Child Support

[Richard Cranium]

Because I play there.

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

Because I play there.

Well I do know lots of patrons at the FOP (Faternal Order of Police) but I do not go there.

And I do not play poker either.

So do you have me mixed up with some one else.

There is Leutenant Cusic in the Sheriff Office but I am not related.

 

[Richard Cranium]

So the "Jim Cusick" I heard over the speaker about 2 weeks ago WASN'T you??

 

[meangirl]

Well I do know lots of patrons at the FOP (Faternal Order of Police) but I do not go there.

And I do not play poker either.

So do you have me mixed up with some one else.

There is Leutenant Cusic in the Sheriff Office but I am not related.

I'm sure all the Cusic/Cusick's around here say that quite often!

 

[MMDad]

So the "Jim Cusick" I heard over the speaker about 2 weeks ago WASN'T you??

It's probably his son. He's a drunk driving, deadbeat dad, druggie thief just like his dad.

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

So the "Jim Cusick" I heard over the speaker about 2 weeks ago WASN'T you??

I guess it must have been some one else.

They do know me (JPC SR) quite well there as I spray painted the Court House and the Child Support office and the MD State House and I spent 3 years in and out of the SMC Detention Center, and I was a Democrat candidate for the MD Legislature 29B last year 2006.

So I doubt that it was a reference to me.

Of course they could have been refering to my present campaign to take out Hoyer.

Also I like to go by James more then Jim but I get called many versions.

 

[This_person]

You're on your way to a full blown meltdown, you drunken lunatic! Drink another fifth and let me have it, you psychotic freak!

Jimmy, could you please respond to the question as to whether you see the custodial parent as victim of the non-custodial parent's lack of responsibility to their child when that non-custodial parent chooses to be a non-supporting parent?

 

[vegmom]

Of course they could have been refering to my present campaign to take out Hoyer.

Steny Hoyer? Or are you refering to someone named Hoyer other than the House Majority Leader?

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

Steny Hoyer? Or are you refering to someone named Hoyer other than the House Majority Leader?

Yes I am refering to Steny Hoyer.

I am runnuing against Hoyer as a Democrat for MD Congressional 5th District.

My campaign website click HERE.

I am pro-life and I want hard restrictions on an abortion,

while Hoyer is for unrestricted baby killing.

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

Jimmy, could you please respond to the question as to whether you see the custodial parent as victim of the non-custodial parent's lack of responsibility to their child when that non-custodial parent chooses to be a non-supporting parent?

No, of course not, the custodial has custody and that is the prize.

I say that any custodial that pretends to be a victim of non-child-support is not being honest.

 

[This_person]

No, of course not, the custodial has custody and that is the prize.

I say that any custodial that pretends to be a victim of non-child-support is not being honest.

So, in your view, once the parents make the decision to split, what is the non-custodial parent's obligation to their child?

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

So, in your view, once the parents make the decision to split, what is the non-custodial parent's obligation to their child?

The obligation is the same as before the parents split up.

The two parents are to raise their own children by their own standards.

 

[This_person]

The obligation is the same as before the parents split up.

The two parents are to raise their own children by their own standards.

so, it's completely okay if one of those parents has the standard to desert the family to let them figure it out for themselves?

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

so, it's completely okay if one of those parents has the standard to desert the family to let them figure it out for themselves?

This is not fitting on this thread.

You just badger and argue without any let up and we have other threads for that purpose.

You made your point so stand by it and stop pushing it down everyone's throat.

I really want to stick to the thread topic and to let others comment.

You are forcing us to take over other threads and I do not want to do that.

I have a solution to c/s thread and other c/s threads and you can start one but I do not want for us to babble on other posters threads and thus destroy the thread topic.

Let us discipline ourselves. I will stick to the rules too.

 

[This_person]

This is not fitting on this thread.

You just badger and argue without any let up and we have other threads for that purpose.

You made your point so stand by it and stop pushing it down everyone's throat.

I really want to stick to the thread topic and to let others comment.

You are forcing us to take over other threads and I do not want to do that.

I have a solution to c/s thread and other c/s threads and you can start one but I do not want for us to babble on other posters threads and thus destroy the thread topic.

Let us discipline ourselves. I will stick to the rules too.

Excellent arguing technique. When presented with one of your biggest flaws in your argument, change the subject.

This thread was over by the originator long ago, when he got the answer to his question and posted it.

But, I applaud your continuing ability to ignore your major failures to your family (not to mention the biggest flaw in your plan - that you personify) yet again.

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

Okay, here's what you linked to:

First: he said IF the ex got her way...meaning that's not how it stands right now.

Second: Let's say she does get her way --- yep, the state takes the $$ and gives her $50 - BECAUSE SHE LIVES IN GOV'T ASSISTED HOUSING. See, they are already providing a home for her, so why shouldn't they collect a little rent if they can? For goodness sakes, JPC, you DO realize that MOST people don't get help from the Gov't the pay for their housing, right? MOST people are RESPONSIBLE and pay for their own housing.

The man said his ex-wife is in public housing, so if the man were sending her the child support directly to her back then or now, then that means they both are committing a big crime of felony fraud because no one can be in subsidized housing and not report the child support.

She only gets $50 and the State of NY steals the rest of the so-called child support.

It would be such a big crime and big act of fraud to send the c/s directly to the custodial that it is not reasonable here to say that is the case,

thus the point remains that the father has been scewed in this case and the State of New York has stolen the majority of the loot and the custodial in this case is selling out her baby's dad for a petty fifty dollar check.

Case closed.

 

[This_person]

She only gets $50 and the State of NY steals the rest of the so-called child support.
(T)hus the point remains that the father has been scewed in this case and the State of New York has stolen the majority of the loot and the custodial in this case is selling out her baby's dad for a petty fifty dollar check.

Let's say that everything he explained about his situation is as you see, not how he exaplained it. It's easier to correct you in your own reality than to bring you into everyone else's.

She's getting housing plus $50. It's not the state of NY taxpayer's obligation to provide these things, it's her and the child's father's responsibility to provide these things. So, if the state provides the housing, and the father provides the money to the state to provide the housing, what is being stolen? The child gets the housing, electricity, food, clothing, school supplies, etc. The father helps with this by providing the housing via the state, plus cash to help with the rest. How, in your world, is that the state stealing the money and the child not getting the support and on and on and on of your lies?

 

[JPC sr]

Scofflaw and Personal Responsibility.

Let's say that everything he explained about his situation is as you see, not how he exaplained it. It's easier to correct you in your own reality than to bring you into everyone else's.

She's getting housing plus $50. It's not the state of NY taxpayer's obligation to provide these things, it's her and the child's father's responsibility to provide these things. So, if the state provides the housing, and the father provides the money to the state to provide the housing, what is being stolen? The child gets the housing, electricity, food, clothing, school supplies, etc. The father helps with this by providing the housing via the state, plus cash to help with the rest. How, in your world, is that the state stealing the money and the child not getting the support and on and on and on of your lies?

This thread is not about me,

this is some other subject by other posters,

so ask them whatever you want to know about their thread.

 

[This_person]

This thread is not about me,

this is some other subject by other posters,

so ask them whatever you want to know about their thread.

I'm asking you to understand your error as it applies to this thread and information, not all of the others (that would take too long). I'm not asking information, I'm correcting your understanding.