Comments by corinne
Page 1 of 34 | Next
Posted on July 3 at 12:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
KingFisher907, my dog liked them last year, but is pretty disinterested now.
My daughter's friend's family calls'em "whiskerbugs!"!!
I like that. But I've just been calling them sprucebeetles for so long, I don't know if I can stop now. But I'll try! It's cute!
Today, there were plenty. I mentioned this article to the kids.
I kept calling them white spotted sawyers. They didn't like that much. So I said, well call 'em "sawyers" then! We were kidding of course.
No one has any intention!
I have, in almost 30 years, only been pinched or bitten or whatever it is they're capable of, only once--maybe twice--and that was within the last few years.
I throw them at the kids because they are so irrationally freaked out about them lately.
Can't help it. I always liked 'em. They're funny to me.
The most random bugs ever.
SPLAT!
On Expect comedy of acting errors at Fairbanks Drama Association dinner theater
Posted on July 2 at 11:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Come on, Bedasse, it's been around for a long time and is a very useful term that most people get. Yeah, I started using it here because several others were, and it makes a point simply and effectively. What's your problem with it?
Zach went to school with two of my kids. He was another death I told my daughter Outside about; it is very sad.
Wendee-
right on.
seven51-
as we told Bedasse before when he was cracking jokes some thought "inappropriate," (is that over used term okay?), don't stop. A bunch of us stood with him then, and I stand with you now.
To me what is also scary is akwebsurfer's apparent thorough indoctrination about this issue.
Kind-of sheepleish!
Posted on July 2 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Understand your rights as a juror and grand juror.
Hope for a "runaway" grand jury; that would be nice for a change.
For the people to actually think independently and not be sheeple.
Posted on July 2 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
continued:
Tell me: who is being vindictive? He could have knocked $25,000-30,000 off arrears simply by signing a tax form--court ordered 5 times, because of my motions, not CSSD--essentially free money to him. He refused.
Had he just worked, he would have had more tax retuns to help lower the arrears. At the time the state was offering the plea agreements, he could have been caught up within a year. He refused.
DOC is a huge problem also. The state has the laws to enforce child support. It won't use them. None of this should have ever happened. He has been under DOC supervision since day 1.
I have correspondence from CSSD saying that DOC is responsible for enforcement. I have correspondence from DOC saying it doesn't enforce civil orders, despite the parole/probation condition to obey all laws and all court orders.
It is both dept.'s task, and the task of the courts. But people must move the courts civilly--unfortunately only the state can file criminal charges, and good luck with that--to get anything to happen at all. This goes for visitation too.
Most non-payers, when faced with jail, will decide to work. But people must be pro-active on their case, because CSSD, while legally obligated to do everything available to them to enforce the order, won't. Only passive enforcement on the decent guys who will work.
BTW, he has attempted no contact with the kids for over 6 years.
What is needed is a lawsuit against the state by those who have been harmed by its lack of enforcement through not following its own laws. I wish I could get an attorney to at least review the law to see if suing is feasible in any way, but I can't.
In the meantime, a group of us are meeting in a few weeks--custodial and non--who are interested in this issue. If anyone else cares to, contact me.
Pressure needs to be put on the state to address peoples' concerns.
Get your case before the court. Most people are not like my ex.
Now I see why folks don't use punctuation and spaces. I cut this down a lot, but I think it counts spaces as characters!
Posted on July 2 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dana is correct all around.
For those of you who think CSSD favors the custodial, you're wrong.
I have worked my butt off on my own case for years without any help from CSSD to enforce the law which it is supposed to follow.
CSSD has been at best passive, and worse, denied responsibility for enforcing the support order, insulted me, and made excuses for the ex and themselves.
My ex is the only person in Alaska to have had a jury trial for the crime of felony criminal non-support. I worked hard to get it that far.
He was offered sweetheart deals to accept a misdemeanor and work. He had a Davis-Bacon job waiting for him.
He chose jail and trial. He got convicted. Barely a hand-slap from the judge. DOC doesn't do their job either, and let him leave the state.
He has twice been extradited back to Alaska for probation violation. Only because I continued to try to get the state to enforce the law. Otherwise, nobody would have done anything.
Again, he chose to remain in jail. It'll be about 6 months. Then he's scott free, no probation,nothing, and believe it, CSSD will do nothing some more.
He has ignored all civil court orders; the judge in civil court didn't hold him in contempt at hearing.
I have moved the court to ask again.
After all this, (the short version), the only child support I have received has been from jail wages.
Free ride. This from a guy who used to ordinarily make $90,000.00+ in 8-9 months of work.
Posted on July 2 at 7:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The reason is, of course, that we are all equal shareholders in the money (resources)--rich or poor, young or old.
Rather than being viewed as assistance, it should drilled into everyone's head that it is profit-sharing.
And $1,200.00 bucks is a pittance compared to what should really be each of our share.
The state should cut loose of more of our money to each of us equally so that we can decide for ourselves what is best for us.
It is an elitist mentality to believe the government knows what's best for us, and should spend all OUR money for us.
Especially during these windfall times. Our profit-sharing should reflect that.
Posted on July 1 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
nygiantsfan-
What can happen? I've never heard anything...?
Posted on July 1 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
That's right, internationa-
Remember:
Read The Signs
!!
Posted on July 1 at 12:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Africa is a hopeless money-burner.
I think we should let them solve their own problems, or in the alternative, let organizations like one I read about somewhere where a guy is building schools, and teaching agriculture, and good stuff through private donations.
Hate to say it, but Africa seemed to do better when it was colonized.
But that's wrong, so let'em figure it out.
As far as the UN goes, I completely agree with glacierles' last post.
Page 1 of 34 | Next
Posted on July 3 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nepotism is and has been rampant in this town.
Agnes, it matters especially in situations like police.
These people exercise alot of power over peoples' lives, and the truth is, they DO cover for each other when one messes up, and if they're married or dating, that likelihood is probably even greater.
Undue influence.
Average_Joe is right.
I think there should be a policy barring a certain level of consanguinity, dating, and marriage.
These guys are the first line of seriously affecting peoples' lives; for good or ill.
On Two Fairbanks police officers file suit against city, police chief