Official "Look How Insane and Shitty ALL GOP Officials Are" Thread

[TUFKAK]

Shit I won’t marry for that exact reason so. Sucking the right dick or eating the right clit shouldn’t be a pay day. 

[Ghost_MH]

8 minutes ago, TUFKAK said:

Shit I won’t marry for that exact reason so. Sucking the right dick or eating the right clit shouldn’t be a pay day. 

 

It is absolutely not. I make like three time what my ex makes and aren't paying any alimony without the need for a prenup or anything. The only thing I agreed to do was keep her on my insurance as long as it didn't cost me anything to leave her there.

 

Alimony is not an automatic thing. If there are retired women in Florida that are getting alimony for life then they're getting that because they gave up something in exchange. That something could be any type of career, because it's extraordinarily difficult to begin a new career in their old age when they have zero work experience. Could be in exchange for ownership in a shared business or shared stock or shared properties.

 

Also, it should be noted they aren't getting alimony if they're at fault for the breakdown.

 

The only place alimony might be more automatic like the way you're thinking is if you cheated or were abusive or something to that effect. Like, Jeff Bezos is even dumber than he looks because he was filthy rich with no prenup and decided to have an affair. He could have called for a no fault divorce and gotten a better settlement in court, but that's hard to do when his very public actions are what lead to the divorce.

[TUFKAK]

27 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

It is absolutely not. I make like three time what my ex makes and aren't paying any alimony without the need for a prenup or anything. The only thing I agreed to do was keep her on my insurance as long as it didn't cost me anything to leave her there.

 

Alimony is not an automatic thing. If there are retired women in Florida that are getting alimony for life then they're getting that because they gave up something in exchange. That something could be any type of career, because it's extraordinarily difficult to begin a new career in their old age when they have zero work experience. Could be in exchange for ownership in a shared business or shared stock or shared properties.

 

Also, it should be noted they aren't getting alimony if they're at fault for the breakdown.

 

The only place alimony might be more automatic like the way you're thinking is if you cheated or were abusive or something to that effect. Like, Jeff Bezos is even dumber than he looks because he was filthy rich with no prenup and decided to have an affair. He could have called for a no fault divorce and gotten a better settlement in court, but that's hard to do when his very public actions are what lead to the divorce.

Lol

 

I don’t care, sometimes you make bad choices, thankfully I never will. I’m not the on hook because you decided not to get a career to stay at home.

 

And my dad got primary custody of me therefore the trend doesn’t matter. Despite him having to give my birth giver in the same state agency who made More half his pension and the house my grandparents gave him.

 

I won’t marry, I support this decision and my contract with my fiancé will continue. Our mutual lawyer contract is iron clad and recorded with multiple copies.

 

Id go into depth on it but clearly a losing battle here.

 

oh fuck I forgot this

 

my birth givers child support was 159 a month back in the 90s, state firefighter, my dads alimony was over 300 while being a mechanic. I saw the receipts. Fuck this system 

 

Want my marine corps friends examples? I have friends now in healthcare who are contributing alimony to their exes too. My friend Trisha is getting ducked, she loses 60% of her paycheck, her ex has a lifestyle to maintain after all. They clearly sacrificed so much to not amount to shit while she became an MD.

 

 

 

 

[Ghost_MH]

42 minutes ago, TUFKAK said:

Lol

 

I don’t care, sometimes you make bad choices, thankfully I never will. I’m not the on hook because you decided not to get a career to stay at home.

 

And my dad got primary custody of me therefore the trend doesn’t matter. Despite him having to give my birth giver in the same state agency who made More half his pension and the house my grandparents gave him.

 

I won’t marry, I support this decision and my contract with my fiancé will continue. Our mutual lawyer contract is iron clad and recorded with multiple copies.

 

Id go into depth on it but clearly a losing battle here.

 

oh fuck I forgot this

 

my birth givers child support was 159 a month back in the 90s, state firefighter, my dads alimony was over 300 while being a mechanic. I saw the receipts. Fuck this system 

 

Want my marine corps friends examples? I have friends now in healthcare who are contributing alimony to their exes too. My friend Trisha is getting ducked, she loses 60% of her paycheck, her ex has a lifestyle to maintain after all. They clearly sacrificed so much to not amount to shit while she became an MD.

 

Sounds like awful lawyers and folks signing papers without thinking things through. Divorces in the 90s and earlier are an entirely different ballgame, though. However, I will say this to anyone in this position. If your state allows it, never get a finalized divorce. In Massachusetts any divorce can be left open for future changes. That is, you can renegotiate alimony if the judge required you to pay at the time of divorce but the ex-spouse's situation changed and made the deal unfair or untenable.

 

The only part of my divorce that's open is anything related to the kids.

 

Sorry, this is really fresh in my head because I literally just spent the last year going through a divorce that was finalized just last week. My negotiations with the judge have me keep my ex on my insurance plan as long as it doesn't cost me anything and I have to maintain at least $300k worth of life insurance for the kids. Neither costs me anything I wasn't already paying for, so I'm not upset. This in spite of having the "toughest family court judge in easter Mass". I put that in quotes, but she did force us to go through nearly a year and back and forths to reach an agreement she, the judge, would accept.

[TUFKAK]

Lindsey Graham booed in his own backyard by MAGA crowd

WWW.NEWSWEEK.COM

---

The real reasons why the crowd was booing Senator Lindsey Graham are unknown, he previously defied a GOP pushback against sending aid to Ukraine.

 

[CastletonSnob]

Abbott sent more migrants to LA the other day.

We shouldn't be asking how people could vote for Abbott and DeSantis. We should be asking why the DOJ isn't investigating them for human trafficking.

[BloodyHell]

1 hour ago, CastletonSnob said:

Abbott sent more migrants to LA the other day.

We shouldn't be asking how people could vote for Abbott and DeSantis. We should be asking why the DOJ isn't investigating them for human trafficking.

I mean, putting willing people on a bus isn’t human trafficking, no matter how badly some want it to be.

 

If they were forced, then sure. But it doesn’t sound like they were. 

[Nokra]

1 minute ago, BloodyHell said:

I mean, putting willing people on a bus isn’t human trafficking, no matter how badly some want it to be.

 

If they were forced, then sure. But it doesn’t sound like they were. 

Without looking into the specifics of this situation, I would guess it probably depends a lot on definitions and what exactly was said or done. 

 

Were they forced at gunpoint? Obviously not. Were they misled (w/ promises of aid, visas, etc.)? I would be willing to bet that they were. Whether that fits the definition of "human trafficking" probably depends on who you're asking, the jurisdiction, etc. 

 

Hopefully someone with more knowledge can answer. 

[BloodyHell]

On 7/1/2023 at 10:24 PM, Ghost_MH said:

 

Sounds like awful lawyers and folks signing papers without thinking things through. Divorces in the 90s and earlier are an entirely different ballgame, though. However, I will say this to anyone in this position. If your state allows it, never get a finalized divorce. In Massachusetts any divorce can be left open for future changes. That is, you can renegotiate alimony if the judge required you to pay at the time of divorce but the ex-spouse's situation changed and made the deal unfair or untenable.

 

The only part of my divorce that's open is anything related to the kids.

 

Sorry, this is really fresh in my head because I literally just spent the last year going through a divorce that was finalized just last week. My negotiations with the judge have me keep my ex on my insurance plan as long as it doesn't cost me anything and I have to maintain at least $300k worth of life insurance for the kids. Neither costs me anything I wasn't already paying for, so I'm not upset. This in spite of having the "toughest family court judge in easter Mass". I put that in quotes, but she did force us to go through nearly a year and back and forths to reach an agreement she, the judge, would accept.

But it sounds like you’re applying Mass. family law to Florida. Either way, aside from splitting assets gained while together, I think the practice of ongoing alimony is pretty gross.

 

Child support obviously is important, but  having been a wife certainly shouldn’t entitle you to monthly payments because uou don’t want to support yourself. Alimony isn’t rare as you seem to be making it out to be. I have multiple friends who got the short end of the stick in divorce, losing their homes, and having to pay child support (as they should) AND alimony. 
 

Every person should be responsible for their children. Nobody should be responsible for their ex beyond the initial splitting of profits. 
 

aAnd if you have any amount of wealth going into a marriage, you’d be insane not to get a pre-nup nowadays. 

[BloodyHell]

5 minutes ago, Nokra said:

Without looking into the specifics of this situation, I would guess it probably depends a lot on definitions and what exactly was said or done. 

 

Were they forced at gunpoint? Obviously not. Were they misled (w/ promises of aid, visas, etc.)? I would be willing to bet that they were. Whether that fits the definition of "human trafficking" probably depends on who you're asking, the jurisdiction, etc. 

 

Hopefully someone with more knowledge can answer. 

Yes, but castleton is very hyperbolic in his opinions on Abbott and Texas. The place definitely has problems, but every time they do something, he pushes the most extreme interpretation.

[stepee]

l

m

a

o

[Jason]

imagine being able to make your fake internet persona whatever the fuck you want it to be and landing on incorporating "human trafficking is okay actually"

[stepee]

leave it to this board to only look at the bad side of human trafficking 

[Keyser_Soze]

3 minutes ago, stepee said:

leave it to this board to only look at the bad side of human trafficking 

 

A free bus ride is a gift. Do you realize how expensive that is? Some people are just ungrateful.

[Ghost_MH]

23 minutes ago, BloodyHell said:

But it sounds like you’re applying Mass. family law to Florida. Either way, aside from splitting assets gained while together, I think the practice of ongoing alimony is pretty gross.

 

Child support obviously is important, but  having been a wife certainly shouldn’t entitle you to monthly payments because uou don’t want to support yourself. Alimony isn’t rare as you seem to be making it out to be. I have multiple friends who got the short end of the stick in divorce, losing their homes, and having to pay child support (as they should) AND alimony. 
 

Every person should be responsible for their children. Nobody should be responsible for their ex beyond the initial splitting of profits. 
 

aAnd if you have any amount of wealth going into a marriage, you’d be insane not to get a pre-nup nowadays. 

 

I'm not using anecdotal evidence here. I've been going all over this stuff. I had a million questions regarding everything along the way. When even an amicable divorce, like mine, takes over a year to be settled, these questions come up. Everywhere I've looked says only ~10% of divorces in this day and age include alimony. Even going back 60 years that number was only ~25%. Certainly not rare, but also not so common that I'd refuse to get married for fear of paying alimony. Even at 10% a decade ago, it's likely lower today since it's been on a steady decline for the last hundred years.

 

How bread-winning women are driving alimony reform | Reuters

WWW.REUTERS.COM

---

When alimony reform comes to Florida, it may be too late for Tarie MacMillan, a 65-year-old who runs a jewelry business near Tampa.

 

The biggest reason for alimony is for a spouse, often a stay at home wife, needing time to get on her feet after her husband's infidelities. Considering some 20-40% of divorces come about because of cheating, that means even being unfaithful isn't a surefire way to be stuck with alimony.

 

If someone you know is paying a good amount of alimony for "no reason other than the spouse didn't want to support themselves" then there's a good chance they're hiding something from you. Even with that 10% number, alimony usually only lasts as long as a judge deems reasonable for the spouse to get on their feet and support themselves.

[BloodyHell]

24 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I'm not using anecdotal evidence here. I've been going all over this stuff. I had a million questions regarding everything along the way. When even an amicable divorce, like mine, takes over a year to be settled, these questions come up. Everywhere I've looked says only ~10% of divorces in this day and age include alimony. Even going back 60 years that number was only ~25%. Certainly not rare, but also not so common that I'd refuse to get married for fear of paying alimony. Even at 10% a decade ago, it's likely lower today since it's been on a steady decline for the last hundred years.

 

How bread-winning women are driving alimony reform | Reuters

WWW.REUTERS.COM

---

When alimony reform comes to Florida, it may be too late for Tarie MacMillan, a 65-year-old who runs a jewelry business near Tampa.

 

The biggest reason for alimony is for a spouse, often a stay at home wife, needing time to get on her feet after her husband's infidelities. Considering some 20-40% of divorces come about because of cheating, that means even being unfaithful isn't a surefire way to be stuck with alimony.

 

If someone you know is paying a good amount of alimony for "no reason other than the spouse didn't want to support themselves" then there's a good chance they're hiding something from you. Even with that 10% number, alimony usually only lasts as long as a judge deems reasonable for the spouse to get on their feet and support themselves.

Im not sure how long two of my friends will have to pay, but one is going on 3 years, on top of child support for two children, and in the end she got the house because she guilted him with “The kids shouldn’t have to leave their home”, and as I’m sure you know, divorced fathers have feelings too, and also want to put kids before themselves.

 

my point is, the standard should be dividing shared assets in cash, and child support, and not another penny ever. The house, proprties, joint accounts and cars not covered by a prenup should be forced into sale, bills paid, profit split. Same with joint accounts. 
 

I think you’re confusing your amicable divorce with what happens in a contentious one with high price lawyers fighting in court.  Thats why I believe it should be standardized, and courts shouldn’t be involved in anything but the dissolution of the marriage after assets are split.  You divorce, an expert comes in, tells you what your 50% is as proscribed by law, and that’s the end. And it should be clear and concise from day one. 
 

Then theres custody, and how men get fucked. If theres no abuse alleged, each parent should get 50% time with them, a week each, and rotating holidays. There’s literally no reason for this stuff to end up in court when it could be settled with actual legislation that lays out alimony and custody agreements where no abuse is alleged. 
 

And I’m sorry, you don’t deserve more because you’ve been cheated on, male or female. Life happens. 
 

Edit: I do think there should be carveouts for abuse though.

 

 

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Alimony is fine, and letting judges decide on it is far better than knuckle dragging chuds dictate things without nuance that comes on a literal case by case basis

 

 

there is legitimate want to bring an end to no fault divorce by the right, you could see it in the immediate aftermath of some chud influencer getting divorced for being a piece of shit to his wife. This is just moving toward that end. Keeping women in unhappy marriages will end marriages not in divorce but in suicide. And they are at best indifferent to this outcome. 

[Jason]

11 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Alimony is fine, and letting judges decide on it is far better than knuckle dragging chuds dictate things without nuance that comes on a literal case by case basis

 

 

there is legitimate want to bring an end to no fault divorce by the right, you could see it in the immediate aftermath of some chud influencer getting divorced for being a piece of shit to his wife. This is just moving toward that end. Keeping women in unhappy marriages will end marriages not in divorce but in suicide. And they are at best indifferent to this outcome. 

 

If your wife kills herself you get to upgrade to the hotter newer model while keeping all your money and stuff and without ever having to deal with your ex again. What's not to like from the chud point of view?

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Just now, Jason said:

 

If your wife kills herself you get to upgrade to the hotter newer model while keeping all your money and stuff and without ever having to deal with your ex again. What's not to like from the chud point of view?

Listen, the woman wouldn’t give me a male heir so obviously she needed to die

[Ghost_MH]

3 hours ago, BloodyHell said:

Im not sure how long two of my friends will have to pay, but one is going on 3 years, on top of child support for two children, and in the end she got the house because she guilted him with “The kids shouldn’t have to leave their home”, and as I’m sure you know, divorced fathers have feelings too, and also want to put kids before themselves.

 

my point is, the standard should be dividing shared assets in cash, and child support, and not another penny ever. The house, proprties, joint accounts and cars not covered by a prenup should be forced into sale, bills paid, profit split. Same with joint accounts. 
 

I think you’re confusing your amicable divorce with what happens in a contentious one with high price lawyers fighting in court.  Thats why I believe it should be standardized, and courts shouldn’t be involved in anything but the dissolution of the marriage after assets are split.  You divorce, an expert comes in, tells you what your 50% is as proscribed by law, and that’s the end. And it should be clear and concise from day one. 
 

Then theres custody, and how men get fucked. If theres no abuse alleged, each parent should get 50% time with them, a week each, and rotating holidays. There’s literally no reason for this stuff to end up in court when it could be settled with actual legislation that lays out alimony and custody agreements where no abuse is alleged. 
 

And I’m sorry, you don’t deserve more because you’ve been cheated on, male or female. Life happens. 
 

Edit: I do think there should be carveouts for abuse though.

 

The standard for divorce is 50/50. It's the divorcing pair that get in the way. How do we do 50/50? Most people don't actually want to sell all their belongings and start from scratch. Who gets what furniture? How about the car/s? The house? Retirement funds? It's the 401k included in the 50/50? How about an inheritance? A lot of things that you might think a common sense in this regard aren't. Like why should he get a portion of wife's father's inheritance? What if husband didn't save up money for retirement because they both agreed it wasn't necessary due to the inheritance? How do you prove that in court if there was never anything in writing?

 

Things get more complicated with children involved. Courts are going to move to keep the kids from moving to a new school. Also, is there any chance the children, who are already going through a hard time, get to stay at home? What does custody look like? Men no longer get fucked in court. Did they as recently as the 80s? Yes, but that's not really the case anymore. Women do get full custody 70-80% of that time, but that number includes the whopping 50% of the time men freely wave custody. That means women get favorable custody in a little more than 50% of contested cases. That's not men getting fucked over, that's a choice many make of their own free will.

 

Times changed.

 

Also, nah, you enter a marriage and cheat, the cheated on spouse deserves enough alimony to get on their feet. They didn't ask to be cheated on and they shouldn't feel forced to remain in such a marriage while facing the threat of homelessness.

[CastletonSnob]

 

[silentbob]

Marjorie Taylor Greene is no longer a member of the Freedom Caucus after a vote last month, according to one member of the conservative group’s board. 

WWW.POLITICO.COM

---

News and analysis from Capitol Hill for when you only have a few minutes, from POLITICO.

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

23 minutes ago, silentbob said:

Marjorie Taylor Greene is no longer a member of the Freedom Caucus after a vote last month, according to one member of the conservative group’s board. 

WWW.POLITICO.COM

---

News and analysis from Capitol Hill for when you only have a few minutes, from POLITICO.

 

 

OLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO

[Jason]

45 minutes ago, silentbob said:

Marjorie Taylor Greene is no longer a member of the Freedom Caucus after a vote last month, according to one member of the conservative group’s board. 

WWW.POLITICO.COM

---

News and analysis from Capitol Hill for when you only have a few minutes, from POLITICO.

 

 

Calling someone a bitch gets you kicked out of the Freedom Caucus? More like the Censorship Caucus!

[silentbob]

Just now, Jason said:

 

Calling someone a bitch gets you kicked out of the Freedom Caucus? More like the Censorship Caucus!

[ThreePi]

I bet she gets back in in a few weeks when things blow over and they'll be all like "MTG learned her lesson" when in reality nothing actually changed.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

39 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Calling someone a bitch gets you kicked out of the Freedom Caucus? More like the Censorship Caucus!

Kancel Kulture Kaucus 

[CastletonSnob]

Texans Die from Heat Exhaustion After Governor Bans Water Breaks - The Texas Observer

WWW.TEXASOBSERVER.ORG

---

House Bill 2127 pre-empts municipalities from enacting legislation in eight areas—with predictable results.

 

Enough is enough. We need to pressure the DOJ to investigate and prosecute Abbott.

[CastletonSnob]

Democrats need to grow some balls and censure Tuberville.

[Reputator]

Republican attorneys general issue warning letter to Target about Pride merchandise

WWW.CBSNEWS.COM

---

The letter did not include any specific demands nor did it outline how the attorneys general believe the campaign could violate child protection laws.

 

 

the attorneys general did suggest that Target might find it "more profitable to sell the type of Pride that enshrines the love of the United States."

 

Peak stupidity.

[CastletonSnob]

Texas Supreme Court says private equity firms not liable for chemical plant explosion

WWW.AXIOS.COM

---

The Port Neches blast in 2019 could be felt 30 miles away.

 

[Jason]

Don't remember if we've done this one before, still lol tho.

 

[marioandsonic]

48 minutes ago, Jason said:

Don't remember if we've done this one before, still lol tho.

 

What does he think beer is made of?

[Firewithin]

1 hour ago, marioandsonic said:

What does he think beer is made of?

Freedom

[chakoo]

3 hours ago, marioandsonic said:

What does he think beer is made of?

The freedom tears of an American bald eagle.