Russell Arrested 3/17/08

[Lex]

A little Ayn Rand never hurt anyone.

Picturing a mini-me version of Ayn Rand going around chainsmoking and biting people on the kneecaps....

A lot of Ayn Rand is a bad thing... she needed a good editor to trim down her diatribes too...  Talk about long winded to the point of hurting her own arguments.

Just because the presentation sucks doesn't make the message invalid.

[srqrebel]

It was not the subject matter that I necessarily objected to, but the delivery.

There is absolutely no need to bash anyone. It accomplishes nothing of value, just the same as putting Russell in jail accomplishes nothing of value.

I have said this repeatedly, and will say it again: In order to accomplish anything, one must act in harmony with the nature of the medium one is working with, not against it.

Since the medium we work with is the human organism, it is important to act in harmony with human nature.  Vitriol goes directly against it -- and serves only to alienate the audience.

[RussellsEx]

The cooperation of the parent is earned through love and tenderness and affection

Except when you have a baby...and they gently 'demand' everything from you...I think people see you for what you are....a person who didn't take marketing in college. 

I am not surprised at your points raised 'against me', but the viciousness which fills you.

I have certainly tried to be reasonable here, in explaining myself. I do not think there are simple solutions. In fact, I have asked for help in that matter from anyone who can honestly help me. What would you have me do? (Other than rot in hell?;-)

[SethCohn]

Jim, you can take your kneejerk diatribes and insults, print them out, and shove them deep enough into your mouth/throat/etc until your fingers stop typing them.  It's folks like you that are part of the problem, not part of the solution... you do no good to anyone else by posting them, so STFU.

To which Jim replied by private msg:

No.  I won't shut up.  I resent the idea that you have the authority to shut me up.  I despise your opinion that I should not be free to write just as I please.

Funny enough, I never said I had any authority to shut him up, I merely told him he should, and as for his despising my opinion 'that he shouldn't be free', it's clear he's just too stupid to understand why his writings hurt his own cause.

Congrats Jim, you've just made my ignore list, a rare rare 'honor', given that I've never ignored the likes of BillG,  or even John Richards.  I usually like to see what folks are writing, even when I disagree with them, but your writings aren't even entertaining to read.

[kola]

yeah this discussion is rotting on the vine and not good for nh freestaters.

despite all the flack russells ex is taking from the peanut gallery she has increasing karma scores. She must have some believers huh?

Kola

[mackler]

I don't know Russell too well, and I certainly don't know his ex nor his children.  And even if I did, it's his situation and not mine, so I hesitate to comment too much on it.

However, since this is such a public discussion (even of a family matter), I'll be so bold as to share my opinion that this sure is a whole lot of opinion-sharing on the matter of Russell's being in jail without any input whatsoever from the man who is in jail.  I would sure love to hear what (if anything) he has to publicly say before I be so presumptuous as to express (much less form) any opinion as to blame, justice, or possible and desirable outcomes.

[Barterer]

I don't believe that RussellsEx is playing a very careful, legal chess game to maximize financial gain. If it was purely about money, she'd be making statements carefully bounced off a lawyer and filing documents, not gushing forth her version of the facts.  She needs something else from Russell and/or the community.  It seems like a good opportunity to demonstrate free market dispute resolution.  FTL Ian could do a radio piece on however it turns out, since Russell is one of the proclaimed super-activists.. higher than average profile for sure.

You are exactly right about my not playing a legal manipulative game...if I wanted to do that, I would have hired an attorney, and I would keep my mouth shut, as I have done for many years. This has never been purely about money. I just could not stand to see so many people making Russell out to be a hero, when in fact, he is anything but. He has been completely irresponsible here. I have been extremely open (ad nauseum) about specifics and details, with all of YOU, his 'cohorts'...quite risky for me on the one hand, but it should also prove that I am not that cagey....I just want what is fair.
...

Thanks for your response, Mindy. I hope you agree that mediation is the only method likely to produce a result all parties will respect, and then abide by the terms.  The mediation option may be in the papers Kat is filing now.. I don't know, but if it is, your agreement to the idea of finding a neutral third party would sure help matters.

I have only been party to a court case once, thank goodness.  I was the plaintiff.  In that case, we all agreed to first talk with a couple of volunteer mediators from the Better Business Bureau.  Only if the mediation was unsuccessful would the case proceed normally.

The mediators did such a good job listening to all our points with empathy, half the battle was over by the time the facts were presented.. we were all clearly listened to.  After that, the mediators spoke with each party privately so that each side could clearly see their opponent's position, and lastly, got the hard numbers concerning time/money/amounts negotiated to everyone's satisfaction.

At the end of all this, the judge was of course all too happy to kick back, listen to our solution, bang his gavel self-importantly, and take credit for processing the case.

Something this good can probably happen in your case too.  I strongly suggest you consider mediation, get with Kat and incorporate it into the documents being filed with the court now.  The court personnel will probably appreciate the lower workload, and the whole thing will be resolved faster.

[kola]

appropraiate Beck song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej8S0r6Jz8o

[Raineyrocks]

Hi Malcom,

I'm not good with quotes like how you replied to my post so I'm just going to type my reply back to your 2nd post to me.

First off I would like to apologize if I wrote anything offensive towards your post.  I will admit it got me hot under the collar but I've printed out your reply to me and have been pondering it for awhile now and I think I may have taken some of the things you wrote the wrong way so let's see how it goes this time around.

For the record I totally disagree that my son only has one path and that is to pay, I see other options. Okay your not saying my son must walk away but that he should have the right to as his girlfriend does, can she legally just leave the baby at a firehouse or police station?  If so I didn't know this but how do you know that my son couldn't do this too if it is legal?

As far as my son's path if they keep the baby you don't know her and I know people can change however she is not the dominating kind of female that would want to make all of the decisions without my son's input.  I'm not being blind here, I've really gotten to know her very well. 

I agree that both of their lives will be more difficult having a baby at their age but it doesn't automatically mean that he or she will be condemned to a life of poverty.  He has a very supportive network of family around him that would be more than happy to help him or her better themselves educationally.  I do understand the family network isn't like it used to be and a lot of babies are put in daycare when they are 6 weeks old so their parent/s can go off to work at McDonalds but our family isn't like that.  Now I'm not saying we are dumb and will be taken advantage of but we have always helped each other the best that we can as long as who we are helping are helping themselves not taking advantage. My son has a large close family so if he is kept in poverty it will be of his/her own doing.  Do I think having a baby for them right now is wise , no way but the baby is already here growing inside of her, she doesn't want an abortion neither does my son.

If she chose to put the baby up for adoption wouldn't she need my son to sign over his parental rights?  I tried to google that question but I got a lot of mixed answers.

I do agree with you that women do seem to have more rights, 2 of the links below discuss that and the 3rd link gives me some hope that father's will hopefully have the same rights someday.  I don't want to give you an argument that women should have more rights than men because I think it should be equal, did I lead you to think otherwise?

I hope this post clarifies some things for you if not let me know and I can try harder.


http://www.kxmb.com/getForumPost.asp?ArticleId=165624  ( I only read the 1st page on this forum but it speaks of the unfairness of child support, I thought it might be interesting)

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/new_york/gender_bias_continues  ( this one seems to be about mother's having more rights)

http://www.themenscenter.com/National/national06.htm  ( lots of links for fathers that are fighting to get more parental rights)

[Tom Ploszaj]

You can take your vile communitarian, communistic, socialistic views about the invalidity of self-ownership and self-determination... [blah blah blah and onward in the same vein....]

Jim, you can take your kneejerk diatribes and insults, print them out, and shove them deep enough into your mouth/throat/etc until your fingers stop typing them.  It's folks like you that are part of the problem, not part of the solution... you do no good to anyone else by posting them, so STFU.

A little taste of his own medicine?

I've already put him on ignore

P.S.-  Is he related to MaineShark?

I do not put anyone on ignore, everyone in their own way have good points that need to be heard.  Now at least I know there are reasons to put new borns in dumpsters and leave 1 year olds on door steps and police stations to transfer the responsibily onto another since it isn't a parents responsibility to be forced to care for them with their labors. Being the smallest minority on earth I expect to stand alone on a majority of issues. 

[RussellsEx]

Maybe you hadn't seen my prior posts, but I have tried many times to work with Russell, in a capacity outside of the court system. It is my guess, and I have not spoken with him yet, that he will make this a political issue. Russell has not seemed to want any sort of resolution at all. I don't think that will change now. But if he would consider mediation, I welcome that.

[grolled]

I'm reminded of a Dag Nasty lyric when I read some of these posts:

shirking responsibility
true freedom from what?
from what?

[kola]

where did all these new? posters come from?

is richard and romack and the feds back at it?

next, i wouldn;t be surprise to see my ex lover Scoop! (aka margot-a-go-go)

giddy up.
kola

[Tom Ploszaj]

You can take your vile communitarian, communistic, socialistic views about the invalidity of self-ownership and self-determination... [blah blah blah and onward in the same vein....]

Jim, you can take your kneejerk diatribes and insults, print them out, and shove them deep enough into your mouth/throat/etc until your fingers stop typing them.  It's folks like you that are part of the problem, not part of the solution... you do no good to anyone else by posting them, so STFU.

A little taste of his own medicine?

I've already put him on ignore

P.S.-  Is he related to MaineShark?

I do not put anyone on ignore, everyone in their own way have good points that need to be heard.  Now at least I know there are reasons to put new borns in dumpsters and leave 1 year olds on door steps and police stations to transfer the responsibily onto another since it isn't a parents responsibility to be forced to care for them with their labors. Being the smallest minority on earth I expect to stand alone on a majority of issues. 

From my March 20, 2008 9:24pm post:
I'm looking at Russell, Mindy and their children problem as this......

I have been corrected before in my confusion of freedoms and liberties during my thought  transition coming from the Connecticunt socialistic state to the FSP movement.  I hope I do not offend anyone, no sides are taken in examining and comparing the facts of this. Please correct me if I am off base in my reasoning......

I can understand and give Planetaryjim some leeway, emotions are running high in here and he may have missed my 3/20/08 post above and that I am pointing out how the majority of outsiders interupt these ideas.

[malcolm]

Hi Malcom,

I'm not good with quotes like how you replied to my post so I'm just going to type my reply back to your 2nd post to me.

First off I would like to apologize if I wrote anything offensive towards your post.  I will admit it got me hot under the collar but I've printed out your reply to me and have been pondering it for awhile now and I think I may have taken some of the things you wrote the wrong way so let's see how it goes this time around.

For the record I totally disagree that my son only has one path and that is to pay, I see other options. Okay your not saying my son must walk away but that he should have the right to as his girlfriend does, can she legally just leave the baby at a firehouse or police station?  If so I didn't know this but how do you know that my son couldn't do this too if it is legal?

As far as my son's path if they keep the baby you don't know her and I know people can change however she is not the dominating kind of female that would want to make all of the decisions without my son's input.  I'm not being blind here, I've really gotten to know her very well. 

I agree that both of their lives will be more difficult having a baby at their age but it doesn't automatically mean that he or she will be condemned to a life of poverty.  He has a very supportive network of family around him that would be more than happy to help him or her better themselves educationally.  I do understand the family network isn't like it used to be and a lot of babies are put in daycare when they are 6 weeks old so their parent/s can go off to work at McDonalds but our family isn't like that.  Now I'm not saying we are dumb and will be taken advantage of but we have always helped each other the best that we can as long as who we are helping are helping themselves not taking advantage. My son has a large close family so if he is kept in poverty it will be of his/her own doing.  Do I think having a baby for them right now is wise , no way but the baby is already here growing inside of her, she doesn't want an abortion neither does my son.

If she chose to put the baby up for adoption wouldn't she need my son to sign over his parental rights?  I tried to google that question but I got a lot of mixed answers.

I do agree with you that women do seem to have more rights, 2 of the links below discuss that and the 3rd link gives me some hope that father's will hopefully have the same rights someday.  I don't want to give you an argument that women should have more rights than men because I think it should be equal, did I lead you to think otherwise?

I hope this post clarifies some things for you if not let me know and I can try harder.


http://www.kxmb.com/getForumPost.asp?ArticleId=165624  ( I only read the 1st page on this forum but it speaks of the unfairness of child support, I thought it might be interesting)

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/new_york/gender_bias_continues  ( this one seems to be about mother's having more rights)

http://www.themenscenter.com/National/national06.htm  ( lots of links for fathers that are fighting to get more parental rights)

Thank you, Rainey.  I am gratified to see that you are willing to see things from a man's perspective.  I DO believe that children are our greatest hope, out VERY FUTURE.  But something that bothers me is that society at large speaks in terms of only women's rights and men's responsibilities.  When was the last time you heard reference to men's rights or women's responsibilities?  Not often (if at all).

As far as adoption, if the child is put up for adoption, and your son does not consent, he can take custody.  If he does consent, the child would be raised by another (hopefully loving and stable) family.  In either case, the biological mother is free of that obligation, and can move on with her life.

Your son is not free to make a similar choice.  He may not terminate his parental duties unless his girlfriend consents.  If she decides to keep the child, he must pay child support, whether or not he chooses or is able to see the child.  This is unfair.  I do not think that men should abandon their children with impunity, but they should be allowed a window of opportunity to sever their rights and duties as a father.  Women have this right.  Men should have it, too.

I often hear references to "the best interests of the child".  The child's best interests are served by being raised in a stable family with a mother AND father present.  If this option isn't available, the child should be placed for adoption, IN ITS BEST INTEREST.  Too often children are raised in destructive and damaging environments by women who do not place their children's interest first.  WE NEED TO SEEK THE CHILD'S BEST INTEREST.  If the father does not want to be around, collecting a monthly payment from him does not constitute parenthood.  Our focus should be promoting good, stable, financially secure, loving, growth-inducing families.  The focus of society (and government) at present is only to extract Mommy Support from the father.  This is not a productive strategy, and is destructive to society and the family as an institution.

And that is all I have to say about that.