Lets Talk Politics Forum.

[JP Cusick]

One more time I got banned and this time it was a small forum called "Let's Talk Politics" linked HERE.

I do not expect the link to take anyone to that forum as they are paranoid there and have the controls set only for members.

I was invited there from another forum called "Cutting Edge" and so most of them were invited too.

The Moderators and the primary members of that forum were of the Republican and the "Tea Party" kind, and they continually used disrespectful remarks about President Obama and they used dirty language profanity there as it is a low life forum, so I think I lasted about one (1) week before getting banned.

There I posted a "Child Support is evil" type of thread and one of the Moderators posted telling her own story of how she was the custodial of her daughter but she refused to get Public Assistance because she was a political conservative and instead she worked 100 hours a week jobs, and she was getting Child Support based on the father's $60,000 but that was not enough as she wanted it based on the father having $120,000, so I told her in reply posting that she was an unfit custodial for refusing the Public Assistance and for working the long hours and that she was greedy for more money and in fact she would NOT have qualified for Public Assistance since she had a job and that large Child Support income, but she figured she was entitled to Welfare simply because she was spending all of her money and so she was thereby poor as if spending her money would qualify as poverty which it surely does not. So twice I told her she was unfit as a custodial.

Of course that made her angry and I was happy to be the one to teach her a bit of reality, so she went and told another Moderator (lots of Mods for a small board) and that Mod was a guy and he did not care what I said about her being an unfit custodial as he was more upset that I dared to criticize Ronald Reagan as a white imperialist supremacist, so the offended Mod went and told her other female boss Lady Administrator about me calling her as an unfit custodial and that one had the gull to tell me in a PM that I had two hours to delete my personal attack or else. Then I replied in a PM that I would not ever do such a thing and that my posting was proper and fitting as she posted her own info online and it was pertaining to the thread subject and I responded accordingly. So things got heated as they saw them selves as the boss of me and I had to show them otherwise.

At the last I sent a really wicked PM to the boss-Lady Administrator and just as I hit the send button my account got deleted so I might forever wonder whether she got that last ditch that I sent as it was a mean rotten one indeed. I believe in escalating an evil confrontation and so I was doing.

[bookworm]

Hmmm. It doesn't sound as if you are obeying the Biblical command to live peacably with all men.

It rather concerns me that you seem to take pride in the number of forums which have banned you. A person who posts their opinions in a well-reasoned manner, while speaking with grace and civilty, usually does not get banned. If bannings become habitual, I can only assume that the speech is occuring without grace or civility and without a well-reasoned approach.

Also, I have a hard time understanding your objections to this woman's job situation. Do you really think she should give up her jobs so she can go on Public Assistance? How in the world can you think she is unfit for NOT being on Public Assistance? If every parent quit their job and went on public assistance, there would be no taxpayers to pay the govermental cost. Would you really want every taxpayer to pay the costs for this woman's child rather than the child's own flesh-and-blood father? Are you really that biased against the idea of a father taking responsibilty for his own children? And then you have the nerve to think that the people who object to your ideas are participating in an "evil confrontation" and need to have meanness directed back to them. Perhaps the forums in which have been banned simply want polite members in the forum.

[JP Cusick]

Nov 15, 2011 21:47:57 GMT -5 bookworm said:

Hmmm. It doesn't sound as if you are obeying the Biblical command to live peacably with all men.

It rather concerns me that you seem to take pride in the number of forums which have banned you. A person who posts their opinions in a well-reasoned manner, while speaking with grace and civilty, usually does not get banned. If bannings become habitual, I can only assume that the speech is occuring without grace or civility and without a well-reasoned approach.

Also, I have a hard time understanding your objections to this woman's job situation. Do you really think she should give up her jobs so she can go on Public Assistance? How in the world can you think she is unfit for NOT being on Public Assistance? If every parent quit their job and went on public assistance, there would be no taxpayers to pay the govermental cost. Would you really want every taxpayer to pay the costs for this woman's child rather than the child's own flesh-and-blood father? Are you really that biased against the idea of a father taking responsibilty for his own children? And then you have the nerve to think that the people who object to your ideas are participating in an "evil confrontation" and need to have meanness directed back to them. Perhaps the forums in which have been banned simply want polite members in the forum.

1) If we look at the example of Jesus then His life was not peaceful with other people, so the hostilities of others is not our job. I give the true and accurate message as peacefully as I can.

2) I expect to be successful or notorious whether I win the election or otherwise, so I feel that I need to give people my side of the story on being banned from a forum and that is my motivation for posting the events here on this board.

3) I say the reason that I am getting banned is because I am getting better and better at delivering the message against the evil Child Support and Custody laws and that is why I am receiving a more hostile reaction because those that support evil must conceal them selves.

P.S.
In this case this one forum was exceptionally nasty with dirty language and insults at the President and "Tea Party" trash so I was happy for being banned.

4) As to the Custodial Mom taking on two or more jobs and working long hours (she said 80-100 hour per week) then she was shirking her job as a custodial because the custodial is to be there and do the custody. She had no business working 80 hours a week or else she had no business having the custody of a child(ren).

5) To get onto Public Assistance is every citizen's right when it is needed, and it is also the right for the children, so the Mom being too prideful or egotistical to get Public Assistance and instead works long works hours means she was not fit to have the custody of a child.

6) This is NOT an all-or-nothing equation as it is NOT every custodial who has this problem, and so it only applied to this one mother who chose working 80+ hours instead of doing her job of providing the custody to her child(ren).

7) I am not biased against the father taking their own responsibility or of raising their own children, and in that case it would have made far better sense if the father was given the custody and let that Mom go work at her jobs since that Mom valued her long working hours over top of doing the job of providing the custody.

8) There really is nothing evil in telling a person that they are wrong. A greater evil is talking nice when ugly ignorant things are being said. They call other parents as "deadbeats" and they put parents into poverty and into jails and yet they get upset at me for telling them that they are doing wrong - so consider that contradiction.

9) A lot of things about the Child Support and Custody laws are based on being "nice" and it stinks. As like the Courts nicely order the parents to lose their children in custody, and nicely order the parents to pay off the kidnappers, and nicely order parents into poverty and nicely put parents into jails and so I say it is time to shove their "niceness" right back at them.

[JP Cusick]

Nov 16, 2011 9:28:32 GMT -5 JP Cusick said:

9) A lot of things about the Child Support and Custody laws are based on being "nice" and it stinks. As like the Courts nicely order the parents to lose their children in custody, and nicely order the parents to pay off the kidnappers, and nicely order parents into poverty and nicely put parents into jails and so I say it is time to shove their "niceness" right back at them.

Now I feel the need to expand on my last point quoted above, in that I am not running as some nice guy candidate because that is not accurate.

If by "nice" we mean being polite and courteous and respectful then that I am and will be, but that is not the accepted or perceived definition, and in real life as online I am hard and mean and determined in what I know to be right against what is known to be wrong, so if I do get elected or otherwise then I will defy the evil that sustains the Child Support and Custody laws by all means with no regard for niceness.

It might be seen or maybe not but I am based from the "old school" in the very worst and the best of ways.

In my own past the dirty thieving Child Support forced me into destitution and homeless, thrown out onto the streets in the midst of winter and discarded there as left to die, and including put three years into jail and later another 3 years into prison because of that dirty thieving Child Support, so by God I will not be categorized as a nice guy and I am not trying to be nice where it comes to the inhuman and immoral Child Support and Custody laws.

Those evil laws need to be fought and they need to be stopped.

FYI.

[citygirl]

Nov 17, 2011 9:28:31 GMT -5 JP Cusick said:

In my own past the dirty thieving Child Support forced me into destitution and homeless, thrown out onto the streets in the midst of winter and discarded there as left to die, and including put three years into jail and later another 3 years into prison because of that dirty thieving Child Support, so by God I will not be categorized as a nice guy and I am not trying to be nice where it comes to the inhuman and immoral Child Support and Custody laws.

Those evil laws need to be fought and they need to be stopped.

FYI.

What you mean is that you just want revenge and thats your real purpose.

[JP Cusick]

Nov 18, 2011 7:31:03 GMT -5 citygirl said:

What you mean is that you just want revenge and thats your real purpose.

I do not want to deny anything since everyone's perception must be given merit.

As such then it could be viewed as wanting revenge, as I would like to get some justice and vindication for my own case.

IMO, all of the Child Support Enforcement agents nationwide who work for the Child Support offices are criminals, in that they enforce human rights' crimes against the parents and against the parents' families, and as such they deserve our scorn and our contempt.

I do not see myself as seeking revenge, but I do want to put a stop to the evil system.