[This_person]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

The link says all the trouble happened after the father was gone, so I say it is hard to blame a man that was not there.

To put this the way you put things to me:
It's like DUH, Jimmy. You blame him for NOT being there, because that's a direct cause for at least some of the problems.

It was the gov that forced the custodial into a trashy housing project.

Really? Where did it say that? I missed the "led at gunpoint to the housing project by government agents". Can you point it out to me? Or, are you lying again? Is it possible that the family chose to do this, because the father deserted this family to figure it out for themselves, thus the father's abandonment is a direct cause of the family falling into the housing project you refer to as "trashy"?

Even if the dad was paying the child support or not (the link and song does not say) It just STRONGLY implies it by saying "Alexakis' father walked out on the family, leaving Alexakis, his mother, his brother, and his three sisters to fend for themselves" then the gov takes the child support loot and keeps it for families on welfare, and it is highly doubtful that the man would have paid enough c/s to get that BIG family out of the gov housing project.

Interestingly, though, they weren't in the housing project until after he deserted them... Strange....

So again I am trying to offer a solution instead of blame and smear as the singer is doing.

Read the song again. No where is child support discussed. The problem, as I read it, is the writer was upset his father deserted him and his family to "fend for themselves". He wanted his dad to be there for him, yet his father chose to leave. His mother apparently didn't find a man like Jimmy's step-dad to fill the empty shoes left by the abandoning father, and this poor man knows that he'll "always be weird inside" because of it.

You just can't give a kid his childhood back, Jimmy. I feel for this poor, neglected person.

We need laws and systems that protect and defend the family unit of both parents with their children and stop the immoral gov that violate the family unit and tries to stick it all on the separated parents.

Except your version of "protecting" has a huge flaw, it ONLY protects the separated parent from having to face reality of obligation to their child(ren). Under your "fix", the separated parent has no responsibility. The current system does not "stick it all on the separated parents", as you dishonestly suggest here. The current system requires each parent to take at least some responsibility for their child.

So, you fail in your attempt in all aspects, Jimmy. You have no standing to make any suggestions because of how you stiffed your family and the taxpayers, your plan is an utter failure at justice and honesty, and you lie constantly to get your "point" across.

The good thing is, not a single person has any problem seeing through you.