Thursday, August 04, 2005



Men generally, and particularly divorced fathers, are the most discriminated against group in today’s America. They are the victims of an out of control, unusually vicious legal and regulatory system rivaling the Jim Crow laws against blacks of the Old South. The media supports the persecution of men by portraying them unfavorably.

Today’s movies reflect today’s stridently anti-male culture. Male leads are usually depicted as emotionally broken men who are often substance abusers. Directly, or implicitly, they abuse their wives, or girlfriends, and neglect their children. When they live alone, their homes are dirty, unkempt hovels unfit for human habitation. Unlike the usual female lead, men usually have blue collar dead end jobs in which they barely function properly. Often there is a kind hearted boss who cuts them plenty of slack when they fail to appear for work, make mistakes, or intentionally screw up. When the man is a professional, he’s usually portrayed as a crook or evil doer out to harm anyone who stands in his way.

Against the backdrop of such lurid and unfair depictions of men, it’s easy to understand the legal structures feminists constructed over the past 30 years to deprive men of equal protection under the law. Under the color ridiculously false assertion women are an oppressed minority, men become fair game for every kind of imaginable excuse for discriminatory treatment.
Women get preferential admissions to the best colleges and professional schools. As physician from a very modest income family, I now wonder today whether with an almost straight A average and high MCAT scores I could get into the state medical school I attended in the 1960s. Back then there was no affirmative action. Admission was solely predicated on grades and the MCAT. I had so little money my only chance for a medical education was to attend a SUNY medical school where the tuition for low income students was $200 annually.

The worst abuses occur in the divorce courts where men are presumed to be the bad guys. Unless a man has significant financial and emotional resources, he’s likely to lose his children, become financially ruined, and get thrown out of the family home. Worse yet he loses his due process rights when accused of spousal abuse which today can simply amount to woman cooking up a story she “afraid” of being abused. Most states today require the man be automatically jailed and post bond to gain release. Prior to incarceration they have no right to confront their accusers, present evidence, or obtain a jury trial. Put another way women have equal rights but men are subjected to Nazi or Soviet style summary judgments. George Orwell’s comment “some people are more equal than others” aptly applies to men’s plight in today’s America.
For American men today divorce is the royal road to financial ruin. With federal government subsidizing state child support collections based upon the percentage of the recovery, child support levels are set at ruinous levels. Accumulated debts can never be reduced or discharged in bankruptcy. Millions of men become paupers condemned to live hand to mouth with no hope of every regaining financial stability. Add to that the loss of their children, it’s no wonder the suicide and mental illness rate amongst divorced fathers is so high.

I don’t think over time a democracy like ours can survive with almost half the population potential victims of totalitarian abuse. Something’s got to give. I believe unless major reforms occur some distraught, angry, unbalanced, heartbroken, impoverished divorced fathers will resort to terrorism. The media hushes such things up because to say out loud a terrorist incident occurred because a legal injustice, the government would be forced to act. Heaven forbid mainstream politicians get off their knees and stop licking the soles of the feminists’ Manolo Blahniks . That’s why last January’s Los Angeles intentional train derailment in which 11 people were killed by an agitated young father who lost his children, and a livable income, wasn’t reported as terrorism. Wouldn’t take much for a WMD to destroy an American city taking millions of lives in the catastrophe.

Because I fear for America’s future I’ve very reluctantly decided to set aside the quiet, very pleasant life I enjoy in California to “test the waters” for a presidential race in 2008. I’ve never sought public office before. Think I’m much like our Founding Fathers who left their farms, businesses, and intellectual pursuits later in life to serve America in her hour of need. Life’s comforts aside, I’m in my mid-60s so I’m sacrificing much of what’s left of the quarter of my life.

It’s a fair question to ask why anyone would take a untried novice candidate like me seriously. The short answer is Americans are particularly very rattled by the collapse of the family and the unaffordability of middle class family life.

I believe I can put together WITHOUT HAVING TO COMPROMISE MY PROGRAMS BY MOVING TO CENTER OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM a winning plurality of men generally, divorced men and their new spouses and heartbroken relatives, social conservatives, exhausted working mothers who’d like to spend more time with their families, sensible seniors who fear the consequences of today’s collapsing families, and young adults who yearn for a normal family life.

There’d be no point to my turning to center to win the White House. I want to change things rather simply be a caretaker for the same old same bankrupt social policies which are destroying the American family. For that there are plenty of professional politicians who’ve spent their entire lives chasing the presidency by playing it safe.

I also believe voters across the political spectrum will immediately see me as an ordinary, honest, quite frank, middle class person who’s only agenda is the nation’s best interests. I seek power very reluctantly, and once my work is done would like nothing more than to return to my pleasant home and wonderful, very colorful garden in the Oakland hills, and hang out with my children and grandchildren.

I have a broad policy reform agenda involving economic and military issues, but today I’ll address how a Klein Administration would deal with divorce and its aftermath.
My primary goal would be to dismantle the DIVORCE INDUSTRY by appointing an HHS secretary fully and unreservedly committed to my policy objectives. My legislative and regulatory agenda would be:

In federally subsidized family court proceeding shall be conducted so that each party have equal rights.

Sunset the HHS Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the policy and enforcement engine for the destruction of the American family.

By regulation, or if necessary by legislation, mandate a 50-50 physical custody presumption for states to continue to receive funding for family programs. The 50-50 presumption would be retroactive so old cases could be reopened.

Repeal the Bradley Amendment so child support debt can be reduced or eliminated.

Amend the bankruptcy laws so child support and alimony debt could be discharged.

Either through regulation, or if necessary with new legislation, mandate no one can be jailed in abuse case without trial unless in good faith the arresting officer certifies under penalty of perjury there is a clear and present danger to the complaining spouse.

I would instruct my attorney general to aggressively criminally prosecute as a civil rights felony violation knowingly filing false domestic violence complaints resulting in an improper incarceration.

Child support orders would have to take into account the maintenance of non-custodial parent’s standard of living. My HHS secretary will issue regulations to strictly enforce this policy.

Multiple willful violations of a non-custodial parent’s visitation rights would automatically shift custody, terminate the current child support obligation, and erase prior unpaid child support debt.

I came to the fathers’ right movement only several months ago by way of my broader concerns about how federal family policy perversely destroys marriage, breaks the hearts of children, and undermines middle class family life generally.

I was completely unaware of the vicious regulatory and legal abuse of divorced fathers. Naïve at first I thought the administration was unaware of the Nazi-like system which systematically destroys fathers. After bringing the situation to the attention of a very senior GOP party official, I spoke with Assistant HHS Secretary Wade Horn who runs ACF, and later met for almost 2 hours with his then chief deputy when on a business trip to Washington. They made it very clear there’d be no policy changes.

As I mulled over what I learned from these contacts, I realized why the fathers rights movement has basically gotten nowhere seeking reform at the state level. With regards to family law and child support the states are essentially string puppets controlled by the federal government. The states are utter moral midgets on family stability policy. Rather than cut spending, or heaven forbid raise taxes, they’ve become addicted to federal subsidies and casino gambling taxes to balance their budgets off the misery and suffering of parents and children.
Hence the only solution for fathers rights issues is to take political power by electing a true reformer to the White House.

I’m testing the waters for a presidential run. I don’t come to this with the Heinz or Kennedy family fortune behind me. Money is the mother’s milk of politics. Unless I’m convinced I’ve got the financial support I just can’t make the race. Divorced fathers are often financially pinched. But $5 from a substantial number of America’s 25 million divorced fathers puts me up at bat in the bottom of 9th, three runs down, and the bases loaded. I’ll be swinging for the fences.

God bless you all. Take care and God’s speed.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home