|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for passing that on, Marc. And congratulations to the NCFM for taking things this far. Let's hope the legislation passes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think if people put their energies into voicing support for bills like this, and supporting leaders in the men's movement like Marc Angelucci and the National Coalition of Free Men, instead of fantasizing about men rioting or going into violent revolt, we'd be making a lot more progress in the men's movement than we are now.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We need to be calling every legislature in CA and find out which ones oppose this bill. Then we should find legal ways to make the anti-mens rights legislatures very uncomfortable. This could bring media attention to them as victims of the mens movement, and it would make them look like the babbling baffons. I will start making the phone calls today. However, I can use some help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now this is good progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, warb-man if you have any numbers pass them on. They few I found and called basically told me to piss off because I wasn't a California resident.
---- Burn, Baby, Burn ----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We need to be calling every legislature in CA and find out which ones oppose this bill. Then we should find legal ways to make the anti-mens rights legislatures very uncomfortable. This could bring media attention to them as victims of the mens movement, and it would make them look like the babbling baffons. I will start making the phone calls today. However, I can use some help.
Good idea, Warble. As a matter of fact, I'm going to take it a step further. I don't live in Calif., so my opinion amounts to a hill of beans for that state's legislature, but I'm going to contact my OWN legislators and forward them info on California's bill as well as Georgia's. Tennessee's legislature recently introduced a bill to make joint custody the default judgment in child custody battles. I'm willing to bet they might be willing to look into paternity fraud as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have contacted Marc by email. We have agreed to organize and post a list publishing a post card (legal) that informs the public of how each legislature views the bill. We will be publishing it at a site that Marc will designate.
You can contact Marc Angelucci at: angelucci2000@alumni.law.ucla.edu to let him know that you will help. We need all the help we can get to hold these legislatures accountable.
For the current time being, I have to remain anonymous until is prove my innocence against the false allegations and lies of my wife and the police.
warble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just read the proposed bill and it looks pretty tight.
It will be most interesting to see who opposes this bill. It is vitally important, as a matter of good special interest strategy, to find those names and make them public. Making known the loyalties of such individuals, and exposing just whose pocket they are in and why, is an excellent weapon for truly effective advocacy. A lot of divroced men do in fact vote, though perhaps fewer than should. Posting the names of "nea" voters on this bill will be a frightful threat to hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting the names of "nea" voters on this bill will be a frightful threat to hold.
I will have to check with my attorney on the legalities of posting the names of the CA Legislatures that oppose men’s rights.
Not long ago, a web site posted the names of the CA Legislatures that are registered Democratic Socialist. The socialists took legal action and were successful is having this form of free speech suppressed!
You would be surprised to find out how many socialist have taken power in our government (or NOT). What is worse is that the Democrats know the socialist are infiltrating their party and they are suppressing the communication of this fact.
I do not want to give the socialist/super-fems a legal reason to shut down this site. Remember that we have to be smarter than they are in our actions. We have to think of every counter move that they will make before they think of the move. Bear in mind that they are reading our every post and know our plans.
However, we can use anonymous email to distribute these lists, and that cannot be stopped or suppressed. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I will have to check with my attorney on the legalities of posting the names of the CA Legislatures that oppose men’s rights.
You've gotta be kidding me. As a member of the press, I can tell you that the actions of the Democratic Socialists are a BIG violation of the First Amendment and freedom of the press. I can't believe they won that! Were there libelous remarks alongside their labeling as Democratic Socialists? Or was that label itself considered the libelous remark?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...You've gotta be kidding me. As a member of the press, I can tell you that the actions of the Democratic Socialists are a BIG violation of the First Amendment...
I did that research about a year ago. I was surprised that the press failed to cover the issue. You can find the information and testimony in Congress on the matter by going to www.google.com and typing the keywords "Democratic Socialist". It shouldn't take long to find the same sites that I encountered and find the retractions, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0H MY GOD! I just did a search of the Internet and found that there has been a major change in ONE YEAR!
The socialists longer seek to hide behind the rule of law. They are in our face and proud of that fact. They have come out of hiding, and they are publishing their success stories in how they are overthrowing out government.
Damn! Wake up America! WAKE UP!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...Were there libelous remarks alongside their labeling...
As I recall they were claiming libel because the legislatures were being labeled as socialist. However, it appears that in just one year they are confident enough to stop the secrecy and go public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I have contacted Marc by email. We have agreed to organize and post a list publishing a post card (legal) that informs the public of how each legislature views the bill. We will be publishing it at a site that Marc will designate."
Well, I first need to talk to some people who about putting it up onto a local NCFM chapter site. We would have to be certain of what we post. If I said something about a score card, that would be a chart that lists each legislator's name and how they *voted* (as opposed to whether their office said they support or oppose something) on various male-related bills from the past. I have wanted to do this for a long time. And what we are talking about doing here (i.e. creating a list of the legislators whose offices said they support, or oppose, this bill) could be a fabulous way to start what would later become a score card. Calpirg, an environmental/consumer group has a good example of legislative scorecards at http://pirg.org/score2001/california.html.
We'll talk some more, Marble. THANKS for the ideas and energy.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A voting score card (or more than one) might be a good thing. Even better is coordination as to what is being scored. I propose voting history - it's in the public record, so no "don't quote me, but..." waffling from legislative offices. Needs some research, of course, but I'm game...
However, I suggest that some lines need to be drawn if this is to be effective. When does "pro-woman" become "anti-man"? In the case of the Georgia and California bills, I don't see a gray area. In other cases, it might come up and should be thought on. When is "pro-woman" == "anti-man"? I don't want to spend time debatng fine ideological points - I want to make such action as I am able to take be effective.
I propose the criteria be (more or less) if the law would most likely make for more equality between the sexes, it's "pro-man" - if it would most likely enhance women's (or more probably, feminist) power at the expense of men, it's "anti-man". Everything else is for discussing over a beer.
Voting scorecards aren't much help without followup - people have to be made aware of the way their representatives vote. How will that be done? Suggestions?
Finally, if someone can suggest sample voting scorecard sites and offer some bills to research, I will see if I can get a sample grid up on my site this weekend for review next week. They say you can't tell the players without a program - lets find out who's actually in our corner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday February 23, @02:55AM EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest that some lines need to be drawn if this is to be effective. When does "pro-woman" become "anti-man"? In the case of the Georgia and California bills, I don't see a gray area.
Good point. They cannot be allowed to waffle on this matter. They are either for men's rights or against them. Failure to return calls, take a stand, or vote in favor of these bills means that are anti-male. There is no gray area in this matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In this case, we can have the name of the legislature in one column, then four columns indicating the actual response or lack thereof.
Categories can include the following:
In Favor
Against
No Comment
No Response
No Return Call
Actual Vote
For
Against
Abstain
There could also be a special section for comments like an appendix.
This would be a powerful tool to hold the CA legislatures accountable. Let the audience draw their own conclusions. That way we can avoid any liable charges. However, we can legally post opinions that interpret the data if we properly qualify them as such. In that way we can help people interpret the information.
We also need to inform the legislatures that we are keeping score and that the results of the queries will be published.
We cannot call as individuals because they will ignore us (been there..done that..). They almost always only listen to special interest groups. So, it is better if we call and represent ourselves as members of a group. By using a group identity, and claiming to be helping a local special interest group, we should be able to obtain help from members that are out-of-state.
We will need to be careful of the language that we use during the call. It might be best to work out a script in advance. That will assure the quality of the calls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've spoken with two candidates in the race for Assembly District 17 in California.
William R. Sweet Jr. (D)
Moses Sanchez (R)
Both of which, support this bill and will vote in favor if it provided they are elected.
William Sweet has come out publicly in favor of men and fathers on several issues including defining desposable income in legislation so that fathers are afford the opportunity live before child support calculations are applied to his earnings.
Anyone in the 17th District should seriously consider these candidate in the primary election, which is just a few weeks away.
William R. Sweet Jr.
http://www.williamsweet.org
Moses Sanchez
MosesSanchez4StateAssembly@hotmail.com
BTW: I do know both of these candidates personally, so name dropping won't hurt. :-)
Dan Curry
DanCurry.Com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice work, Dan. Hopefully folks in the 17th are campaigning hard for those two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've spoken with two candidates in the race for Assembly District 17 in California.
William R. Sweet Jr. (D)
Moses Sanchez (R)
Humm. It occures to me that we are close to election time. So, any statements the legislatures make are suspect. We will have to carefully examine their track record on men's rights also. They may be telling a lie to get men to vote for them.
I have a call into Gloria McLeod and will be calling the female dems on the list. Be careful to followup and not let them off without an answer.
The homepage and phone numbers of the Assembly members can be found at the following URL:
http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/acsframeset7text.ht m
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a call into Gloria McLeod and will be calling the female dems on the list. Be careful to followup and not let them off without an answer.
You're doing great work, Warble. Good idea on calling the female dems. I must admit I am at a loss for what I as an out-of-stater can do on this matter, but I'm willing to help in any way I can.
Actually, I *do* know something I can do. Next week's ifeminists.com guest editorial topic: paternity fraud: the Georgia and Calif. legislation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 22, @04:11PM EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that it took two or three tries to pass paternity fraud laws in Ohio and Georgia.
But, once they passed, the vote was unanimous in Ohio and a landslide in Georgia.
Hang tough.
Don't give up.
Get your facts straight, keep your chin up and keep going!
Thanks,
Kingsley G. Morse Jr.
Reproductive Rights Chairman
National Center for Men
www.choiceformen.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that it took two or three tries to pass paternity fraud laws in Ohio and Georgia.
No kidding. Well thanks for the support and the example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...landslide in Georgia.
Hugh? Landslide? You mean there are members that voted against a man's right not to have their income stolen by the State? Just who are those enemies of men's rights?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why is California late in getting a paternity fraud bill passed? I have always heard that as California goes so goes the rest of the nation.
Here it seems to be the other way around.
We must keep in mind that paternity fraud only affects the lives of a small number of men and any bill that remedies this "no brainer" has to be viewed as a stepping stone to other anti-misandric legislation.
Let's not rest on our laurels with the recent victories in Georgia and Ohio and be lulled into a false sense of security thinking the rest like child support/restraining order reform and false accusations protection is just going to fall into place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday February 24, @01:25AM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Why is California late in getting a paternity fraud bill passed? I have always heard that as California goes so goes the rest of the nation.
It is because the CA legislatures are caught up in the anti-male movement. While most of them are male, the super-fems play upon their chivalry to get their laws passed.
They have been covertly passing laws to criminalize males for several years now. Until a few months ago, I had no idea just how bad it has gotten. I was scared out of my mind when I finally took time to read the domestic code in CA. A man can be criminalized for literally breathing wrong (heavily). Unfortunately, men do not think it can happen to them. So, we must get the word out that this is a false idea. The only state that might be worse is Colorado.
Humm. Perhaps we need a bumper sticker to communicate the message. It might read like:
?(male symbol here) Criminalization (male sym)?
---------------It can happen to you!--------------
----------------mensactivism.org-----------------
In LA County alone, 30% of all new fraudulent paternity claims are against men. That means that millions of men are having their income stolen by the State of CA.
When it was tested in court, the liberal activist judges determined that men are liable because it is considered politically correct and in the best interest of the child.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"When it was tested in court, the liberal activist judges determined that men are liable because it is considered politically correct and in the best interest of the child."
But it also was a liberal legislator, Rod Wright, who finally took a step to stop this. I think we should leave the left/right politics out of this. All that does is divide us up unnecessarily.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
