Kane
October 18th 03, 06:52 AM
(Greg Hanson) wrote in message >...
> > instead of accepting help, slamming the helper.
> > I wonder why?
Well, let's see if he even once considers the child, or if this is
going to be all about HIM. Will it be an apology, an excuse, a
rationalization, or a plain old crock of ****?
> Because they never switched from the investigative
> role to the helping relationship, a requirement.
Not for you, bubbah. Only for the child and the mother. You can't be a
client of CPS. You couldn't however be named as a party if you would
so state and agree to services.
Let me see now if my old head can rustle up some memories of your
posts....oh yeah, you refused services not only for yourself but for
your "fiance."
Isn't that special.
> Because the ""help"" was much like Torquemada's
> rack, used to ""help"" people to reveal that they
> consorted with the devil.
You are still a victim of that idea that if you agree to services you
are agreeing you need them. If I didn't think you wanted the mother to
fail just to get the girl out of the house I'd have to call you
obtuse.
You had a chance to do what was right to get the girl back. You could
have walked...or you could have accepted services, then walked if they
didn't work, but no...it's all about Greg.
> > > Even worse, questions asked and reports generated
> > > made us feel that it was simply an extension of
> > > the witch hunt the caseworkers were running.
> >
> > All investigations feel like that. I recall a cop <snip>
>
> You didn't need 4th Amendment protections as a victim.
You didn't needed in your case, because you weren't married, you
weren't the child's father. You subjected yourself to the
investigation. And YOU were not the victim. Though I see you again
trying to cast yourself in that role.
> > > The FP SW however, did three things that have and will
> > > haunt CPS here.
> >
> > Do you think she's actually reading here?
>
> Possibly. Why?
How will she knows she's being haunted otherwise?
> > > She took a proposed plan from us to CPS.
> > Who wrote the plan Greegor, you?
>
> Both of us.
The nice CW took your plan to CPS for you, hmmmm?
> > > She suggested they should provide written
> > > STANDARDS regarding household clutter. She also informed
> > > us that DHS had funding that could help us rent a storage
> > > locker. CPS ignored or refused all three.
You weren't busted for household clutter. Stop kidding people. It was
ONE of the factors for removal, now wasn't it? Fess up boy it's good
for the soul.
> > Sometimes CPS has a small fund for discretionary use.
Yes, it's labeled Strengths Needs Based funding. It comes and it goes
according to the state budget and the vagaries of legislators. It's
usually completely overseen by a state leg. committee.
> >My bet is they
> > took a look at you and a look at their other cases and the others won
> > out. It can only go so far.
>
> Yes, but their hired expert recommended it.
> It was HER idea to ask for that help, not ours.
That's nice, and you have some reason to think they can't overrule him
or her without being "haunted" somehow? That money is meant to be used
for things like getting a cleaning crew in, or a homemaker service, or
buying the child (assuming the child is in home) a band instrument, or
financing a field trip so the family regains some of its normalcy.
It's never used to finance a boyfriend storing his ****. Nor should it
be.
> > Gee's I hope. Assuming that fund is ultimately tracable back to the
> > tax payer somewhere I'm damned please they didn't give it to you to
> > pay to store your [e.d.].
>
> They are supposed to spend money like that, which avoids
> the huge bill they've racked up as it is.
No they aren't. If every lazy **** ass bum that hooks up with a single
mother were to get some kind of support for things you wanted the
system would bust in a week. The countryside is littered with such
flecks of ****.
> For the amount of money they've spent on this case,
> we could have bought the storage locker company.
No doubt. Your holding them up, your intruding yourself on this
family, your failure to contribute has cost the state a pile of money.
All you had to do to cut the cost was take the damned assigned
services, or walk.
Instead you had to play little reform CPS hero and insure the child
wasn't coming home.
>
> Kane, I also notice that you bypassed the comment about how
> they refused to provide STANDARDS regarding clutter.
"Bypassed"?
Naw, just forgot to point out what a ditz you are. Sorry.
> That
> also, as I said, was recommended by THEIR OWN HIRED EXPERT,
> originating with our question to her.
The state, me, and everyone else do NOT want the bureaucrats kissing
your or anyone elses ass jumping through expensive hoops YOU want them
to so you can get out of the real reason the child was removed.
> I wouldn't want you to neglect that issue. :)
YOu better hope to hell I do, as everytime you bring them up or reply
you make yet a further ass of yourself and your motives become even
clearer.
> > It needs to be saved for those that truly need it.
>
> If they can blow the hundreds of thousands they HAVE,
> they could certainly have paid for a locker at about
> 100 a month for a few months.
No, actually I hope, as a tax payer, they make a very firm
discrimination between case costs and wiping the ass of some little
twit like you, on demand.
No, Greegor, the only reason there was any kind of cost at all, from
the beginning, was YOU were in the child's life and shouldn't have
been....well, not in the way you chose.
> They could have had
> hundreds of thousands to deal with REAL cases if they
> had decided not to blow it on a clutter case.
So, you wish to claim the only reason they removed the child was
"clutter?"
That's a classic. We see that again and again here and when the media
actually shows a case of clutter, it's filth to the knees, broken
plate glass on the coffee table with toddlers wandering about and gas
powered equipment sitting next to wood stoves in winter. Yeah, sure,
clutter.
> > > Caseworkers commonly confuse Domestic Abuse with Domestic Violence.
> >
> > So do I. Since the overlap is so extreme. On the other hand, from the
> > child's point of view, often the hitting (abusive violence) and the
> > screaming and yelling and threats to hit (abuse alone, non-hitting)
> > tend to have similar psychological results on the child.
>
> Domestic Violence is a legal definition.
The careful splitting of hairs is con talk.
> Domestic Abuse is anything the ""victim"" doesn't like.
Bull ****.
> While Abuse can be serious, the meaning is terribly
> dilute with all of the attitude stuff used in claims.
Load of crap. The biggest load is put out by the perps to try and con
the public into accepting the minimizing...hell, we've seen people do
it here with the old, "well what if she was asking for it" defense.
> If they didn't know it was just gas, then why
> have they avoided using any qualified child psychologist?
Because it costs money and you won't pay for it, right? You wouldn't
pay for one YOU got to pick asshole. We know about you pretty clearly
now.
You haven't figured out that you are NOT a party except by the
thrusting yourself into the family. You have NO legal relationship to
the child or the mother, and you know, and we know, that if you
stepped forward your ass would be liable for costs of all kinds that
you haven't paid.
> We think we know.
No, you are guessing again.
> > They are unable to differentiate at younger ages. Did you know there
> > are only three things that can startle a new born? Sudden overpowering
> > visual stimuli, sudden noise, or being dropped, even if caught.
> >
> > So it follows that little children carry around in them the need for
> > gentleness and kindness as a part of them growing up psychologically
> > healthy.
> >
> > They are afraid for their parents, for their siblings, their pets, and
> > themselves. Do YOU think children should have to live in a continual
> > atmosphere of fear or dread of fear erupting?
>
> Nope. That's why she did not.
> She was fearless, with one exception.
So tell us again why YOU think she wet herself. Lot's of kids that
live with brutes put up a brave front but their bodies betray them by
doing what kids do when they are scared, evacuate bowel or bladder.
> Prozac grandma grandma instilled in the child
> fears that the grandma is dying. This was used as
> part of her pathological programming of the child
> to feel guilty if she was not there for her
> grandma's dying days.
Careful, Dung will be after you for amateur psychologizing.
> The grandma was not
> diagnosed terminal, but IS prematurely senile and
> physically feeble. The grandma truly belongs
> in a nursing home because of the number and
> types of care issues.
Greegor the Whore, you could have, simply by being a truly loving and
caring parent, instead of a punitive self serving little twit, avoided
the whole damn mess. But you think you know better than anyone else
how to raise children and are a spanker and a punisher for normal
reactions to stress.
Grandma, without even knowing it no doubt, has done that child a great
favor...created enough havoc through being ill to bring things to a
boil. You needed to be stopped.
> This and some other inappropriate behaviors such
> as window peeping and stalking, are exactly why
> we began limiting contact between the child and
> her grandmother.
Grandmother was doubtlessly worried about you being in the household
and was trying to find out what you were doing to her grandchild.
Turns out she was on the right track.
> That is the root cause of the entire case, really.
No, Greegor, YOU were the root cause and you know it. Had you NOT been
in the picture the gparents would have had nothing to go on. YOu
provided the problem to get the state involved.
> The grandma became more and more psycho and we
> were concerned.
I don't know many people more psychologically stable than myself. I've
proven it time and again under extreme duress and stress, twice in
combat, and if I thought YOU were staying home to take of MY
granddaughter and I could do nothing about it I daresay I might well
have gone a little psycho.
> When asked, other family members said
> "Well, you know how she is.". (Each seperately.)
They were trying to not makes things worse for their relative, your
"fiance." You should thank them for not executing a grandpa's number
on you.
> So we began limiting contact, and the psycho
> phone calls began.
Let me see now. Here's a stranger that's moved into their daughter's
trailer home, doesn't work, drags in his clutter, takes to spanking
and showering their gdaughter and they are scared ****less that more
could be happening...and no doubt they found out about the showering,
and YOU cut of contact and you are calling THEM psycho...r r r r.
I'd say they had a highly appropriate response and if anything grandpa
should sue YOU for making the gmother ill. YOU created mountains of
stress for her.
> Obsessive repetitive phone calls,
> never leaving answering machine messages.
Nope. Probably wanted to make sure you were interupted doing your
towel about routine.
> One called ID collapsed the calls, but the other one
> showed at times she had called like 20 times within
> a two hour span when the family was out shopping.
She no doubt was frantic thinking of what you might be doing to her
granddaugher. If you weren't such a controlling putz you'd have
understood that and set up MORE time with the gdaughter and MORE
contact with MORE of an open door policy.
YOU, yahoo, were creating the appearance of the exactly the scenerio
that CPS all over the country as one of most high risk ones for kids
when it comes to sexual abuse....mother's boyfriend.
And there you were, isolating, showering, kid ****ing herself (one of
the signs that needs to be further checked out for possible sex
abuse).
> Another time I answered and explained that SO was
> busy cooking, and unless it was an emergency if she
> could call back later. The grandma insisted it
> was an emergency and then asked SO how the school
> pictures turned out.
That was because you were creating isolation and appearing like you
had something to hide.
If you were living with my daughter <ugh ugh ugh> and weren't
answering the phone for long periods I'd be damn worried about what
was going on and wanting to speak to my daughter so she could ask for
help if needed and I'd say anything to get her to the phone.
> SO was angry and I was angry.
Your SO is a dupe, and at this point apparently a willing one. And if
SHE couldn't figure out and response to her mothers terrors about you
being in the house then it's no wonder gma was upset.
> They also got DEMANDING about visits, apparently
> expecting visits every other weekend.
Grandparents every other weekend you think is abnormal? Where you from
boy, Neuw Yawk...r r r r ...Dan'll get me for that one, for sure.
> They began "pumping" the child for dirt, and
> second guessing many parental decisions.
By that time they'd have to be getting frantic. Anyone that bothers to
read up on sexual molesting perps knows they groom kids to hide the
truth. And one of the favorite ploys of molesters is to isolate the
victim and the victim's parent from other family members.
> At one point the grandma even complained that we were
> considering getting the child (all of us) flu shots.
>
> The grandma thought it was hurtful to the child.
>
> Days of trying to convince the child that the
> big owie was better than getting the flu was
> all destroyed by this comment.
Nuts, obviously. I can see why though.
> And the grandfather realized how stupid her comment
> was and chastized the grandma on the spot.
Oh, then the gpa wasn't nuts, he just finally got the message when he
punched your lights out.
> Another time the grandma referred to the
> 7 year old child as "baby" and I complained
> that this was inappropriate for a 7 year old.
> Another relative was there and heartily agreed.
I call my wife's daughter (my step -) honey, and sweetie and all kinds
of child names...she's 26. I call my own daughter the same kind of
names, and both like it. Now if you had said she had call her "A" baby
I might be moved a bit to your side.
But an old lady calling a 7 year old girl, "baby?" Come now Greegor.
You were just in a power struggle with them, and looking for every
excuse possible to keep control of all parties.
I note you've never had your "finance" here dispite repeated
invitations. Is she too feeble minded to handle what we say here and
correct us where we are wrong...r r r....or does it scare you ****less
not to have control of her?
> > > The Domestic Abuse category is loaded with every imagineable
> > > Feminist political issue. Even referring to your mate
> > > as "my wife" raises their hackles,
> >
> > Your citation please.
>
> 1. The Duluth Method, Domestic Abuse Project, Duluth Minnesota
>
> 2. Actual experience in the Duluth Method classes
Please enumerate those things that actually denoted feminist political
issues.
And your "mate" was not your "wife" so I can see what's up there.
You don't think you might have been projecting a little tiny bit on
them because they had the authority for the moment and that bothers
the hell out of you? Hmmmmmmm?
Put up a website and scan in their handouts and let us see what they
actually said.
> > Have you been accused of domestic abuse or violence?
>
> Not with this family, ever.
Nmmmm....now that is very interesting. You sure you want to pursue
this further here in a ng?
> Prior convictions.
Oh dear. And I'll bet you've been saying over and over since I brought
it up,
"I am not a controller." "I am not a controller."
> Ask Dan about Bipolar wives. But mine was worse than his.
Dan had a Bipolar wife? Did he share that her in the ng or did you
take something told to you in confidence and dump it here without
permission, you little controlling feeble impotent twit?
I guess we'll have to wait and see if Dan cares to share something or
not.
> > Has your "fiance" been accused of domestic violence or abuse?
>
> No
So now she has a man living with her, her daughter gone probably for
her entire childhood, and mommy has another baby to feed and look
after, except when you get out of the house and collect cans and
bottles.
Hokay.
> > > Emotional abuse is one that amuses me.
> >
> > I'll be it does.
>
> > Did you laugh when you humilated the child by making
> > her strip naked while you watched
>
> Watched? You made that up.
She showered with her clothes on? Really? And all this time you didn't
tell us? You let us think you were a dip**** turd?
Gosh, I'm sorry, but you should have come clean.
> Just so you could keep
> pretending that I am a pervert.
Greegor, I trust one day that you will actually grow up. I don't have
much faith in my hope, but hey, I've seen more screwed up people than
you do it.
And if you do one of the most embarrassing things you are going to
have to face is your passive agressive style of setting others up to
make YOU the victim when YOU have actually victimized someone else.
You have NOT described your showering and punishments in any way BUT
so that people would see an image of you making a child strip and get
naked into the shower while you stood by with towel and a hands on
shampoo rinsing episode.
Now if you are so stupid as to write what you wrote here but now want
everyone to beleive WE have victimized you, you got serious
psychological problems boy.
> Very convenient for you I'm sure.
Not in the least. I'm thoroughly disgusted and have been since I first
saw what you wrote and what you defended. I'm still disgusted and do
what I have to to compensate for your lowlife behavior.
> > her take a cold shower for punishment, when she was
> > likely humiliated
>
> Wasn't humiliated. More like ignored the problem.
You can't even write "she" or her name, or even "the child." That's a
running theme when she comes up and you have to respond to a question
about her.
How do you know she wasn't humiliated? I doubt there is a kid of 6 or
older that has wet him or herself that isn't ashamed and embarrassed,
but you, you child development specialist parexcelance, have decided
you know what went on in her mind.
> > Can you see, funny man, why you so disgust me?
>
> Yes, I can see that you are an incredibly SMALL person
> who feels a need to inflate yourself and diminish others.
Isn't it odd then that some I deflate, and some I inflate. For
instance I'm quite happy to point out people that do good for others
and appreciate their skills and ethics.
I'm not, like you and some others here, a one trick pony. I can see
the world through more than one simple lense.
> Clearly you have self esteem problems and are constantly
> seeking ways to improved you perceived self-image.
R R R R ..... friend I have never been accused by those who know me of
being slightest bit in need of further appreciation for myself and my
skills, contributions, and talents. And I don't spank children. And I
don't second guess them if they have bowel or bladder accidents and
try to claim they did it out of uncaring or any other bogus piece of
bull**** excuse to overcontrol them.
> What you overlook however, is that your bad behavior,
Some might applaud me.
> whether it be kicking somebody you perceive as down,
You are still way to far from down. If you were you'd be out of food,
no place to live, the child would be back. I'd THEN feel sorry enough
for you to look up the homeless shelters and soup kitchens in your
area and provide you with a list and a fiver...just to help you along,
mind.
> or using put downs,
This ng is a river of putdowns, the more clever from your side of the
fence. I am blatant and don't fool around. I don't need to feel good
about myself, so I don't even hide what I say from myself....like you
and the Dung heap do. You think you are soooooooo...nicey nice, but
you are little scumbags.
> or accusing somebody you think
> can be easily accused,
Naw, I'll take on anybody I think is an asshole.
> of working to EXTEND damage
> that somebody else has already done,
Let me see now. I'd have to assume that you have been damaged somehow
in the child vs grown man encounter. Or maybe you are referring to
grandpa vs the Whore's jaw.
So I am supposed to feel sorry for a little twit that punishes six
year old girls with cold showers, and who let's themselves get whipped
by an elderly man.
Hokay, you are pitiful...that help a little?
> you make the
> mistake that your miscreant behavior makes you superior.
I have never gauged my own stature by the lowest but only by the
highest. If I could aspire to be anything on a par with say, Dan
Sullivan, THEN you might accuse me of trying to attain some
superiority...but why would I want to compare myself to a low life
snake?
No my heros are the doers. My number one is Rosa Parks. If ever a
human being had guts it was her. I know how dangerous bigots can be.
You wouldn't be worth to walk on the same street as her.
I barely am.
> It is the same psychology that some moron bully on
> the school grounds operates with.
Let me see now. I've never even spanked a child. Never purposely
humiliated a child...and if I slipped and caught myself I
apoligized...in front of everyone that was there when I said something
hurtful to them. Once stopped my school bus, 1977 I believe, after I'd
scolded a teen boy for being noisy and disruptive.
I set the brake, walked by on a very quiet bus, to his seat, squated
down to his eye level and delivered a heartfelt genuine apology and
stated that I was wrong and wouldn't do it again.
I immediately have 45 kids eating out of my hand and did so for three
more years. Can't tell you the fun we had on that bus and the grateful
parents.
> You think you are superior because you knock somebody
> else down.
No, I only think I've moved my worth up a peg when I've lifted someone
else up. I'd like to life that girl up back into her home and you
either growing up and getting with the program or hitting the road. I
might have earned a tiny notch on the universal judgement of worth.
> Heck, you even seek people who are down
> so you can kick somebody who is down.
I've been trying to get you to do right or go away. Does that look
like I'm seeing someone to kick? You aren't down, dummy. YOu are no
top of the world. No job, nothing to do but putter on your puter, and
pick up bottles and cans, and probably, if you can get it up, service
your fiance now and then.
Except for the abject rot you must feel inside you got to be doin'
great.
I haven't seen you whine so thoroughly before though. Maybe a little
of this is starting to seep in?
> You pick some of the easiers marks in society today.
In a ng full of them that all line up together and fight me? I'd
hardly call that "easy" though now you mention it the lot aren't my
equal.
> People who are accused of child abuse and neglect.
You have never ONCE seen me pick on people that are ACCUSED of child
abuse, only the ones that run out a pile of bull**** and fail to
convince me they are FALSELY accused, or that have enough sense to own
up and do something about it. I never pick on falsely accused, nor on
those that are actually looking for a way to make things right.
Does that tell you anything about yourself? I hope so.
> You have made many claims about who you are and what
> your experiences have been, but you are a giant liar.
I have said more than once, I am not a liar. I always tell the truth.
I have done what I say I have done.
> You have made many assertions using your "expertise"
> that have proven to be "gas"
I have seen many try to make it appear that way. When a person goes to
the trouble of reading through my posts and figures it out for
themselves they get it pretty easily that those making claims such as
yours are the liars and bull****ters, just have a smoother style. I
don't like 'smarm.'
> and as best I can tell
> we should look back to your earliest comments where
> you merely claimed a relative of yours works at CPS.
I'm still looking for that statement. I claimed that my relative
worked for the AG of the US in the western region. I have had one that
was a foster parent and I believe I shared that here.
I had a lady friend who worked for MS CPS many years ago..probably
about 1973 or 4..and then herself, in 76 or so, had a runin in another
state with CPS, where I came to her defense. That was my beginning
with hassling CPS.
Every one is gospel to the best of my memory. Which is pretty good.
> I think you are a variation on a sock puppet.
So then, since sock puppets are made ups of other people what would my
real name be as a current poster here?
Hell, you hang out with posters that run sockpuppets. Don't be coy,
tell us who they are...like we can't figure it out...r r r r
Hell, I've seen posts that were so out of character and writing skill
that it was dead on obvious who had written a post for them. You
people are so feeble.
> The information you presents shows signs that you
> have been fed info from a knowledgeable contact,
You bet your sweet bippy....since 1976 I've had hundreds of them,
possibly thousands by now. I've lost track of how many people I've
interviewed, (we called it debriefed in military intelligence where I
once worked) and I can get more info out of a five minute exchange
than most people can from hours of hard interrogation.
> but your ego didn't let you leave well enough alone.
Whoa! I thought I was supposed to have a weak ego...now I have a giant
one. Of two I'll take the second door Mike. r r r r
> After all, you wanted the info to prop up your
> purile little game.
My game would be...?
> People over 50 years old don't go onto open public
> channels and swear the way you do.
Jesus Christ swore, though he was a bit underage.
The focus on my swearing is a little trap I like to lay to see who
will be diverted from my claims and points made. It reveals some
things to me that are very helpful.
And you HARP on it, which reveals more. You are terrified of someone
else having any control in encounters with you, and that is one of
your reasons for coming here.
In the real world I'm just as abrasive, and as kind, as I am here. In
other words, a complete person, not a flopping little dying fish like
you.
> You are either
> a teen ager
Ah, now you have cut me to the quick. I do feel like I'm 19 sometimes,
but then my wife says something like, "Oh, cut that out, you aren't a
kid anymore."
Usually I'm exhausting myself flayling away with my splitting maul on
those big old rounds of timber I cut.
> or about the wierdest 50 year old on
> the internet.
Oh, youth, precious youth. If only I COULD see 50 again. I can't tell
you how much worse...or to my lights....better I was. I'd have driven
across the country to hunt you down and squeezed your little pencil
geek neck until you woke up and understood the viciousness of your
treatment of that little girl.
Then we'd have had a beer...well, maybe a case....and been good
buddies.
> Even the real perverts living on
> porn don't swear like you do on open public channels.
Wouldn't know. Don't go there. Don't care what THEY do, or why they
swear. I have my own reasons and they are not what you like to think
they are.
How is it you know what they do on porn channels?
> Your swearing displays an impulse control problem
Not in the least. Stop and think, I am writing this. I can't even
communicate a swearing to you until I stop and hit the send button. I
have tons of impulse control. I am exceedingly deliberate in all I do,
damn near the control freak you are, but I've made it work for people
and most especially children.
I learned that control working with mentally teens.
> that truly doesn't fit anybody in a supervisory
> role over social services of any kind.
Oh, I see. You think everyone is like you, with so little depth or
breadth that they can only act in one way in all situations.
Well, got a surprize for you, I'm NOT like you. I can swear at you,
and whisper sweet talk to someone else, and stand on a stage and make
my voice boom so the room shakes, and talk very softly and gently to a
frightened child that is afraid of me because I am so much bigger and
bigger people have hurt and frightened her.
You, on the other hand, can give her a shower and punish her and that
appears, you cold half dead fish, about all you can do.
You can't sacrifice. You can't hurt for her. You can't put your self
interest aside and swallow your stupidity and go through a few weeks
of inconvenience without spouting YOUR BILE AND HATRED and blowing our
all chances of her coming home.
Nope, between us I've brought children home...you have boosted at
least one out.
I'll swear all I want, asshole.
> Doug found that many of your technical assertions
> were incorrect.
Bull****. He reframed and expanded so that what I said appeared to be
different but anyone that can read could see that that was all he was
doing, not refuting me, just little slimy assed word games.
> Your claimed age never fit your stated personal
> experience in foster/adoption.
What is my age?
When did I say that I was formally adopted?
And when did I say the state was involved in my foster placement?
I very carefully described what my life was about, and YOU and I
presume other little pimple assed twits read into what you wanted to
find there.
> Your take on Joseph McCarthy was laughable.
> (He just went after a few military people you said.)
> I notice you said nothing about the photo links and
> text I posted about Joseph McCarthy and his tactics.
Oh but I did. And I pointed out exactly the truth. You bought all the
propaganda about him. It's been shown that he was again and again
linked with the HUAC, when in fact he was a Senator and had a committe
in the Senate that investigated. He got too damn close to some friends
of powerful people and he got his ass kicked for it and it was later
revealed. Hell, the head of HUAC, was very likely behind some of the
attacks on McC. And it's all but proven HE was a paid foreign agent.
You don't know **** little boy.
> The remote psychology was amusing also.
We apparently share a talent, or you seem to think so. I've noticed
out freely you diagnose grandma, and occasionally others, and myself.
> You got shot down by Doug.
Didn't happen. Self proclaimed winners often make the mistake that
anyone outside of their circle of neurotic friends buys the claim.
> You got an international "Diss" from Robert in Canada.
Awww...I guess I'm heart broken. I've dissed a few canucks in my time
so I guess I deserve a shot or two back. Robert the C has a few
thoughtful and useful things to say but he runs the lying party line
just a bit to hard from time to time.
>
> You seem to be acting like a nut case off your meds.
>
You had a lot of experience with nutcases of their meds? I have.
Treated them.
They don't act "nutty" much. They look and act more like you and your
Dung heap buddy. Kind of rational sounding and very stuck like a
broken record until they finally start to run down.
It's the noisey full time pain in the ass folks that usually turn out
to not be nuts at all, just uncomfortable to the worlds liars.
> Now you think I'm the weak target, and you're
> going to retreat back to haranguing me?
I do? Gosh, I guess I better see if I can cancel all my posts to the
"bit strong boys" then, eh?
No, I come back to you because you are still here and the mother is
still without her child and the child her mother. And I probably will
unless I find an asshome worse than you that I can go after. Yah know
CPSWatch?
I'm GREEGORTHEWHOREWatch.
> Nobody believes your lies and exaggeration.
Do you think I really care? And I'd watch that exaggeration if I were
you.
> What are you going to do now, "never spanked boy"?
You are now going to demonstrate your strength by emulating a little
dog****er? Tsk tsk tsk.
I've never said whether I was spanked or not. So not only are YOU a
liar, you quote a liar. I guess in some strange demented way, suitable
for such as you, that makes you a truth teller?
> You can see I'm pouting in a corner. :)
You are? Should I apologize? You aren't going to do something stupid
now, are you? Should we worry about you? Is there a hotline you can
call in Iowa?
> Boo hoo...
Don't cry.
> You've HURT my feelings... Hahaha.
Careful. Some people pee themselves if they laugh too hard, especially
if they are nervous.
So tell me, do you feel like something might be opening up for you,
something you don't really want to take a look at but you feel the
inevitability of it?
We certainly hope so.
Sometimes I have great hopes for you Greegor. And then........
Kane
> > instead of accepting help, slamming the helper.
> > I wonder why?
Well, let's see if he even once considers the child, or if this is
going to be all about HIM. Will it be an apology, an excuse, a
rationalization, or a plain old crock of ****?
> Because they never switched from the investigative
> role to the helping relationship, a requirement.
Not for you, bubbah. Only for the child and the mother. You can't be a
client of CPS. You couldn't however be named as a party if you would
so state and agree to services.
Let me see now if my old head can rustle up some memories of your
posts....oh yeah, you refused services not only for yourself but for
your "fiance."
Isn't that special.
> Because the ""help"" was much like Torquemada's
> rack, used to ""help"" people to reveal that they
> consorted with the devil.
You are still a victim of that idea that if you agree to services you
are agreeing you need them. If I didn't think you wanted the mother to
fail just to get the girl out of the house I'd have to call you
obtuse.
You had a chance to do what was right to get the girl back. You could
have walked...or you could have accepted services, then walked if they
didn't work, but no...it's all about Greg.
> > > Even worse, questions asked and reports generated
> > > made us feel that it was simply an extension of
> > > the witch hunt the caseworkers were running.
> >
> > All investigations feel like that. I recall a cop <snip>
>
> You didn't need 4th Amendment protections as a victim.
You didn't needed in your case, because you weren't married, you
weren't the child's father. You subjected yourself to the
investigation. And YOU were not the victim. Though I see you again
trying to cast yourself in that role.
> > > The FP SW however, did three things that have and will
> > > haunt CPS here.
> >
> > Do you think she's actually reading here?
>
> Possibly. Why?
How will she knows she's being haunted otherwise?
> > > She took a proposed plan from us to CPS.
> > Who wrote the plan Greegor, you?
>
> Both of us.
The nice CW took your plan to CPS for you, hmmmm?
> > > She suggested they should provide written
> > > STANDARDS regarding household clutter. She also informed
> > > us that DHS had funding that could help us rent a storage
> > > locker. CPS ignored or refused all three.
You weren't busted for household clutter. Stop kidding people. It was
ONE of the factors for removal, now wasn't it? Fess up boy it's good
for the soul.
> > Sometimes CPS has a small fund for discretionary use.
Yes, it's labeled Strengths Needs Based funding. It comes and it goes
according to the state budget and the vagaries of legislators. It's
usually completely overseen by a state leg. committee.
> >My bet is they
> > took a look at you and a look at their other cases and the others won
> > out. It can only go so far.
>
> Yes, but their hired expert recommended it.
> It was HER idea to ask for that help, not ours.
That's nice, and you have some reason to think they can't overrule him
or her without being "haunted" somehow? That money is meant to be used
for things like getting a cleaning crew in, or a homemaker service, or
buying the child (assuming the child is in home) a band instrument, or
financing a field trip so the family regains some of its normalcy.
It's never used to finance a boyfriend storing his ****. Nor should it
be.
> > Gee's I hope. Assuming that fund is ultimately tracable back to the
> > tax payer somewhere I'm damned please they didn't give it to you to
> > pay to store your [e.d.].
>
> They are supposed to spend money like that, which avoids
> the huge bill they've racked up as it is.
No they aren't. If every lazy **** ass bum that hooks up with a single
mother were to get some kind of support for things you wanted the
system would bust in a week. The countryside is littered with such
flecks of ****.
> For the amount of money they've spent on this case,
> we could have bought the storage locker company.
No doubt. Your holding them up, your intruding yourself on this
family, your failure to contribute has cost the state a pile of money.
All you had to do to cut the cost was take the damned assigned
services, or walk.
Instead you had to play little reform CPS hero and insure the child
wasn't coming home.
>
> Kane, I also notice that you bypassed the comment about how
> they refused to provide STANDARDS regarding clutter.
"Bypassed"?
Naw, just forgot to point out what a ditz you are. Sorry.
> That
> also, as I said, was recommended by THEIR OWN HIRED EXPERT,
> originating with our question to her.
The state, me, and everyone else do NOT want the bureaucrats kissing
your or anyone elses ass jumping through expensive hoops YOU want them
to so you can get out of the real reason the child was removed.
> I wouldn't want you to neglect that issue. :)
YOu better hope to hell I do, as everytime you bring them up or reply
you make yet a further ass of yourself and your motives become even
clearer.
> > It needs to be saved for those that truly need it.
>
> If they can blow the hundreds of thousands they HAVE,
> they could certainly have paid for a locker at about
> 100 a month for a few months.
No, actually I hope, as a tax payer, they make a very firm
discrimination between case costs and wiping the ass of some little
twit like you, on demand.
No, Greegor, the only reason there was any kind of cost at all, from
the beginning, was YOU were in the child's life and shouldn't have
been....well, not in the way you chose.
> They could have had
> hundreds of thousands to deal with REAL cases if they
> had decided not to blow it on a clutter case.
So, you wish to claim the only reason they removed the child was
"clutter?"
That's a classic. We see that again and again here and when the media
actually shows a case of clutter, it's filth to the knees, broken
plate glass on the coffee table with toddlers wandering about and gas
powered equipment sitting next to wood stoves in winter. Yeah, sure,
clutter.
> > > Caseworkers commonly confuse Domestic Abuse with Domestic Violence.
> >
> > So do I. Since the overlap is so extreme. On the other hand, from the
> > child's point of view, often the hitting (abusive violence) and the
> > screaming and yelling and threats to hit (abuse alone, non-hitting)
> > tend to have similar psychological results on the child.
>
> Domestic Violence is a legal definition.
The careful splitting of hairs is con talk.
> Domestic Abuse is anything the ""victim"" doesn't like.
Bull ****.
> While Abuse can be serious, the meaning is terribly
> dilute with all of the attitude stuff used in claims.
Load of crap. The biggest load is put out by the perps to try and con
the public into accepting the minimizing...hell, we've seen people do
it here with the old, "well what if she was asking for it" defense.
> If they didn't know it was just gas, then why
> have they avoided using any qualified child psychologist?
Because it costs money and you won't pay for it, right? You wouldn't
pay for one YOU got to pick asshole. We know about you pretty clearly
now.
You haven't figured out that you are NOT a party except by the
thrusting yourself into the family. You have NO legal relationship to
the child or the mother, and you know, and we know, that if you
stepped forward your ass would be liable for costs of all kinds that
you haven't paid.
> We think we know.
No, you are guessing again.
> > They are unable to differentiate at younger ages. Did you know there
> > are only three things that can startle a new born? Sudden overpowering
> > visual stimuli, sudden noise, or being dropped, even if caught.
> >
> > So it follows that little children carry around in them the need for
> > gentleness and kindness as a part of them growing up psychologically
> > healthy.
> >
> > They are afraid for their parents, for their siblings, their pets, and
> > themselves. Do YOU think children should have to live in a continual
> > atmosphere of fear or dread of fear erupting?
>
> Nope. That's why she did not.
> She was fearless, with one exception.
So tell us again why YOU think she wet herself. Lot's of kids that
live with brutes put up a brave front but their bodies betray them by
doing what kids do when they are scared, evacuate bowel or bladder.
> Prozac grandma grandma instilled in the child
> fears that the grandma is dying. This was used as
> part of her pathological programming of the child
> to feel guilty if she was not there for her
> grandma's dying days.
Careful, Dung will be after you for amateur psychologizing.
> The grandma was not
> diagnosed terminal, but IS prematurely senile and
> physically feeble. The grandma truly belongs
> in a nursing home because of the number and
> types of care issues.
Greegor the Whore, you could have, simply by being a truly loving and
caring parent, instead of a punitive self serving little twit, avoided
the whole damn mess. But you think you know better than anyone else
how to raise children and are a spanker and a punisher for normal
reactions to stress.
Grandma, without even knowing it no doubt, has done that child a great
favor...created enough havoc through being ill to bring things to a
boil. You needed to be stopped.
> This and some other inappropriate behaviors such
> as window peeping and stalking, are exactly why
> we began limiting contact between the child and
> her grandmother.
Grandmother was doubtlessly worried about you being in the household
and was trying to find out what you were doing to her grandchild.
Turns out she was on the right track.
> That is the root cause of the entire case, really.
No, Greegor, YOU were the root cause and you know it. Had you NOT been
in the picture the gparents would have had nothing to go on. YOu
provided the problem to get the state involved.
> The grandma became more and more psycho and we
> were concerned.
I don't know many people more psychologically stable than myself. I've
proven it time and again under extreme duress and stress, twice in
combat, and if I thought YOU were staying home to take of MY
granddaughter and I could do nothing about it I daresay I might well
have gone a little psycho.
> When asked, other family members said
> "Well, you know how she is.". (Each seperately.)
They were trying to not makes things worse for their relative, your
"fiance." You should thank them for not executing a grandpa's number
on you.
> So we began limiting contact, and the psycho
> phone calls began.
Let me see now. Here's a stranger that's moved into their daughter's
trailer home, doesn't work, drags in his clutter, takes to spanking
and showering their gdaughter and they are scared ****less that more
could be happening...and no doubt they found out about the showering,
and YOU cut of contact and you are calling THEM psycho...r r r r.
I'd say they had a highly appropriate response and if anything grandpa
should sue YOU for making the gmother ill. YOU created mountains of
stress for her.
> Obsessive repetitive phone calls,
> never leaving answering machine messages.
Nope. Probably wanted to make sure you were interupted doing your
towel about routine.
> One called ID collapsed the calls, but the other one
> showed at times she had called like 20 times within
> a two hour span when the family was out shopping.
She no doubt was frantic thinking of what you might be doing to her
granddaugher. If you weren't such a controlling putz you'd have
understood that and set up MORE time with the gdaughter and MORE
contact with MORE of an open door policy.
YOU, yahoo, were creating the appearance of the exactly the scenerio
that CPS all over the country as one of most high risk ones for kids
when it comes to sexual abuse....mother's boyfriend.
And there you were, isolating, showering, kid ****ing herself (one of
the signs that needs to be further checked out for possible sex
abuse).
> Another time I answered and explained that SO was
> busy cooking, and unless it was an emergency if she
> could call back later. The grandma insisted it
> was an emergency and then asked SO how the school
> pictures turned out.
That was because you were creating isolation and appearing like you
had something to hide.
If you were living with my daughter <ugh ugh ugh> and weren't
answering the phone for long periods I'd be damn worried about what
was going on and wanting to speak to my daughter so she could ask for
help if needed and I'd say anything to get her to the phone.
> SO was angry and I was angry.
Your SO is a dupe, and at this point apparently a willing one. And if
SHE couldn't figure out and response to her mothers terrors about you
being in the house then it's no wonder gma was upset.
> They also got DEMANDING about visits, apparently
> expecting visits every other weekend.
Grandparents every other weekend you think is abnormal? Where you from
boy, Neuw Yawk...r r r r ...Dan'll get me for that one, for sure.
> They began "pumping" the child for dirt, and
> second guessing many parental decisions.
By that time they'd have to be getting frantic. Anyone that bothers to
read up on sexual molesting perps knows they groom kids to hide the
truth. And one of the favorite ploys of molesters is to isolate the
victim and the victim's parent from other family members.
> At one point the grandma even complained that we were
> considering getting the child (all of us) flu shots.
>
> The grandma thought it was hurtful to the child.
>
> Days of trying to convince the child that the
> big owie was better than getting the flu was
> all destroyed by this comment.
Nuts, obviously. I can see why though.
> And the grandfather realized how stupid her comment
> was and chastized the grandma on the spot.
Oh, then the gpa wasn't nuts, he just finally got the message when he
punched your lights out.
> Another time the grandma referred to the
> 7 year old child as "baby" and I complained
> that this was inappropriate for a 7 year old.
> Another relative was there and heartily agreed.
I call my wife's daughter (my step -) honey, and sweetie and all kinds
of child names...she's 26. I call my own daughter the same kind of
names, and both like it. Now if you had said she had call her "A" baby
I might be moved a bit to your side.
But an old lady calling a 7 year old girl, "baby?" Come now Greegor.
You were just in a power struggle with them, and looking for every
excuse possible to keep control of all parties.
I note you've never had your "finance" here dispite repeated
invitations. Is she too feeble minded to handle what we say here and
correct us where we are wrong...r r r....or does it scare you ****less
not to have control of her?
> > > The Domestic Abuse category is loaded with every imagineable
> > > Feminist political issue. Even referring to your mate
> > > as "my wife" raises their hackles,
> >
> > Your citation please.
>
> 1. The Duluth Method, Domestic Abuse Project, Duluth Minnesota
>
> 2. Actual experience in the Duluth Method classes
Please enumerate those things that actually denoted feminist political
issues.
And your "mate" was not your "wife" so I can see what's up there.
You don't think you might have been projecting a little tiny bit on
them because they had the authority for the moment and that bothers
the hell out of you? Hmmmmmmm?
Put up a website and scan in their handouts and let us see what they
actually said.
> > Have you been accused of domestic abuse or violence?
>
> Not with this family, ever.
Nmmmm....now that is very interesting. You sure you want to pursue
this further here in a ng?
> Prior convictions.
Oh dear. And I'll bet you've been saying over and over since I brought
it up,
"I am not a controller." "I am not a controller."
> Ask Dan about Bipolar wives. But mine was worse than his.
Dan had a Bipolar wife? Did he share that her in the ng or did you
take something told to you in confidence and dump it here without
permission, you little controlling feeble impotent twit?
I guess we'll have to wait and see if Dan cares to share something or
not.
> > Has your "fiance" been accused of domestic violence or abuse?
>
> No
So now she has a man living with her, her daughter gone probably for
her entire childhood, and mommy has another baby to feed and look
after, except when you get out of the house and collect cans and
bottles.
Hokay.
> > > Emotional abuse is one that amuses me.
> >
> > I'll be it does.
>
> > Did you laugh when you humilated the child by making
> > her strip naked while you watched
>
> Watched? You made that up.
She showered with her clothes on? Really? And all this time you didn't
tell us? You let us think you were a dip**** turd?
Gosh, I'm sorry, but you should have come clean.
> Just so you could keep
> pretending that I am a pervert.
Greegor, I trust one day that you will actually grow up. I don't have
much faith in my hope, but hey, I've seen more screwed up people than
you do it.
And if you do one of the most embarrassing things you are going to
have to face is your passive agressive style of setting others up to
make YOU the victim when YOU have actually victimized someone else.
You have NOT described your showering and punishments in any way BUT
so that people would see an image of you making a child strip and get
naked into the shower while you stood by with towel and a hands on
shampoo rinsing episode.
Now if you are so stupid as to write what you wrote here but now want
everyone to beleive WE have victimized you, you got serious
psychological problems boy.
> Very convenient for you I'm sure.
Not in the least. I'm thoroughly disgusted and have been since I first
saw what you wrote and what you defended. I'm still disgusted and do
what I have to to compensate for your lowlife behavior.
> > her take a cold shower for punishment, when she was
> > likely humiliated
>
> Wasn't humiliated. More like ignored the problem.
You can't even write "she" or her name, or even "the child." That's a
running theme when she comes up and you have to respond to a question
about her.
How do you know she wasn't humiliated? I doubt there is a kid of 6 or
older that has wet him or herself that isn't ashamed and embarrassed,
but you, you child development specialist parexcelance, have decided
you know what went on in her mind.
> > Can you see, funny man, why you so disgust me?
>
> Yes, I can see that you are an incredibly SMALL person
> who feels a need to inflate yourself and diminish others.
Isn't it odd then that some I deflate, and some I inflate. For
instance I'm quite happy to point out people that do good for others
and appreciate their skills and ethics.
I'm not, like you and some others here, a one trick pony. I can see
the world through more than one simple lense.
> Clearly you have self esteem problems and are constantly
> seeking ways to improved you perceived self-image.
R R R R ..... friend I have never been accused by those who know me of
being slightest bit in need of further appreciation for myself and my
skills, contributions, and talents. And I don't spank children. And I
don't second guess them if they have bowel or bladder accidents and
try to claim they did it out of uncaring or any other bogus piece of
bull**** excuse to overcontrol them.
> What you overlook however, is that your bad behavior,
Some might applaud me.
> whether it be kicking somebody you perceive as down,
You are still way to far from down. If you were you'd be out of food,
no place to live, the child would be back. I'd THEN feel sorry enough
for you to look up the homeless shelters and soup kitchens in your
area and provide you with a list and a fiver...just to help you along,
mind.
> or using put downs,
This ng is a river of putdowns, the more clever from your side of the
fence. I am blatant and don't fool around. I don't need to feel good
about myself, so I don't even hide what I say from myself....like you
and the Dung heap do. You think you are soooooooo...nicey nice, but
you are little scumbags.
> or accusing somebody you think
> can be easily accused,
Naw, I'll take on anybody I think is an asshole.
> of working to EXTEND damage
> that somebody else has already done,
Let me see now. I'd have to assume that you have been damaged somehow
in the child vs grown man encounter. Or maybe you are referring to
grandpa vs the Whore's jaw.
So I am supposed to feel sorry for a little twit that punishes six
year old girls with cold showers, and who let's themselves get whipped
by an elderly man.
Hokay, you are pitiful...that help a little?
> you make the
> mistake that your miscreant behavior makes you superior.
I have never gauged my own stature by the lowest but only by the
highest. If I could aspire to be anything on a par with say, Dan
Sullivan, THEN you might accuse me of trying to attain some
superiority...but why would I want to compare myself to a low life
snake?
No my heros are the doers. My number one is Rosa Parks. If ever a
human being had guts it was her. I know how dangerous bigots can be.
You wouldn't be worth to walk on the same street as her.
I barely am.
> It is the same psychology that some moron bully on
> the school grounds operates with.
Let me see now. I've never even spanked a child. Never purposely
humiliated a child...and if I slipped and caught myself I
apoligized...in front of everyone that was there when I said something
hurtful to them. Once stopped my school bus, 1977 I believe, after I'd
scolded a teen boy for being noisy and disruptive.
I set the brake, walked by on a very quiet bus, to his seat, squated
down to his eye level and delivered a heartfelt genuine apology and
stated that I was wrong and wouldn't do it again.
I immediately have 45 kids eating out of my hand and did so for three
more years. Can't tell you the fun we had on that bus and the grateful
parents.
> You think you are superior because you knock somebody
> else down.
No, I only think I've moved my worth up a peg when I've lifted someone
else up. I'd like to life that girl up back into her home and you
either growing up and getting with the program or hitting the road. I
might have earned a tiny notch on the universal judgement of worth.
> Heck, you even seek people who are down
> so you can kick somebody who is down.
I've been trying to get you to do right or go away. Does that look
like I'm seeing someone to kick? You aren't down, dummy. YOu are no
top of the world. No job, nothing to do but putter on your puter, and
pick up bottles and cans, and probably, if you can get it up, service
your fiance now and then.
Except for the abject rot you must feel inside you got to be doin'
great.
I haven't seen you whine so thoroughly before though. Maybe a little
of this is starting to seep in?
> You pick some of the easiers marks in society today.
In a ng full of them that all line up together and fight me? I'd
hardly call that "easy" though now you mention it the lot aren't my
equal.
> People who are accused of child abuse and neglect.
You have never ONCE seen me pick on people that are ACCUSED of child
abuse, only the ones that run out a pile of bull**** and fail to
convince me they are FALSELY accused, or that have enough sense to own
up and do something about it. I never pick on falsely accused, nor on
those that are actually looking for a way to make things right.
Does that tell you anything about yourself? I hope so.
> You have made many claims about who you are and what
> your experiences have been, but you are a giant liar.
I have said more than once, I am not a liar. I always tell the truth.
I have done what I say I have done.
> You have made many assertions using your "expertise"
> that have proven to be "gas"
I have seen many try to make it appear that way. When a person goes to
the trouble of reading through my posts and figures it out for
themselves they get it pretty easily that those making claims such as
yours are the liars and bull****ters, just have a smoother style. I
don't like 'smarm.'
> and as best I can tell
> we should look back to your earliest comments where
> you merely claimed a relative of yours works at CPS.
I'm still looking for that statement. I claimed that my relative
worked for the AG of the US in the western region. I have had one that
was a foster parent and I believe I shared that here.
I had a lady friend who worked for MS CPS many years ago..probably
about 1973 or 4..and then herself, in 76 or so, had a runin in another
state with CPS, where I came to her defense. That was my beginning
with hassling CPS.
Every one is gospel to the best of my memory. Which is pretty good.
> I think you are a variation on a sock puppet.
So then, since sock puppets are made ups of other people what would my
real name be as a current poster here?
Hell, you hang out with posters that run sockpuppets. Don't be coy,
tell us who they are...like we can't figure it out...r r r r
Hell, I've seen posts that were so out of character and writing skill
that it was dead on obvious who had written a post for them. You
people are so feeble.
> The information you presents shows signs that you
> have been fed info from a knowledgeable contact,
You bet your sweet bippy....since 1976 I've had hundreds of them,
possibly thousands by now. I've lost track of how many people I've
interviewed, (we called it debriefed in military intelligence where I
once worked) and I can get more info out of a five minute exchange
than most people can from hours of hard interrogation.
> but your ego didn't let you leave well enough alone.
Whoa! I thought I was supposed to have a weak ego...now I have a giant
one. Of two I'll take the second door Mike. r r r r
> After all, you wanted the info to prop up your
> purile little game.
My game would be...?
> People over 50 years old don't go onto open public
> channels and swear the way you do.
Jesus Christ swore, though he was a bit underage.
The focus on my swearing is a little trap I like to lay to see who
will be diverted from my claims and points made. It reveals some
things to me that are very helpful.
And you HARP on it, which reveals more. You are terrified of someone
else having any control in encounters with you, and that is one of
your reasons for coming here.
In the real world I'm just as abrasive, and as kind, as I am here. In
other words, a complete person, not a flopping little dying fish like
you.
> You are either
> a teen ager
Ah, now you have cut me to the quick. I do feel like I'm 19 sometimes,
but then my wife says something like, "Oh, cut that out, you aren't a
kid anymore."
Usually I'm exhausting myself flayling away with my splitting maul on
those big old rounds of timber I cut.
> or about the wierdest 50 year old on
> the internet.
Oh, youth, precious youth. If only I COULD see 50 again. I can't tell
you how much worse...or to my lights....better I was. I'd have driven
across the country to hunt you down and squeezed your little pencil
geek neck until you woke up and understood the viciousness of your
treatment of that little girl.
Then we'd have had a beer...well, maybe a case....and been good
buddies.
> Even the real perverts living on
> porn don't swear like you do on open public channels.
Wouldn't know. Don't go there. Don't care what THEY do, or why they
swear. I have my own reasons and they are not what you like to think
they are.
How is it you know what they do on porn channels?
> Your swearing displays an impulse control problem
Not in the least. Stop and think, I am writing this. I can't even
communicate a swearing to you until I stop and hit the send button. I
have tons of impulse control. I am exceedingly deliberate in all I do,
damn near the control freak you are, but I've made it work for people
and most especially children.
I learned that control working with mentally teens.
> that truly doesn't fit anybody in a supervisory
> role over social services of any kind.
Oh, I see. You think everyone is like you, with so little depth or
breadth that they can only act in one way in all situations.
Well, got a surprize for you, I'm NOT like you. I can swear at you,
and whisper sweet talk to someone else, and stand on a stage and make
my voice boom so the room shakes, and talk very softly and gently to a
frightened child that is afraid of me because I am so much bigger and
bigger people have hurt and frightened her.
You, on the other hand, can give her a shower and punish her and that
appears, you cold half dead fish, about all you can do.
You can't sacrifice. You can't hurt for her. You can't put your self
interest aside and swallow your stupidity and go through a few weeks
of inconvenience without spouting YOUR BILE AND HATRED and blowing our
all chances of her coming home.
Nope, between us I've brought children home...you have boosted at
least one out.
I'll swear all I want, asshole.
> Doug found that many of your technical assertions
> were incorrect.
Bull****. He reframed and expanded so that what I said appeared to be
different but anyone that can read could see that that was all he was
doing, not refuting me, just little slimy assed word games.
> Your claimed age never fit your stated personal
> experience in foster/adoption.
What is my age?
When did I say that I was formally adopted?
And when did I say the state was involved in my foster placement?
I very carefully described what my life was about, and YOU and I
presume other little pimple assed twits read into what you wanted to
find there.
> Your take on Joseph McCarthy was laughable.
> (He just went after a few military people you said.)
> I notice you said nothing about the photo links and
> text I posted about Joseph McCarthy and his tactics.
Oh but I did. And I pointed out exactly the truth. You bought all the
propaganda about him. It's been shown that he was again and again
linked with the HUAC, when in fact he was a Senator and had a committe
in the Senate that investigated. He got too damn close to some friends
of powerful people and he got his ass kicked for it and it was later
revealed. Hell, the head of HUAC, was very likely behind some of the
attacks on McC. And it's all but proven HE was a paid foreign agent.
You don't know **** little boy.
> The remote psychology was amusing also.
We apparently share a talent, or you seem to think so. I've noticed
out freely you diagnose grandma, and occasionally others, and myself.
> You got shot down by Doug.
Didn't happen. Self proclaimed winners often make the mistake that
anyone outside of their circle of neurotic friends buys the claim.
> You got an international "Diss" from Robert in Canada.
Awww...I guess I'm heart broken. I've dissed a few canucks in my time
so I guess I deserve a shot or two back. Robert the C has a few
thoughtful and useful things to say but he runs the lying party line
just a bit to hard from time to time.
>
> You seem to be acting like a nut case off your meds.
>
You had a lot of experience with nutcases of their meds? I have.
Treated them.
They don't act "nutty" much. They look and act more like you and your
Dung heap buddy. Kind of rational sounding and very stuck like a
broken record until they finally start to run down.
It's the noisey full time pain in the ass folks that usually turn out
to not be nuts at all, just uncomfortable to the worlds liars.
> Now you think I'm the weak target, and you're
> going to retreat back to haranguing me?
I do? Gosh, I guess I better see if I can cancel all my posts to the
"bit strong boys" then, eh?
No, I come back to you because you are still here and the mother is
still without her child and the child her mother. And I probably will
unless I find an asshome worse than you that I can go after. Yah know
CPSWatch?
I'm GREEGORTHEWHOREWatch.
> Nobody believes your lies and exaggeration.
Do you think I really care? And I'd watch that exaggeration if I were
you.
> What are you going to do now, "never spanked boy"?
You are now going to demonstrate your strength by emulating a little
dog****er? Tsk tsk tsk.
I've never said whether I was spanked or not. So not only are YOU a
liar, you quote a liar. I guess in some strange demented way, suitable
for such as you, that makes you a truth teller?
> You can see I'm pouting in a corner. :)
You are? Should I apologize? You aren't going to do something stupid
now, are you? Should we worry about you? Is there a hotline you can
call in Iowa?
> Boo hoo...
Don't cry.
> You've HURT my feelings... Hahaha.
Careful. Some people pee themselves if they laugh too hard, especially
if they are nervous.
So tell me, do you feel like something might be opening up for you,
something you don't really want to take a look at but you feel the
inevitability of it?
We certainly hope so.
Sometimes I have great hopes for you Greegor. And then........
Kane