should support this bill. Like it or not, the payment of child support is an obligation; anyone who doesn't like it should pay it and fight the law, not blow it off.

It doesn't appear this guy in IL is too bright about laws in his own legislature.

He would have to change the state's constitution. What a dork.

And if any candidate has whatever for baggage--the opposition is more than able to bring it up over and over.

Heck Obama did it with Ryan to kick him off the ballot for senator.

Voters get what they deserve--we got Obama didn't we?

#70 good. Btw to me if you think character matters then reject it too. Like imho a father behind in support/extortion payments would often be way better than most existing candidates who are experts at doublespeak..

Why not include the candidate to have a FICO score over 700 while he's at it?

I don't know if we need another law and especially regarding something like arrears in child support. Hopefully, everyone of these cases should be looked at individually and adjudicated (hopefully) by an ethical and competent judge. As far as Walsh is concerned, if he was gainfully employed and could pay but chose to not pay, his sorry rearend should be booted out of office.

...would forbid people owing more than $10,000 in back child support from running for office in Illinois.

[okaywiththis.png]

Be Well.

#2 | Posted by dethspud

Soooooo...

Your ok with denying someone's rights because it's a popular thing to do for the Liberals?

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

LOL!!!

Bet'Cha fo'got 'bout that one.

Reitze, If all you say is true than why have you paid all these years? How's come you're not in jail? Furthermore, if you're as smart as you want us to believe why didn't you seek and win custody of the child(ren)?

I know your younger than I am but I sought and won custody of my two while, still in the Navy so you have no good excuse. Bottom line is you like to fuck but don't like the responsibility that comes (pun intended) with it. You have lost any last remaining bit of respect I might have had for you dude. You are a true piece of shit Reitze. You are a classic example of the need for forced sterilization laws in this country. To be honest any offspring you produced should be sterilized as well just to be safe.

Fuck off Reitze you're an embarrassment to yourself, you're family, and humans in general.

People who deny hand-made global warming shouldn't be allowed either. We know for a fact those folks are crazy.

"Why not include the candidate to have a FICO score over 700 while he's at it?"

If you believe in personal responsibility, why not? : )
+++++

"What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? "

Um, if you are in arrears, it's because you are in fact guilty of not paying the money. QED. There's no reasonable doubt involved. You don't pay; you are guilty of not paying.
+++++

"People who deny hand-made global warming shouldn't be allowed either. We know for a fact those folks are crazy."

I do believe you're being sarcastic. And silly. This is a belief/opinion issue. Paying child support is a legal responsibility. Apples and oranges.

Reitze, If all you say is true than why have you paid all these years? How's come you're not in jail? Furthermore, if you're as smart as you want us to believe why didn't you seek and win custody of the child(ren)?

I know your younger than I am but I sought and won custody of my two while, still in the Navy so you have no good excuse. Bottom line is you like to fuck but don't like the responsibility that comes (pun intended) with it. You have lost any last remaining bit of respect I might have had for you dude. You are a true piece of shit Reitze. You are a classic example of the need for forced sterilization laws in this country. To be honest any offspring you produced should be sterilized as well just to be safe.

Fuck off Reitze you're an embarrassment to yourself, you're family, and humans in general.
#76 | Posted by Tedly at 2011-12-29 07:38 AM | Reply | Flag: WTF?

1. I have paid all these years - its the law and what I expressed was "regret" about going along with it rather than more of a self-sacrifice when younger. If I'd made the other choice sure I'd have regrets about that too.

2. I didn't win custody - she had Gr8 lawyers and I had just been laid off and had nothing - while finishing my MSEE. My own lawyer warned me of the cost of fighting it and didn't think Id win it either (the kid's a GIRL too). It was tougher to overcome that fact back then too.

3. I was in financial deep shit for years, had no ability ($25K was the legal estimate for a 40% chance getting her via unknown investigation thing he thought he could come up with (law-crooks will do anything for enough $. That's how I got screwed in the first place and it was her family with access to that sort of lawyer for FREE.

4. WTF pissed you off like that? What do you think I represent that's sooo baaad??? I'm actually a paying father who wanted a kid, had one while married, got screwed in divorce but knows his kid and PAYs for it because its the law (a shitty set of law that this thread is about making worse).

Prag busted me good.

I wonder though, are any other "legal responsibilities" fair game now?

I can think of a few that sound good...

...paid property taxes, paid health care insurance (new personal legal requirement), paid income taxes, and paid parking tickets.

Hell, let's through in the legal responsibility of having attending Jury Duty too.

What makes you think I'm pissed off? You however going on a rant to breed kids and then go to jail instead of supporting them is the sign of a totally pissed off/on person.

It was 1979 when I divorced the first wife. My last year in the Navy with 2 full months left to go. The kids, one boy, one girl, went to her during the separation. (Mandatory 90 days in Texas back then) She thought she had a hot shit lawyer. I however did have a hot shit Lawyer. I won custody of both kids, I kept the house and the paid ff car. She got the car with the payments and her clothes. It took almost 6 years to pay off the loan I took out for the Attorney. I was worth every god damn penny. She was amazing in court. Ate the ex's attorney and ex alive. Oh BTW, I never accepted a single child support payment from her. In 85 I remarried and the new wife adopted them putting the ex out of the picture for good.

I guess that Mensa intelligence didn't really work in real life for you, did it?

No I suspect you didn't want the responsibility of raising your own kid and figure she could do it for you.

"You however going on a rant to breed kids and then go to jail instead of supporting them is the sign of a totally pissed off/on person. "

That was the point... Its wrong what the law does to men - I tried to help here by illuminating that view. Now I'm only surprised that your POV seems more sympathetic than I though.

"I guess that Mensa intelligence didn't really work in real life for you, did it?"
NO it hasn't. I 1st became a problem in 4th grade when they wanted me drugged for school over being hyper active - or special ed. Thanks to mom and dad being teachers I got an explaination of what was up and how to go-along-get-along, especially by pretending to be taught things that were overly basic and making sure NEVER to get an A in anything. Thank GOD that worked most of the time. And yea to this day its more of a challenge than some sort of luxury. But at almost 50 I've finally opened up about it. I'm just so fucking tierd of "playing stupid" to "play the game"... so my pride may kill me - but I do hope to find good work in the future without playing so fucking dumb.

"No I suspect you didn't want the responsibility of raising your own kid and figure she could do it for you. " - thats just not true and its fucking mean.

Some people are evil Tedly, it is possible that Reitze happened to have children with one them.

She is evil, he is pissed, and there are no do-overs.

Reitze paid like he was supposed to do. He didn't like it, but he did it.

What? Do you believe all heroes are brave too? Nope; most will tell you they were scared beyond their wits.

Give the dude a break. HE paid his dues, it's arguable to what, but he did pay.

And now he's finished. He's earned the right to be pissed off if he wants to be; we have no idea how he's been treated all of these long years.

It's up to his daughter now, to refind him.

Reitze has my respect for doing what he considered to be the right thing.

I value his past acts, much more than I do his present feelings.

Please tell me how am I wrong here?

"I can think of a few that sound good...
...paid property taxes, paid health care insurance (new personal legal requirement), paid income taxes, and paid parking tickets.
Hell, let's through in the legal responsibility of having attending Jury Duty too."

Sure. Except for the last one--you can't control that you get called up to actually serve. You can, however, go when called and not try to get out of it. If you want to run to be a lawmaker, you should be someone who follows laws. (This gets tricky. Does a speeding ticket disqualify the candidate? Not if you paid it or it was dismissed. What about people who have been to jail? Well, I'd say if they served their time and were released, why not? Paid debt to society and all that. And if you were once in arrears but paid up, no problem.)
+++++

""No I suspect you didn't want the responsibility of raising your own kid and figure she could do it for you. " - thats just not true and its fucking mean."

Agreed. I thought he was over the line on that one.

But can you explain the "never get an A" thing to me?
+++++

"What? Do you believe all heroes are brave too? Nope; most will tell you they were scared beyond their wits."

Bravery is not a lack of fear, but the ability to face one's fears and do what must be done. Having no fear in a dangerous situation is... dangerous. And possibly insane.

I value his past acts, much more than I do his present feelings.
Please tell me how am I wrong here?

#85 | Posted by BloodSacrafice at 2011-12-29 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

A feeling just is. Those feelings aren't just my own. I think most men who pay support feel robbed - and that's most often coupled to a system that's biased against them and easily manipulated by women-with-lawyer dirty tricks like false accusations - or even threats of such false accusations. And while I have respect here only because I paid and did what the law perscribes.... I'm also saying I still have respect for the men who chose jail over paying into the evil. And further, I'm saying that condemning them as though they're somehow baaad is wrong. Especially since men don't control reproduction, women do.

It's up to his daughter now, to refind him.
#84 | Posted by BloodSacrafice at 2011-12-29 12:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

I never lost contact with my daughter. Its' just been aggravating to have so little of her time as she was growing up - and again to be victimized by my X in having to go along with her extra rules/ideas/bullshit in order to avoid even more unaffordable legal bullshit.

My daughter's coming to my house to visit me tomorrow. And for the last year she's been expressing how she likes being around the more intelligent conversations of me and my side of the family than her mothers. She turned out more "like me" than like her mom.

These kinds pf law are forbidden in the U.S.A. bt the 14th amendment. The same sort of disenfranchisement happens to people convicted of a felony in stating those so convicted cannot vote.

Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868.
1.1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. NO STATE shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

These kinds pf law are forbidden in the U.S.A. bt the 14th amendment. The same sort of disenfranchisement happens to people convicted of a felony in stating those so convicted cannot vote.
#88 | Posted by Che_Ernesto at 2011-12-29 01:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Which is why its become so fucking startling how far away from their oath of office the current politicians AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE actually are. Like who in their right mind would send someone to jail for simply exercising their inalienable rights to ingest whatever they wanted (the majority of prisoners, enslaved that way). Like NFW you're any fucking better while supporting that sort of "law" (crime via law)!

The patriot act was treason, and anyone who supported that supported destruction of our constitution. THAT's TREASON. IE: they're satanic greedy bastards who want to enslave us in order to keep their power. Fuck them. I just wish everyone understood the reality of it. If they did it would be easy to convict such assholes for the harm they intended and continue to cause. Instead we're the most notable INCACERATION NATION throughout all of history. T

There are still some free aspects but the way things have been going --- the globalist keep pushing slave-making initiatives... more WOD, more WAR, more Drugs, more bullshit all the time. They've got the time, the money, and the airwaves. And now the voting machines are rigged too.

...but the ability to face one's fears and do what must be done.

#86 | Posted by pragmatist

Thank you prag for summarizing my point.

Your words, are what Reitze has done.

unconstitutional. Divine retribution comes to mind when thinking of politicians in any positive sense these days.

But can you explain the "never get an A" thing to me?
#86 | Posted by pragmatist at 2011-12-29 12:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sure. Having an IQ that's off the charts isn't fun. In 4th grade teachers identified me as a problem for not paying attention to the teacher. On the way home after a 3rd hearing test that I passed with flying colors, dad asked me "WTF?".

I said the teacher wan't teaching anything new and I was board. He said ooohhhh I get it. Then he asked if I ever tried answering the questions the teacher asked. I said yea and that I always had the right answer first but she just ignored me and called on someone else who gave the wrong answer. He said hmmmmm ok I get it... YOU ARE IN TROUBLE - but not with me. If you want to stay in school with 'normal' kids you'd best pay attention close and do what I say - or you'll end up in special ed with the retards. His key points were

1. Always "look" like I was paying attention while using my imagination to keep self-entertained.

2. NEVER GET As or perfect scores because it will challenge the teachers and creat envy-based hatred (boy did I learn that was true the hard way in both 12th, college, and work-life).

3. ALWAYS try to "be like everybody else" while in a classroom environment. Don't be too-good, too-bad, too-smart, etc.

12th grade honors math was an EVIL EXPERIENCE of #2 too. The teacher believed in hard-work for grades but I knew every homework-problem in real time. So I usually got myself sent to the board to do one of them rather than getting my hw checked, or did it in the 10 minuts it took him to get to my desk... and he knew it, and envied me.... SO...

On sr skip day my frieds were waiting outside his classroom for me to finish the last regular test of the year. I was sure I aced it too because I had become annoyed with his homework gotcha attitudes and started letting my brian show a little too much... I also aced the final.

A month later I got my grades in the mail. It said I got a 69 in honors math. My parents were pissed too - they knew I had a high 80s average just like dad said should keep in order to be college eligable, etc... So we went to the principal (in July). He went to the teachers office and found the grade-book as well as boxes with the other students tests. Mine weren't in the boxes. The grade book also had smudge marks for both the last test and the final. Last test had an entry of 0 and the final had a 50.

The principal's solution was that I re-took the final exam a year later. So I did and aced it and moved on. BUT, 2 years later my sister got that same SOB for math and she's just ordinary at it. He had her after school every day and she cried every night. She survived ok and graduated college too - but I for one am glad that SOB died a few years after that. IDK what killed him but I'm certain this world is better off without him. well hmmmm I guess that just means the attitude he delivered still pisses me off.

-The principal's solution was that I re-took the final exam a year later.

you retook a final a year after your senior year?

Reitze, Prag, and Blood. You think I stepped over the line with my comment but not Reitze advocating getting single women pregnant and not suporting the children. Hmm. Well I won't apologize for my statement but I will qualify it better.

Reitze for, what it's worth, a I am happy you did make your child support payments instead of taking the route you suggested in your rant. I did group you in with the stereotypical absent father that most would never consider 100% custody of their children. I was wrong to say that of you but to be honest if you're so bright and all why did it end up the way it did?
Nah never mind, having smarts and having convictions are two separate things. I'm happy it is coming to an end for you, and even happier your daughter is including you in her life. Ultimately that is the most important aspect of the here and now.

Reitze, what is the statistical probability of randomly walking up to a black person, and correctly guessing they voted for Obama?

Since you're a genius at math, you shouldn't really have to struggle with this one.

Please show how you arrive at your answer, in real time.

you retook a final a year after your senior year?

#93 | Posted by eberly at 2011-12-29 04:50 PM | Reply | Flag: yes

Reitze, what is the statistical probability of randomly walking up to a black person, and correctly guessing they voted for Obama?
Since you're a genius at math, you shouldn't really have to struggle with this one.
Please show how you arrive at your answer, in real time.

#95 | Posted by BloodSacrafice at 2011-12-29 05:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

My answer is IDK.

And your question is scientifically flawed too. Like are you referring to ANY black person (ans=P(bummer love)) or a SPECIFIC black person (ans = criteria lists)?

There are many ways to measure likelihoods - but as for "correctly guessing", isn't that an oxymoron in and of itself? You can only "educate" your guessing - to improve its accuracy. Obviously the group affinity of black voting black would be a hint, but still non-determinant.

So w/ all that scientific uncertainty whats the ans? The polsters actually have the best scientific answers but their motives to manipulate the public perception corrupt that too.

So good luck figuring out what a person thinks based on skin color or even other visible characteristics. If you go down that road too far you become associated with EUGENICS/NAZIs.

#97 well that was a little hasty reply... the pollsters estimate P(political affinity). The science of that involves sample sizes, contact methods (like who would answer phone may have unknown correlation to politial affinities, etc), question formats, etc.

What's worse is the businesses that sell poll results can often get additional cash by providing skewed results that help whoever wants to pay for such corruption. Like consider all the poll results on Faux Noose that omit Ron Paul.

Reinh-dude .. they were divorced in 2002, you be promoting your own irrelevance, along with that of the left y'all have evolved from just plain wrong to 'sadly pathetic'

#3 | Posted by L_E_Light

Child support doesn't end when a divorce is final. It ends when they turn 18 if there aren't other stipulated requirements, like paying for college, insurance, etc. once they're beyond that age.

What's your point?

Your analysis don't sound so brilliant here, doctor. Mine is a very simple probabilities question, with a real answer.

"2. NEVER GET As or perfect scores because it will challenge the teachers and creat envy-based hatred (boy did I learn that was true the hard way in both 12th, college, and work-life)."

I have never experienced this, and I had straight As (and was a wiseass) until 10th grade (fuckin' geometry... and chemistry...). I can't understand your point, therefore. But oh, well. YMMV and all that.
+++++

"You think I stepped over the line with my comment but not Reitze advocating getting single women pregnant and not suporting the children. Hmm. "

Not at all. I called him out on it twice in this thread. And "having smarts and having convictions aren't the same"? No, but I'm still not sure why you even are saying these things. I think Reitze was pretty clear about what happened. Not everyone is able to take on child-rearing solo. You were lucky or gifted or you made sacrifices--commendable. I think Reitze goes way over the top with his suggestions, but I don't understand why you have to demean him over this. There but for the grace of God, Ted...

My brother has been paying child support for his younger son's entire life. He's not happy, and he has fought amounts when he could, but he often simply couldn't afford to fight. And his ex is about as evil as they come. Over the last few years, father and son have gotten very close, and the lad, remarkably given his mother's... personality... is a remarkable, driven, polite, thoughtful, big-hearted soul. He is off to college next fall, and Dad (my brother) is expecting to move out of northern New England and go live his life on his own terms. Of course, he'll stay close with the young man through various communications, and he's hoping the lad will end up going south too (but he's not pressuring him).

#99 .. r u being silly or AU-stupid? .. my point was plainly stated AND in BOLD type ..

"Walsh has not been found delinquent or in contempt of court in the ongoing dispute"

Blood, your comment seems lost of context. What do you mean?

"2. NEVER GET As or perfect scores because it will challenge the teachers and creat envy-based hatred (boy did I learn that was true the hard way in both 12th, college, and work-life)."

I have never experienced this, and I had straight As (and was a wiseass) until 10th grade (fuckin' geometry... and chemistry...). I can't understand your point, therefore. But oh, well. YMMV and all that.
+++++
...

#101 | Posted by pragmatist at 2011-12-29 08:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Certainly not all teachers are like that math teacher I described butting heads with in HS. Especially in college IMHO. I did get 4.0, 3.9, etc... and only had "issues" with a few of the teachers who were into their power-trips rather than education.

The HS math teacher experience-story was extreme - even for me. But its relevant to the 4th grade lesson of going along to get along while not attracting attention via excellence while already accused of being ADHD (a potential drug-profit victim). Dad was clearly correct and in 4th grade the teacher actually WAS actively ignoring me and accusing me of things like hearing problems that I didn't have.

My dad kicked that school's and medical-establishment's fucking ass - thank GOD! (and pray for him, he's still atheistic and almost 80).

...but I don't understand why you have to demean him over this.

So you're suggesting I should start being denice to Reitze?

No Tedley he's suggesting you be nice. De-nice would be mean - and asking him to say yes w/ that well placed spelling error - wow you're a slimy fuck arent you!

So you're suggesting I should start being denice to Reitze?

#105 | Posted by Tedly

Why not? Reitze is cool.

Wow thanks null, I didn't expect any mojo while defending "deadbeats".

Then denice it is. Reitze hows about a dog at Heid's?

Lol tedly, that sounds fun & its within walking distance. Got a time/day?

Noon tomorrow.

Ok, see ya then. I'll just stand by the entrance doing my best to look "stupid".

#112 Ooops, TEDLY, my daughter is coming to visit me tomorrow... lets make it Saturday or next week.

#102 | Posted by L_E_Light

You're using his failure to list the debt on his disclosure forms as proof of that, eh? His wife has filed a court case (link to court filing in bold).

Or, are you claiming it's frivolous because WALSH is disputing it? Of course he is! Documents have newly surfaced detailing the extent of U.S. Representative Joe Walsh's (R-Ill.) alleged lapse on his child support payments to his ex-wife Laura Walsh.

According to a court filing, made public Friday afternoon by The National Memo, Tea Party darling Walsh paid only limited child support between November of 2005 and March of 2008, and stopped paying altogether after that point.

Court Filing - DOCUMENT

Unpaid obligations and interest combine to $115,294, the filing claims.

The document also purports to debunk Walsh's claim, in not paying child support, that he simply didn't have the money

If voters reelect this scum bag I'll be sort of surprised.

Don't under estimate the dipshits of the State of Illinois, Danni. I grew up here and I'm sad to say that Mike Madigan will still have a job next go round... and I'm sure Pat Quinn will too....

So sad... we used to be a great state...

Unfortunately, this bill is being drafted in Illinois. It has ZERO to do with "The Children" and everything to do with some d-bag trying to cock block another d-bag from office.....

There's those increased taxes... hard at work :/

#112 Ooops, TEDLY, my daughter is coming to visit me tomorrow... lets make it Saturday or next week.

#113 | POSTED BY REITZE

Probably a good plan Reitze, seems today is Mrs. Tedly's 44th and I can't see anything good in meeting a stranger for lunch instead of her.

So Saturday it is! (weather permitting) noon at Heid's.

Is it pronounced Reitze or Reitze?

Ok, see ya then. I'll just stand by the entrance doing my best to look "stupid".

#112 | Posted by reitze

If the doctor gives you 3 pills and tells you to take 1 pill every half hour, how long would it be before all the pills had been taken?

Reitze, divide 30 by half and add 10. What do you get?

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable