Follow the money....unadopt egregious adoption SCAM

Subject: Follow the money...unadopt egregious adoption scam
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 11/10/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/new...sh/7194888.htm


NJ family adding to family for the cash, only. Column written by conservative
writer and talk show host, Michael Smerconish.

Fern5827 wrote:

Subject: Follow the money...unadopt egregious adoption scam
From: (Fern5827)
Date: 11/10/2003 1:17 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/new...sh/7194888.htm

NJ family adding to family for the cash, only. Column written by conservative
writer and talk show host, Michael Smerconish.

What a surprise, Fern. A conservative writer and talk show host who objects to
intervention designed to protect children. But I have to keep in mind that you
support churches that hang children by rafters and beat them, as long as the
parents approve.

I would think a conservative would want protection of children. I would think a
conservative would regard and respect children. But I'm mistaken. Conservatives
view children as objects, subject to whatever pain and abuse a family decides is
appropriate in the name of discipline.

How are your children, Fern?

LaVonne

Fine.

How do you think the Congressional hearings about CPS are proceeding?

Do you think all members of the Congressional committee are child abusers
because they question how CPS spends my not insignificant tax dollars?

On 14 Nov 2003 20:26:07 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:

Fine.

Isn't it lovely when we agree?

How do you think the Congressional hearings about CPS are proceeding?

I don't know. I tend not to make judgements before hand. I would
assume they are proceeding according to law.

I'm as concerned about proper use of my tax dollars as the next
person.

Your attempts to cast me as some kind of CPS apologist are wearing
rather thin.

What you pretend is defense of CPS on my part is nothing more than an
unwillingness to make accusations that are not supported by evidence
weighed properly by our government system.

Should congress determine that there needs to be changes I may
question the wisdom of such changes but I will congratulate all
involved should it result in actual improvements and NOT cause more
child abuse.

What could be fairer than that? A ranting screaming mindless babbling
against CPS such as you and your cohorts indulge in rather frequently?
And lie upon lie upon lie?

You don't even adequatly research what you post.

For example a recent article you cited makes the claim the adopted
children get Medicaid. Madicaid is only available based on the
financial limits of the recipient.

In other words, it's only good through the post adoption period. Once
an adoption is final it could only cover the child should the family
be destitute. Or if expenses so far exceeded their personal insurance
covereage that it put them in the same position the child occupied
prior to finalization.

But then even the so called expert being quoted apparently didn't know
any better.

Do you think all members of the Congressional committee are child
abusers
because they question how CPS spends my not insignificant tax
dollars?

Why would I think that?

I simply know deep in my tender heart that child abusers of all kinds
are delighted with the proceedings.

And not a few of their supporters express the same glee and wish for
destruction of child protection in this country.

Do you think they are not and do not?

So, what did happen to your Saplings, Ponderosa?

Kane