Sexist Arizona Governor Promotes “Dead Beat” Suicides and Violence for Personal Gain

28ea6f975d3a41523e04619d1a5648a6
No more lying in court ladies. Governor Ducey’s coming for you next. And it’s not going to be pretty!

 

Administrator’s Note: Due to a recent gag order placed on this website as reported in an earlier post, we feel that we can only publish controversial editorials from anonymous sources such as Dr. Sam Publius (As if we don’t know who he really is).

There is strength in numbers – In order to be heard, it is our sincere hope that our readers spend the weekend flooding the mailboxes of the following individuals and media outlets found at azgov@azgov.org, http://www.azleg.gov/memberroster.asp and http://www.abyznewslinks.com/uniteaz.htm with the following editorial:

 

___________________

Governor Rip Van Wacko Awakens From 50 Year Stupor
January 14, 2016

By Sam Publius, PhD.

Did this really happen in 2016? A new governor desperate for attention actually issued a state of the state address that featured the vilification of “dead beat DADS” on social media. His name is Doug Ducey, and by all indications he has been asleep since the 19th Century, maybe longer.

Our federal government engaged in a similar sexist act in 2012 when the Justice Department issued a news release boasting of its “sting operation” on “dead beat dads.” After a protest and lobby initiative in Congress, that phrase was dropped from public pronouncements.

Will someone in the Arizona Legislature now wake this guy up to our times? Moms are working, they get behind in child support obligations too, and taking into account their proportion to all female obligors, it is a more pressing issue due to the historic favor they receive in family courts.

“Dead beat Dads” is a sexist slur for the pathetically obvious reason that it stereotypes a stigmatizing condition based strictly on gender. In Ducey-land, there are no “dead beat Broads” or jail terms for moms who file false accusations to alienate fathers from their children.

Through so-called “child support,” fathers are often paying the state to take away their offspring. In effect, it is a discriminatory court system they are protesting no different than Susan B. Anthony who refused to pay her fine for the crime of voting in the 1872 elections.

Where is Ducey’s focus on bureaucratic corruption which is rampant here? States like Arizona receive Title IV-D funds based on the number and size of support awards to pay for court operations. Interest revenue is also derived from state banks known as support collection centers.

Excessive awards result from biased judges leading to a social epidemic. Government is actually creating “dead beats.” In the Kids for Cash scandal, two Pennsylvania judges were sent to prison for taking bribes from prison contractors requiring the reversal of 4,000 juvenile convictions.

You would think that our government would learn from real life precedent like the murder of Walter Scott last year in South Carolina. An unarmed father and “repeat debt offender” was shot in the back five times by a traffic cop while fleeing a support warrant. Now why would he flee?

South Carolina has some of the toughest enforcement laws, yet it is among the worst in collection rates. Veterans and law enforcement have suicide rates suppressed by this trillion dollar industry. One is featured at Purple Heart’s Final Beat, Second Class Citizen.org.

Other examples include a police investigator who left support court and committed a murder-suicide despite protection orders by use of a common kitchen knife. It left behind three children and a $2 million civil rights liability, see Pearce v Longo, 766 F. Supp.2d 367 (NDNY 2011).

State vilification of “dads-only” raises other serious concerns. There is a thing known as our Bill of Rights. Even if it got by him in civics class, Doug Ducey should have recalled “witch” hunts and public flogging that were outlawed by our founding dads due to their barbaric nature.

Use of the pronoun “his” before the words “child support” has become as common as the illegal aliens crossing Ducey’s state border with Mexico. These criminals bearing vast burdens upon taxpaying “dads” are receiving more protection than our own citizens. Where is that focus?

The criminalization of fatherhood is very real in America today. Increasingly, proud veterans are finding their way onto these Doucey hit lists simply because they lack skills or are subjected to cheap illegal competitors. Any lawyer who stands up to such injustices can expect retaliation.

One gave testimony at a Corruption Commission in New York which was prematurely shut down by the governor who created it. A newspaper later reported that the same governor was seriously behind on his own child support. Like Doucey, he was promoting tough enforcement.

While such hypocrites find it expedient to “beat up” on dads, they are inflicting greater injury to innocent children and national security. Of the 58,000 names on the Vietnam War Memorial, all but eight are men. Is this any way to honor their sacrifices for fair treatment here in the states?

“Uncle Sam” Publius, PhD.
National League of Fathers, Inc.
P.O. Box 8302
Utica, New York 13505
(315) 380-3420

 

Please share this editorial: https://leonkozioljd.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/sexist-arizona-governor-promotes-dead-beat-suicides-and-violence-for-personal-gain

Should Fathers Stop Paying Support in Protest of Discrimination?





“We Are Fathers” Campaign Begins in Nashville

It’s the boldest proposal coming from my first day in Nashville. A sponsor of our campaign originally suggested the idea at the Divorce Corp Family Law Conference at our nation’s capital this past November. Now it is gaining momentum.

After years of frustration seeking justice and equal rights in a Tennessee family court, the father who advanced it is adamant that conventional channels will remain corrupt and dysfunctional for many years to come. Something more profound was needed to secure meaningful reform. Debate on the subject was lively to say the least.

Of course, opponents of the plan argued that a united consensus among fathers to stop paying support would mean breaking the law. Guys could go to jail for this. Women’s rights groups would go wild and our cause would be harmed. Finally the question was put: what about the children?

To this I emphasized that Susan B. Anthony was a convicted criminal who refused to pay her fine in protest of discrimination against women. Her crime: voting in the 1872 elections. The U.S. Supreme Court justice who presided over her criminal trial never did commit Susan to jail as was the prescribed remedy for such a willful violation of the so-called law. 

As for the children, the real question is this: is it more important for them to have money or a real father? What incentive is there for a father to earn money when he is not accorded equal rights in parenting or alienated altogether in order to enrich family court lawyers or a scorned adversary?

Two ironies emerge from the Nashville proposal and the crimes committed by  our greatest women’s rights advocate. First, had Susan B. Anthony continued to comply with “the law” women would still be considered too ignorant to vote. And with such precedent, can it be said that today’s fathers are being ignorant when they comply with the current system of discriminatory laws which makes them visitors and indentured servants in their children’s lives simply because of their parental birth status? The Census Bureau continues to report that 85% of all parents paying support are fathers.

This leads to our second irony. The courtroom in Rochester, New York where my law license was suspended for a refusal to pay support is dedicated to none other than Susan B. Anthony. If a conscientious father, model citizen and successful civil rights attorney, unblemished for over 23 years can make such a sacrifice, why not others? Our military makes a greater sacrifice before returning home to the same unjust laws.

As for women’s rights groups, one of the first supporters to be sought behind such a proposal should be the National Organization for Women. After all, if equal rights is their true mantra, they should be out front seeking it for children and future generations. Otherwise their whole movement is nothing more than a giant hypocrisy. 

It leads to one final irony. During my civil rights career, I became the attorney and trusted advocate for Karen DeCrow. For those of you who do not recognize the name, she was an attorney and president of the National Organization for Women. A referendum on this bold proposal is expected before Father’s Day 2015. Will NOW be its strongest supporter.

Dr. Leon R. Koziol

Parental Rights Advocate 

(315) 796-4000

DAY 154: DEDICATED TO CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER SUSAN B. ANTHONY

In our countdown to the Founding Fathers March scheduled for April 20, 2012, Day 154 is dedicated to a prominent founder of the women’s rights movement, Susan B. Anthony. In many respects, her experiences 150 years ago are not unlike my own in the effort to secure equal rights for fathers. Everyone recognizes generally the contribution which Susan B. Anthony made for women. However, few are familiar with the fact that she was a convicted criminal.

Susan endured this stigma after casting her ballot in Rochester, New York during the 1872 Presidential Elections, thereby violating the law which prohibited women from voting. She was later convicted under circumstances which deprived her of a fair trial. After her case was transferred from Monroe to Ontario County, presiding state Supreme Court Judge, Ward Hunt, read an opinion before the trial even started, he refused to allow Ms. Anthony to testify, and he directed the jury to return a guilty verdict. She was never imprisoned but fined $100 which she forever refused to pay.

In remarkably similar circumstances, my licensure case was transferred from Monroe to Albany County and my custody case was transferred from Utica to nearby Syracuse where an “Acting” state Supreme Court Judge, Martha Walsh-Hood, prejudged the merits, refused to allow me to testify on the same footing as my adversary, and she rendered a decision without any jury. I refused to pay a child support obligation for the same reasons that Anthony refused to pay her fine: men are not allowed to participate equally in domestic relations matters and the support order emanated from a biased judge in violation of my constitutional rights.

Perhaps the greatest of ironies, however, may lie in Anthony’s certificate of conviction which is found on a memorial plaque at the Rochester courtroom where my license was suspended for non-payment of support. I certainly never expected justice to be tortured in the same fashion as my mentor, but it all demonstrates one thing: gender equality has become a one way street now that women have secured their rights to vote and preside over litigation. They have simply reinvented the rule of law which says that some people are more equal than others. Sounds a lot like the communists once promoted, circa the book “Animal Farm”.

Rochester, New York                                                                             Dr. Leon R. Koziol, J.D.

Parenting Rights Institute

Dr. Koziol Introduces the Founding Fathers March to America

IMPORTANT: Please share this video with others

http://youtu.be/hlUBvqKGby4

Help us help you by donating today: