Friday, June 8, 2007


One of the blogs I enjoy reading is "The Advice Goddesses" blog by Amy Alkon, a Libertarian that often takes feminists to task for their misandry, entitlement princesses for their narcissism, and wussy girly men for being manginas. (A side note: I just noticed that "Blogger" treats the word misandry as not a real word by underlining it in red! WTF? I'm quite sure misogyny doesn't get the same treatment -- yep, it doesn't.)

Anyhow, I read the following Reason Magazine article, "Injustice By Default" from a link from her blog -- and it contained something that EVERY AMERICAN MALE MUST KNOW:

...what nearly 10 million American men have discovered to their chagrin since the welfare reform legislation of 1996, is that when the government accuses you of fathering a child, no matter how flimsy the evidence, you are one month away from having your life wrecked. Federal law gives a man just 30 days to file a written challenge; if he doesn't, he is presumed guilty. And once that steamroller of justice starts rolling, dozens of statutory lubricants help make it extremely difficult, and prohibitively expensive, to stop -- even, in most cases, if there's conclusive DNA proof that the man is not the child's father.

You got that men?!?!? If you are ever served with paternity papers claiming you are a deadbeat dad, you must IMMEDIATELY obtain legal counsel and submit a written challenge to protect yourself!

Check out the experience of the subject of the article - a man who literally had a skank-whore pick his name out of the phone book and claim he fathered her bastard.

Tony Pierce remembers vividly the exact moment in November 2000 when the state of California began trampling on his life. "There was a loud angry pounding at my door at five o'clock in the morning," he recalls. "Very scary."

It was a female police officer with a complaint accusing him of being the father of an 8-year-old girl in Contra Costa County, east of San Francisco. "I'm like, 'Great! I'm definitely not the father of anybody,'" he says.


The front page of the court document gave simple but misleading instructions: "You have 30 days to respond to this lawsuit. You may respond in one of two ways: 1. File an Answer to the complaint with the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, not with the District Attorney....2. Settle the case with the District Attorney. You may call us at (925) 313-4200 to discuss your case." Concluding incorrectly (but understandably) that he could settle the matter over the phone, Pierce called -- three times that day -- and tried to weave his way through a labyrinthine phone tree. Finally he found a human being, who instructed him to leave a message with a home phone number. The department called him back the next day and left a message; it took another three calls from Pierce before he reached a caseworker for the first time.

"I said, 'What do I need to do? I'm not the father,'" he remembers. "And they were like, 'OK, well this is what you do: You just call in every day, and then we'll understand that you're not it, because if you're it, you're not gonna call us every day.'"

Pierce did everything he was told over the next three weeks of phone tag, except for comprehending that the 30-day deadline for denying paternity in writing was etched in federal law, regardless of what he discussed with Contra Costa employees -- who he says never once told him the clock was ticking. "All they were doing was delaying me from doing what I needed to do," he says. "It's a huge scam -- huge scam....They're just counting the days. They're like, 'Sucker, sucker, sucker, sucker.'...And this is the government!"

Two months later, after the phone conversations had ended and he assumed he was off the hook, Pierce received notice that a "default judgment" had been entered against him, and that he owed $9,000 in child support. He was between dot-com jobs, and his next unemployment check was 25 percent smaller; the state of California had seized and diverted $100 toward his first payment. Suddenly, he was facing several years of automatic wage garnishment, and the shame of being forced to explain to prospective employers why the government considered him a deadbeat dad. "That's when it hit me," he says. "I mean, it's mostly my fault -- 'Fill out the form, dumb-ass!'...But it's so rigged against you, it's ridiculous."

You got that guys? Remember, this is a FEDERAL law, so this sort of thing can happen to you in ANY 50 States in the good old United States of Matriamerica!

Here are some more details:

For now, the system aimed at catching "deadbeat dads" illustrates how a noble-sounding effort to help children and taxpayers can trample the rights of innocent people.

Here's how it works: When an accused "obligor" fails, for whatever reason, to send his response on time, the court automatically issues a "default judgment" declaring him the legal father. It does not matter if he was on vacation, was confused, or (as often happens) didn't even receive the summons, or if he simply treated the complaint's deadlines with the same lack of urgency people routinely exhibit toward jury duty summonses -- he's now the dad. "In California, you don't even have to have proof of service of the summons!" says Rod Wright, a recently retired Democratic state senator from Los Angeles who tried and failed to get several paternity-related reform bills, including a proof-of-service requirement, past former Gov. Gray Davis' veto. "They only are obligated to send it to the last known address."

Can you believe this crap? They are only obligated to send it to the last known other words, a REALLY evil, conniving whore can tell social services an address you once lived at - knowing full well that you moved - but she only has to claim that as your last known address. And when you never even SEE the summons, the "default judgment" after 30 days holds you financially responsible and they will immediately begin to garnish your wages if you are employed!

Think it can't happen to you, or that this kind of thing rarely happens? Think again!

In fact, a March 2003 Urban Institute study commissioned by the California Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) found that "most noncustodial parents appear to be served by 'substitute' service, rather than personal service, which suggests that noncustodial parents may not know that they have been served." In Los Angeles County, which is notorious for its sloppy summons service and zealous prosecution of alleged fathers it knows to be innocent, nearly 80 percent of paternity establishments come in the form of default judgments. In the state as a whole, which establishes 250,000 paternities a year while collecting $2 billion in child support, a whopping 68 percent of the 158,000 child support orders in 2000 (the last year studied) were default judgments.

Once paternity is "established," even if the government has never communicated with the father, the county court imposes a payment rate and schedule under the statistically mistaken assumption that he makes a full-time salary at minimum wage. (State audits have found that a full 80 percent of default dads don't make even that much.) To collect the money, the county may put a garnish order on the purported father's paycheck or place liens on his assets. If the mother has received welfare assistance after the child was born, the man will be hit with a bill to pay back the state, plus 10 percent annual interest. "That's what they're trying to do, is get some reimbursement to the state," says Carolyn Kelly, public relations officer for the Contra Costa County DCSS. "As you can imagine, [that's] millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars."

This is without a doubt, the pinnacle of misandrist, man-hating legislation authored and enacted by the feminazi's and their mangina accomplices in the government!

So what happens to you when you are falsely accused and suffer a "default judgment" and you refuse to pay, or are currently unemployed?

If the father falls 30 days behind on his payments, he will be blocked by law from receiving or renewing a driver's license or any "authorization issued by a board that allows a person to engage in a business, occupation, or profession" -- a category that includes teaching credentials, fishing licenses, and state bar memberships. If his credit rating was good, it won't be any more. If his past-due tab exceeds $5,000, the U.S. State Department won't issue him a passport. (An average of 60 Americans discover this each day. Meanwhile, Congress has been pushing to cut the limit to $2,500, while urging the State Department to begin revoking passports, which is allowed under the law.)

"When you tell people about the inequities of the system," Wright says, "they're surprised. They go, 'This is America! You couldn't do that!' And I go, 'Yes, you can.'"

You got the whole picture men? I used to believe that the ultimate manifestation of the Matriarchy was the numerous examples of vindictive wives dragging their husbands into divorce court with false allegations of domestic violence and/or abuse, and take away your house, car, children and half your income and savings...but this is even worse than that! Women are now empowered to have the Government take a strangers money away from him, and take away all the rights and privileges we supposedly enjoy as Americans...all on her say so!

Always remember: if you get served with a summons, RESPOND IN WRITING and follow up! Make it the TOP PRIORITY IN YOUR LIFE AT THAT MOMENT. Contest it in writing and follow up to make sure your contest of paternity is recieved and registered and follow through! Because no matter what happens, you only have 30 days before the wonderful example of American Justice and Equal Rights Under the Law begins Ass-Raping you with a "default judgment!"


MikeeUSA said...

Feminist Government Employees + Gas Can + Something to light said person up with can solve this problem.

Accusing female + Gas can + lighter just adds to the justice.

Personally, I don't think bullets would get the point across that anti-men collaborators won't be tollerated well enough.

Imagine if everytime a man was accused of a feminist "crime" a few govt employees of the accusing office + the accusing female went up in flames.

The govt would either kill all men in the USA or ... fall to said revolution.

Anonymous said...

Quite a few military personnel stationed overseas have been hit by this. All a woman has to do is randomly pick the name of someone enlisted, which is publicly available, and she's set.

There was also the case of a 15 year old virgin who was asked to pay child support for a child born 12 years earlier, when he was 3.