FaceUpToFred

Hi Shirley, that was a great conversation yesterday regarding back-lash. Your insight into this topic is very illuminating. Read the story below. This hi-jacking of the United States as a legal authority over its own citizens welfare is Obama and his girl friend, Joe (Freakin’ VAWA) Biden’s job. It’s what the money that backed them was for. This kind of “new world order” government is the goal of our rulers. Total domination and control of ALL people. This is why Obama can never be my President. He is not an American. He is anti- American. Is he one of them? NO. He serves them, trying to be something that he is not. He’s not one of us, nor one of them. I find him disgusting. I find both Obama and Biden to be poor excuses for manhood. Neither is the kind of man that my father or any real man can respect. The feminization of the American man is shown clearly in these two very powerful ninnies.

SUPREME COURT URGED TO IMPOSE UNRATIFIED TREATY
Press Contact: Rebekah Pizana National Coalition Director ParentalRights. org 540.645.9475 Rebekah@parentalrig hts.org
by Jim Bentley Tuesday, September 29, 2009
The Supreme Court this term has agreed to hear on appeal two cases which question the authority of a state to sentence juvenile violent offenders to life without parole. Amnesty International and other global organizations have filed briefs urging the Court to apply the U.N.´s controversial Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) to Florida law as a matter of binding “Customary International Law”. On Monday, sixteen members of the U.S. House of Representatives filed an opposing brief which argues that this use of international law is contrary to both the facts and the law.

“Amnesty International believes that international law, rather than American law, should be used to make this decision. We have been warning people for some time that this theory could be used to force this treaty upon an unwilling American public. Americans want to retain family-based decision-making and American-made law. The UN Convention Rights of the Child would undermine both of these principles,” constitutional lawyer Michael Farris said.

Amnesty International´s brief asserts that the United States is the only nation with laws that permit juveniles to be sentenced to life in prison. The opposing brief, written by Farris and filed by the Members of the House, uses the records of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to demonstrate that at least 23 nations impose either life sentences or the death penalty for certain juvenile offenders. Moreover, the brief argues that the United States cannot be bound by any form of international law in a domestic case of this character.

Amnesty International´s argument is premised on the prior Supreme Court decision of Roper v. Simmons in 2005. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled the imposition of the death penalty against juvenile murderers to be unconstitutional. In reaching that decision the Court relied on the unratified CRC as persuasive authority to support its decision. However, Amnesty International has asked the Court to move to the next step. AI contends that this treaty is already binding on the United States because 193 nations have adopted this convention.

Each brief was filed in both cases, Graham v. Florida and Sulivan v. Florida, which the Court will hear separately. Not only sentencing guidelines, but a vast majority of family law in every state could be impacted by such a ruling.

“While we hope to stop the use of international law in this case, those who are committed internationalists will not give up with just one attempt,” Farris added.

Farris is the President of Parentalrights. org, an organization which seeks to prevent U.S. ratification of the CRC and to protect the fundamental liberty of fit parents to direct the upbringing of their children through an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“Only an amendment to the U.S. Constitution can protect traditional parental rights both from erosion in our courts system and from the threat of customary international law, which is being argued here,” Farris concluded.

Farris submitted the brief on behalf of 16 Congressmen including Rep. Thaddeus McCotter and Rep. Doug Lamborn, co-chairs of the House Sovereignty Caucus. The other House members on the brief are: Rep. Pete Hoekstra, Rep. John Fleming, Rep. Trent Franks, Rep. Todd Akin, Rep. Robert Latta, Rep. Jim Jordan, Rep. Todd Tiahrt, Rep. Phil Gingery, Rep. Cynthia Lummis, Rep. Dan Burton, Rep. Gus Bilirakis, Rep. Mark Souder, Rep. John Boozman, and Rep. Rob Bishop.

Parentalrights. org is a 501c4 non-profit organization existing solely for the purpose of passing a parental rights amendment to the US Constitution.
General | Categories: financial, entertainment, media, television, authors, government, health, travel, religion, catholic, christian, judaism, defense, tobacco, family, parenting
0 submitted by Jim Bentley
Parentalrights. org is a 501c4 non-profit organization existing solely for the purpose of passing a parental rights amendment to the US Constitution.

Once again the wisdom of the masses is forced upon me. I may be guilty of this same phenomenon but I hope not. It’s so common.

Example: “All this parking meter money goes to pay the parking meter police. If they would just let us park for free they could fire the parking meter police and relieve the pressure on these overworked courts.” BRILLIANT. This guy thinks he should be our president?

Today it was the “Back Lash.” A loud voice said, “now that we know that the President is a lying SOB, there will be a huge back lash against the Democratic Party and the Republicans will take power and then we’ll finally have the change that we all deserve. I couldn’t believe my ears. Again with the fake two party system and its die-hard believers. I asked him if he didn’t think that the people who finance these candidates, you know, the people who control our lives, wouldn’t realize this and just install their own lackeys so that we would continue with business as usual? His response was “yea I guess you’re right. I guess we’ll just get screwed again.” How’s that for resolve? He’s resolve to being screwed.

I suggested that maybe we should all vote for an independent candidate. He responded by telling me that he had no intention of “throwing his vote away on a loser.” I suggested that he was in fact affirming to his rulers that he was subservient to their simplistically transparent sham. He would be confirming the acceptance of an oppressor.

He then looked at me and said, “Don’t worry Fred. The Republicans will straighten out this “Obamanation” in Washington DC. They will take over and stymie him at every turn. He’ll be as good as dead, and we can go on and rebuild America. You see Fred, that’s how it works. When one party gets too strong there is a back lash by the people and we take our country back by voting them out and voting the other party back in.”

Believe it or not I let him live. I have nothing to worry about. He’ll be voting next November. Once again “the people will speak.” I guess “the public schools” are another issue. Or are they?

We had a seriously disturbing incident this week in California. Not disturbing in and of itself, disturbing in that it brings to the surface an issue that I have been frustrated with for as long as I can remember.

The fact that a local politician Mike Duvall was caught having two extra-marital affairs with hired lobbyists half his age is certainly reprehensible, especially considering that he was elected to the California State Assembly on a “family values” platform. This however, is not my issue.

What bothers me is that in Sacramento, this goes on as “business as usual.” This could not exist if was not given tacit approval by the unanimous silence of the “rest of the team.” I say “team” because the silence of the rest of the political population there, makes them conspirators. All of these politicians are influenced one way or another by the interactions of their colleagues being bought with sexual favors, travel, dope or just good old fashioned cash. Even if a politician does not partake in any of these “perks” he must work in an environment where those around him do. He knows who, how and why things move the way they do and rather than expose this to his employers (us), he condones them with his silence and “works within that system.”

Mike Duvall’s friend Jeff Miller, another Assemblyman, is exposed as having full and intimate knowledge of Duvall’s exploitation of his position of power. Does Jeff Miller do the right thing? No, he “lets it ride.” Doing that makes him is a conspirator. We have to ask the obvious question. What is Jeff Miller guilty of? It’s not an accusation, It’s merely an obvious question. I think it begs the same question to every other person who accepted Mike Duvall’s transgression as OK. You don’t think that these lobbyist/whores only serve one company and target only one politician do you?

This brings me to the subject of this entry.
Since police departments do not police themselves and in fact have an expression that we all know “the blue wall of silence” we have to be suspicious of all police.
Family law corruption has proved to us all, that every lawyer involved is more than suspect.
The Sturgeon case in Los Angeles has exposed every Judge as corrupt.
Family law Judges there, are then doubly corrupt.
Doctors who “cover” for sleep deprived, drug addicted or mentally disturbed other doctors are conspirators in murder on the operating table.
Middle Management staff who exploits laborers, while receiving “incentives” from the employer, are guilty of this kind of crime.
Building inspectors and licensors who take bribes from developers who want to “cut corners” are just as bad because there is more than one inspector and one says nothing about the other.
This “wall of silence” or “professional courtesy” is exploited by the military and is legendary in the church.

We live in a world where “doing the right thing” just doesn’t happen. The sick and saddest part is that so many people accept this from every one of the groups mentioned above and many more. The people themselves do not “stand up” as I would hope the cops, judges, politicians, doctors, lawyers, inspectors, soldiers and priests would, and demonstrate integrity. The people themselves give consent with their silence. Are the people to considered conspirators? Not even. Sadly they do not even get the status of conspirator because they do not profit from their consent. Their ignorance and apathy simply make them unwitting enablers.
Which is worse?
The intentional exploitation of someone?
The exploited persons not standing up for themselves?
OR, the person who watches one person exploit another, and does nothing?

I have an interesting proposal for family law reform that I think needs serious consideration. This idea came to me in a writing session and now in a spirit of equality, I believe it has enough merit to be seriously bantered back and forth and then carelessly signed into law.

Here’s the scenario. A man with a family has an affair with his secretary. She knows the man and his family from a number of social events that naturally occur in business. The secretary wants the man to leave his family and he says no. The secretary looses the battle for possession of the man. The astounded and enraged secretary seeking revenge and a pound of flesh, exposes the affair.

The formerly careless but now enraged wife thought that she did not have to be responsible for keeping her man out of the arms of other women. She thought that the ever present threat of financial ruin was enough to emasculate him enough that his sexual needs would be suppressed by him, not satisfied by her. She thought that he was a husband and thereby owned by her and no longer a man. She teams up with the other frustrated woman and together they set about the task of ruining the man.

The man is stripped of everything. Children, home, business licenses, professional licenses, tools, collections from childhood, income, pensions, etc are all stolen from him. In addition he is charged with spousal abuse, child abuse and unlawfully claiming position of his own penis. The man is ruined, but the secretary, “the other woman” gets to “bang and walk.”

She walks away unscathed to go out and victimize some other man. Sweet! Now here is the proposal. The couple who had the affair is equally responsible for it. I always love it when a child is brought into this world and a woman somewhere says to a man, “you men want to deny responsibility. You should learn to keep it in your pants.” I love that. Now, the secretary who could not “keep it in her pants” is as responsible for the destruction of the man, as the man who impregnates the woman is for the child that she bares.

The man is bound by a court to placate is x-wife. That same court should bind the offending secretary to support the man whose life she contributed to the ruin of.
This would result in one of three things.
1) Women would not engage in affairs for fear of fallout from divorce. (yea right)
2) Women would not expose affairs for fear of fallout from divorce.
3) Women would kill the X-wife.

Now for the groovy part for the court, and why I believe this is an idea whose time has come. As we all know the court gets matching Federal funds for every dollar that goes through the court in a family law or family law related proceeding. Now in addition to child support and spousal support and psych evaluations and forensic income audits, false domestic violence claims, false paternity claims, counseling sessions and all the rest, we can add to that, a whole new way to victimize the general public.

Adulterer support.

That’s right legal “puttanelles.” Cash flow from a third source. I know what you’re saying to yourselves. “Holy crap, why didn’t I think of that?” Well there you are. Sure the man pays and pays, and the wife pays too but what about the “other woman?” Yea, hey councilor, let’s get ‘er. Woo Hoo. Hey “Bar Association” I’m giving you this for free. It’s a multi billion dollar idea. Women are an expanding group of income earners and with our first women President Barack Obama and his girl friend Joe Biden crushing men and men’s jobs at every turn, soon men won’t have the income to support the divorce industry. Women have demanded that the President create jobs for women. What better job creation than a whole new slew of college educated women bent on a career in family law based on the brand new concept of “adulterer support.” After all, it’s in the best interest of all those new lady lawyer’s children.

Jobs in education.
Jobs in family law.
Jobs for locating former adulterers and giving them an arrears (oh this is just too good) bill.
Jobs for the staff of the new “Adulterer Czar.”
Jobs for academics who can study and write an infinite barrage of papers on adultery. (just think of the grant money)

This concept should be at least as good as Title IV-D, VAWA or the Bradley Amendment for total insanity from Government. In fact, I’m so excited about this idea that I think I’m going to draft a thousand page Bill for Congress that no one will read. I’ll just bet that with a few glamorous speeches we can get this passed.