JP for Governor.

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

If parents took shared responsibility for their own child/ren. There would have never been a child support law.

That is not true, and as I already showed the Child Support originated under the old English Blackstone laws, link see page 14, so it is NOT based on parents failing with their children as the Child Support and Custody laws are what betrays the parents and the children as it betrays our entire society.

Blaming the parents is the true cop-out.

The number of people receiving a welfare check has dropped a lot over the years. One reason is child support is being collected through Social Services and it's forward to the custodial parent. Which is use for whatever the child may need. Plus the single parent is able to work because of the daycare voucher program.

You say it saves money in welfare, but at the same time it destroys families and alienates children from their parents.

So steal money while breaking up families - and that is the profitable equation indeed.

 

[Geruch]

That is not true, and as I already showed the Child Support originated under the old English Blackstone laws, link see page 14, so it is NOT based on parents failing with their children as the Child Support and Custody laws are what betrays the parents and the children as it betrays our entire society.

When you read more on page 15 and beyond, I believe this is the main point the lawery was making. Which is indicated below

"The ultimate objective of all of these efforts and techniques, including those that are truly punitive in nature, is not to punish the parent but to provide support for the children. Although incarceration for non-support — the ultimate permissible sanction — does not constitute imprisonment for debt (Maryland Constitution, Article III, § 38; Johnson v. Johnson, 241 Md. 416, 419, 216 A.2d 914, 916 (1965)

It obviously impinges upon the liberty interest that parents have under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,
under the Maryland Constitution, and under Maryland common law, and thus must comport with both procedural due process and with the non-Constitutional procedures ordained by this Court.

As these cases, and many others that preceded them, illustrate, it may be frustrating to judges and masters to have to deal with people who appear to be deliberately ignoring their child-support obligations, by spending available funds for other purposes, by voluntary impoverishment, by refusing to obtain steady employment, or by other techniques —people who return time and again with excuses that the judge or master finds incredible or inadequate and who thus seem to flaunt their defiance of properly entered court orders.

Nonetheless, because a person’s liberty is at stake and because it is a judicial proceeding, both the form and substance of due process and proper judicial procedure must be observed. Shortcuts that trample on these requisites and conclusions that are based on hunch rather than on evidence are not allowed.

There was not a scintilla of evidence to support a conclusion that Thrower, Mason, or Miles then had or could possibly obtain the ability to pay the purge amounts within the time set, in order to avoid incarceration.

The lawery isn't saying parents shouldn't pay child support but that parents shouldn't be put in jail for non-support. The judge should look at all the evidence and not to assume that they could pay the purge amount.

 

[Geruch]

You say it saves money in welfare, but at the same time it destroys families and alienates children from their parents.
So steal money while breaking up families - and that is the profitable equation indeed.

I did not say,"It saves money in welfare." That's your perception of what I said. Which it's not correct.

Point is that more money is being free up for other government programs. That's directed towards the poor and needy. Such as energy assistance, food stamps, daycare vouchers, housing, welfare to work program, etc.

By the time a separate/non-custodial parents are court order to pay child support.
It's not the laws that broke up the parents. People make their own choice to spilt up or stay together.

It's the parents that alienates the child/ren from the other parent. We all heard the story's how the ex try's to keep the other parents out of the child/ren life. Every separate/ non-custodial parent has a right to see their own children. As long as they aren't deem unfit. A loving parent would do whatever they can to stay in their child/ren lives.

To blame the laws for parents breaking up, Is just plain stupid.
Takes two to make a relationship work.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

I did not say,"It saves money in welfare."

Point is that more money is being free up for other government programs. That's directed towards the poor and needy. Such as energy assistance, food stamps, daycare vouchers, housing, welfare to work program, etc.

It simply does not matter what the money is used for since the laws break up families then it is dirty money.

The stolen loot pays to keep the single parents (mostly Moms) comfortable and not married to the other parent of the children.

So stolen Child Support loot pays for broken families.

 

[Geruch]

It simply does not matter what the money is used for since the laws break up families then it is dirty money.

The stolen loot pays to keep the single parents (mostly Moms) comfortable and not married to the other parent of the children.

So stolen Child Support loot pays for broken families.

Stolen loot keeps single parents comfortable, How So ?
You don't realize what it takes to raise a child on your own. I doubt it.

You can consider it stolen loot all you want. Still doesn't justify why the custodial parent should provide all.
When the child/ren has a father and a mother.

So it doesn't matter to you what the money is used for. Guess what,
It does matter to the government and the voters where the money is going.

Let me tell you, You can't force people to stay married. You can't force non-married couple to stay together.
It's a broken family because two adults! Two grown people decided to split up, separate or divorce.

First it's "Stolen Loot" now it's "Dirty Money". If it's dirty money then go wash it.

 

[hvp05]

their claims never stuck

They didn't? You prove them right every time you post. In fact, you appear to be getting more insane as time goes along. The only "victory" you may EVER achieve is being deemed St. Mary's Co.'s Biggest Whackjob of All Time. Keep up the good work, Shortbus.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

Stolen loot keeps single parents comfortable, How So ?
You don't realize what it takes to raise a child on your own. I doubt it.

This is why there use to be the Institution of marriage.

The child is not to be raised on one's own, as there is to be two (2) parents, but instead we have a custody law which steals the children from one parent, and custody then legally establishes the single parent families.

The fact that being a single parent is uncomfortable was a big reason why it use to be not done or seldom done, but now we have the Child Support laws that make being a single parent as respectable and profitable and easy with the big govt stamp of approval.

The system destroys families and undermines society.

You can consider it stolen loot all you want. Still doesn't justify why the custodial parent should provide all.
When the child/ren has a father and a mother.

My perspective is that the person with custody must pay all the cost of custody because the custody means they have stolen the child from the child's other parent.

When one steals a child as in take custody from the other parent, then the least the child thieves can do is provide the full custody of the stolen children.

If one does not want to feed and raise their own children then they surely have no business stealing the custody of those children.

And if a custodial can not afford the cost of custody then the Courts and the law surely have no business ordering the custody to one that is incompetent.

Let me tell you, You can't force people to stay married. You can't force non-married couple to stay together.
It's a broken family because two adults! Two grown people decided to split up, separate or divorce.

The law has no business making the parents separating as comfortable or friendly or legalized as the law needs to stay out of personal disputes between parents.

The point of the Child Support and Custody laws is to punish one of the two parents and as such the family unit is divided and compromised.

First it's "Stolen Loot" now it's "Dirty Money". If it's dirty money then go wash it.

That is exactly what I intend to do as Governor.

I will clean it up.

 

[Toxick]

The child is not to be raised on one's own, as there is to be two (2) parents, but instead we have a custody law which steals the children from one parent, and custody then legally establishes the single parent families.

You plan to abolish divorce then? You plan to regulate abandonment?



Good luck with that.

 

[Geruch]

This is why there use to be the Institution of marriage.

The child is not to be raised on one's own, as there is to be two (2) parents, but instead we have a custody law which steals the children from one parent, and custody then legally establishes the single parent families.

The fact that being a single parent is uncomfortable was a big reason why it use to be not done or seldom done, but now we have the Child Support laws that make being a single parent as respectable and profitable and easy with the big govt stamp of approval.

The system destroys families and undermines society. My perspective is that the person with custody must pay all the cost of custody because the custody means they have stolen the child from the child's other parent.

When one steals a child as in take custody from the other parent, then the least the child thieves can do is provide the full custody of the stolen children. If one does not want to feed and raise their own children then they surely have no business stealing the custody of those children. And if a custodial can not afford the cost of custody then the Courts and the law surely have no business ordering the custody to one that is incompetent.

The law has no business making the parents separating as comfortable or friendly or legalized as the law needs to stay out of personal disputes between parents. The point of the Child Support and Custody laws is to punish one of the two parents and as such the family unit is divided and compromised. That is exactly what I intend to do as Governor. I will clean it up.

If your elected governor, is it your intention to fired as many state employees?

Is it your intention to give Pardon's to all non-violent criminals?

I would also like the idea of creating a "common-law" marriage as soon as any couple have a baby then they need to be deemed as legally married because a baby makes marriage. And then grant no divorce and no remarriage until all their child reach the mature age of 22. If they have children by 2 or more mates then they would be married to each and all until the child of each matures.
More Here

 

[tomcatter]

JP, do you have a stance on any issues other than child support?

 

[Toxick]

JP, do you have a stance on any issues other than child support?

He doesn't particularly care for white people.


Also he was droning on about the public school system a while back, but he seems to have lost interest in that particular topic.

 

[tomcatter]

He doesn't particularly care for white people.

Kill whitey! lol

Also he was droning on about the public school system a while back, but he seems to have lost interest in that particular topic.

Not something a governor should lose interest in I should think.

 

[hvp05]

JP, do you have a stance on any issues other than child support?

He enjoys bowing to terrorists and coddling illegal immigrants. He believes we should open the border to allow them all in.

He also believes riding a horse is animal abuse. (There's a thread in the horse forum about that one.)

None of these are officially part of his campaign, though. One would think he'd get tired of talking about the "stolen children" after the 700 millionth time. I guess mentally unstable people are able to tolerate stuff like that.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

JP, do you have a stance on any issues other than child support?

I suppose we could try to legalize marijuana or at least stop prosecuting it in Maryland.

I do believe it is possible that medical use of marijuana could pass and I would support that.

And as Governor then one of my first task would be to order the release of all non violent prisoners.

But these are ideas and not changing my platform of ending the injustices of the Child Support and Custody laws.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

You plan to abolish divorce then? You plan to regulate abandonment?

I do not plan to abolish divorce, but I see no reason to give parent incentives and profits for one parent to separate from the other parent, as done by the Child Support and Custody laws.

And trying to regulate abandonment is an absurdity.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

If your elected governor, is it your intention to fired as many state employees?

No.

Is it your intention to give Pardon's to all non-violent criminals?

I do have a new idea of commuting the sentence for one day for each month, so that a person sentenced to 1 year which is 12 months would be commuted to 12 days time served. Then 10 years jail time reduced to 120 days.

Each month to be down sized as one month equals one day.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

He doesn't particularly care for white people.

I do so care about white people, and I care very much about us white folks.

I just want and expect us whites to do right, and I do not like whites doing wrong.

 

[Geruch]

JP Cusick spit in victims face

I do have a new idea of commuting the sentence for one day for each month, so that a person sentenced to 1 year which is 12 months would be commuted to 12 days time served. Then 10 years jail time reduced to 120 days.

Each month to be down sized as one month equals one day.

Originally Posted by VoteJP - I must admit that I never have liked the idea of victim statements or of victim's right because our US "Bill of Rights" is not designed that way, and governments do not work that way either.

If the gov treats prisoners harshly then the prisoner will become harsher, and that does not help nor serve anyone and it is detrimental to society.

Being sent to jail or to prison is in itself the punishment because the prisoner is removed from their life and family and from society, but advocating that the prisoner be punished after being put into jail or prison is a second punishment and that second punishment is counter productive.

JP Cusick spit in victim's faces

You are mentally ill, You really should get some help.

 

[VoteJP]

Mr Short-Bus.

You are mentally ill, You really should get some help.

You really do need to get educated about mental illness, and it does not apply to persons with different beliefs than your self.

If anyone reads the US Constitution's Bill of Rights then anyone can see the many rights that apply to protecting criminals against the lynch-mobs and from the law.

See particularly Amendments 4, 5, 6, 7 and Amendment 8, link HERE.

So by this then all those that singed onto the US Bill of Rights must have been mentally ill too - not.

In fact the Bill of Rights was particularly drafted to prevent the demands of fault finders and accusers like your self.

 

[Highlander]

You really do need to get educated about mental illness, and it does not apply to persons with different beliefs than your self.

If anyone reads the US Constitution's Bill of Rights then anyone can see the many rights that apply to protecting criminals against the lynch-mobs and from the law.

See particularly Amendments 4, 5, 6, 7 and Amendment 8, link HERE.

So by this then all those that singed onto the US Bill of Rights must have been mentally ill too - not.

In fact the Bill of Rights was particularly drafted to prevent the demands of fault finders and accusers like your self.

There's one slight problem JPC (Just Plain Crazy)............

Mr. Cusick, who was diagnosed during a psychiatric evaluation as having a personality disorder with excessive/compulsive traits, requested a jury trial but had no attorney.

He denied having any mental illness, but when asked by Judge Lerner when he would stop vandalizing buildings, he did not give an answer after pondering the question for several seconds.

Ms. Prigge requested Mr. Cusick be incarcerated, saying there's no indication his antisocial behavior will cease. She speculated his dislike of child support laws stems from the time he spent in jail in 1995 for failure to pay support.____________________________________

You were offically diagnosed as having a personality disorder. Eveyone on this forum and the others you waste your time on remind you that you are nuts everyday. Why is it that you can't accept that? You are ill. I did like the part where you said you would order the release of all non violent offienders. That almost got a laugh out of me. I guess I could start burglarizing other's homes and stealing their cars now. After all, you are going to be governor and I know I'll never have to go to jail.