Deadbeats for Badnarik

Deadbeats for Badnarik
Who dat say they gonna beat Mike Badnarik?
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/u-v/untershine/2004/untershine102904.htm

Jim Untershine, GZS of LB, 10-28-04

American family members, desperate to vote for change, are finding themselves still wondering 'who?'. The major candidates are not recognizing parents and children currently victimized by Family Law as a special interest group. In contrast to the words of Ross Perot: "Don't waste your vote on traditional politicians who promise you everything to get elected but never deliver", parents are not even getting the promises.

Sometimes a voter must identify the special interest groups that endorse a candidate, rather than believing the lip service from the major party nominee.

• A vote for George Bush is a vote for FoxNews (America cannot survive 4 more years of FoxNews).

• A vote for John Kerry is a vote for the National Organization for Women (America cannot survive 4 more years of flaming feminism).

• A vote for Ralph Nader is a vote for consumer protection (American families have never seen the first 4 years of that).

• A vote for Micheal Badnarik is a vote for American families and the preservation of the Constitutional rights that they are too good-natured to rise up and demand - or are too busy working hard, paying taxes, and raising their children.

American parents striving to insure the preservation, protection, and prosperity of their family are finding themselves behind the 8-ball (in that - you can't get there from here). Sons must be told to go into the world and become successful and raise a family to allow Family Law to take it all away. Daughters must be told to pursue their dreams and fall in love and have children to allow Family Law to provoke their murder. Grandparents must be told why they can't see their grandchildren or why they are forced to raise them.

Micheal Badnarik is the Liberatarian candidate and is running with Richard Campagna. As explained on his website: "Libertarians are, quite simply, people who believe in 'Self-Ownership': You own yourself, and no one else on Earth has a higher claim to your body or your labor than you do. So long as people act in a way that doesn't interfere with anyone else's freedom, Libertarians believe that they should be free to do what they please.", "As president, I will direct the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice to sue states which attach criminal liability to child support obligations and, if necessary, to charge government officials who administer that unconstitutional criminal liability with violations of the civil rights of non-custodial parents."

Noncustodial parents, who refuse to fund family law systems holding their children hostage, and those who cannot convince their employers to do likewise, must realize that they can refuse to fund the Electoral College by voting for Micheal Badnarik. Not unlike the Bush - Clinton fiasco that resulted from everyone voting for Ross Perot, and the Bush - Gore fiasco that resulted from all the absentee voters in Florida voting for Perot again, sometimes the greatest power a voter posseses is the power to prefer not to.

To recognize the weight of a single voting block, their numbers must be accurately determined. Since American parents are not afforded the luxery of being counted in life (US Census) or in death (Homicide statistics), we are forced to extract our data. Of the 213 million potential voters in the US, 36% are parents, and 64% are grandparents and non-parents. Of the 286 million people of all ages in the US, 26% are children, 27% are parents, and 48% are grandparents and non-parents. This seems to suggest that 53% of the population (parents and children) is represented by 36% of the voters (parents) - a good case could be made for an electoral family in the best interest of the children.

On 10-08-04 the major media outlets continued their blackout regarding citizens who are critical of government and choose to demand their rights: "Libertarian Michael Badnarik (on 49 state ballots) and Green David Cobb (on 28 state ballots), crossed a police line in St. Louis, and were arrested.", "Badnarik was also attempting to serve the Commission on Presidential Debates with a 'Show Cause Order' issued by an Arizona judge, requiring the CPD to appear at a hearing concerning the Libertarian Party's lawsuit to stop the upcoming debate at Arizona State University, as an illegal campaign contribution to Bush and Kerry, an unconstitutional use of Arizona state funds to support selected candidates, and a violation of the LP's equal protection rights, since they are a recognized political party in Arizona."

Many Americans are beginning to realize that the only people in jail are the ones forced to abide by the law - like Jim Trafficant, Martha Stewart, Elena Sassower, and Lowell Jaks. I guess as long as there are bars between the lawfull and the lawless, there can be a measure of freedom in that too. In the words of Henry David Thoreau "Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison"

American parents are not asking for much really:

• Paternity establishment at childbirth with every child assigned medical insurance at a reasonable cost with upgrades.

• Basic child support orders that are uniformly calculated to slightly exceed each states welfare amount for a family of the same size.

• Default presumption of equal parenting that can be concurrant or consecutive.

• Restoration of due process, rules of evidence, and 'Yo Fault' divorce to make Family Court civil again.

• Parent protection from employer discrimination due to Family Law proceedings or judgements.

• Accurate accounting of payments made to support the children and adequate proof that the children received it.

• Deprivation of rights and priveledges of the parents that won't pay the basic child support, instead of the parents who can't.

• Release from incarceration all parents that have children to support and don't ever do that again.

My name is Jim Untershine, a deadbeat dad and single parent supporting 2 of my 3 daughters, and I approve of this message.

Is Child Support Peaking your Interest?

Is Child Support Peaking your Interest?

Cultivating deadbeats in California

http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/u-v/untershine/2004/untershine100704.htm

Jim Untershine, GZS of LB, 10-05-04

Not unlike the 'Ansari X' prize which awards the winner for designing something to repeatedly break free of the Earth’s gravity – Arnold Schwarzenegger may be considered for the 'Malcolm X' prize, in preventing his state from repeatedly enslaving free men by utilizing false paternity. The state of Illinois attempted to take on the same challenge, but expedient injustice and the gravity of greed never allowed them to get off the ground.

Paternity fraud is so obviously wrong; it is hard to justify taking time to condemn it. Of all the 'deadbeats' that are accused of driving our national child support arrearage up to $84 billion - paternity fraud victims are the heterosexual men who dare to have sex with liars, who are expected and encouraged to refuse to allow crime to pay and their employers are scorned for withholding it.

A ‘deadbeat’ is defined as "One who does not pay one's debts - a lazy person; a loafer". The term was previously used to describe a morally negligent person who relies on the generosity of others rather than getting a job. The term deadbeat has recently been expanded to include breadwinning parents who are put out of a job due to extraordinary child support garnishments, which makes living and formal employment mutually exclusive. I would like to propose another expansion of the term to include agencies that are paid by the US taxpayers to support a State's families and children, then actively proceed to impoverish them, rob them, provoke violence between them, make them beg for mercy, imprison them, and give the surviving kids to the homos.

Paternity establishment is the ‘foot in the door’, concerning these Family Law vacuum salesmen, who destroy your home demonstrating their machine, and then force you buy it but then won’t allow you to use it. Many disgruntled customers are reluctant to make timely payments for a money machine that is designed to suck, and may be more reluctant to pay due to the amount of the monthly payments or in defiance of fraudulent billing. Although child support demands vary from state to state, there is a way that some greedy states can accumulate a huge arrearage that can easily be lost in the shuffle and absorbed by the state upon collection.

The interest charged on child support arrears is limited by the federal mandate to 6% maximum and specifies that this interest must be collected last. As reported by the Office of Child Support Enforcement:

• Maine leads the nation demanding 15% interest for late payments, but no interest on adjudicated and retroactive arrears.

• Indiana leads the nation demanding 18% interest for adjudicated and retroactive arrears, but no interest on late payments.

• California ranks 3rd in the nation charging 10% interest on all 3 types of child support arrearages.

The actual child support owed by a parent includes any TANF or Foster Care charges that would be earmarked for taxpayer reimbursement. Upon collection of child support, the state is required to distribute the money in the following order: Child support, TANF, Foster Care, and Interest. Since TANF, Foster Care, and Interest are required to be distributed last, these amounts are doubled in the incentive calculations regarding the states cut of the $454 million incentive pool provided by the US taxpayers.

States who choose to unlawfully distribute child support collections as interest, will not only bolster their incentive calculation, but will also prevent the parent from reducing the principal, which would tend to reduce the interest charges. In a state that is penalized by the Federal government for continuing to operate an unacceptable system of accounting, it would not be difficult to find various ways for this agency of the Attorney General (CSE) to absorb uncalculated collections and then over-calculate the TANF and Foster Care payments that may (or may not) have been paid by the state.

A parent under the spell of a state CSE agency that chooses to charge interest, can calculate the money that is up for grabs by using the following equations:

• Monthly child support withholding = (parent monthly net income) * (65% maximum)

• Actual child support owed = (Monthly interest charge) * 12 / (Annual interest rate)

• TANF or Foster Care owed = (monthly benefit or maintenance) * (Total months impoverished or imprisoned)

• Total Interest owed = (Grand total owed)- (Actual child support owed)

• Total support owed to the children = (Your guess is as good as mine)+ (Nobody seems to care)

For example, your humble 'deadbeat dad' / 'systemic anomaly' (on a blind date with destiny and I think she ordered the lobster) reports the following data from 2 different counties in California (Annual interest rate = 10%, LA = Los Angeles, MO = Monterey):

• Monthly child support withholding = $2,718 (LA) + $1,738 (MO) = $4,456 (101% of imputed net income)

• Actual child support owed = $63,120 (LA) + $66,840 (MO) = $129,960

• TANF or Foster Care owed = $809 * 37 = $29,933 maximum

• Total Interest owed = $42,668 (LA) + $21,270 (MO) = $63,938

• Total support owed to the children = Priceless

Payment is power when you know what you owe- when you plop down a payment and watch where it goes.

"The function of the ONE is now to return to the source, allowing a temporary dissemination of the unimplemented US Code you carry, reinserting the prime program. Failure to comply with this process would result in a cataclysmic system crash,enslaving every parent connected to Family Law, which coupled with theimpoverishment ofthe family,would ultimately result in the extinction of the entire human race." Matrix Reloaded