Sources

graphic

This is worth sharing with all of you.  I know it’s mostly politically based, but it still gives you the basic idea.  It’s neither left-biased or right-biased.

Take a good look. Stay away from the stuff down at the bottom, regardless of whether it’s to the right or left.  Limit the stuff in the middle at the bottom.  And be careful with both HuffPo and Faux News.  I avoid them both.  Sometimes on one or the other, you can find something that is really true, but then you can usually find it elsewhere with better analysis and better writing.

This comes from Vanessa Otero, who deserves a big thank you for the trouble she went to. Obviously, these are her opinions as to the placement of each source, but I would personally disagree with little that she has here.

 

Doggone It

joe dog

There was a little conversation over at the BLH Facebook page about coyotes. It seems they are coming closer to the Blessed Shithole and might threaten the “flock,” which I assume means the hen and whatever chicks may have survived thus far.  So what to do?

We have donkeys. But then, we have fences. And we’ve never had a problem with coyotes and chickens, but I suppose anything’s possible.

So, the conversation went along with people chiming in their two cents worth, and then Joe had to insert his little rant about dogs.

He’s so upset, poor thing. Two dogs killed.  How sad.  One dog was hit by a car on that dirt road, he says, and the vet told them that the car was going very fast. I’m gobsmacked.  Really?

First off, this incident happened when the Nauglers had fled the Shitshack to live in relative luxury on GFM money at the local motel while the kids were being babysat by the state. They were not living on the property. That’s one reason those dogs were killed. They were abandoned there.

Perhaps Joe and/or Nicole drove out to the property one day (about 25 minutes one way from the motel) to check on things and got there at just the point in time when the dog had been hit, was lying there mortally wounded but not dead, and the car was nowhere in sight. And he/she/they promptly put the dog in the car and drove madly to the nearest vet who explained that dog was irreparably wounded but that he’d been hit by a vehicle going 75 mph.  He could tell, you see, because the dog was all smashed up.

And perhaps, using Occam’s Razor, this is complete bullshit.

Joe and Nicole have never, to my knowledge, taken a child to the doctor, much less a dog to the vet.  But let’s say that they were flush with Go Fund Me money and felt generous and did just that.

A vet cannot tell you how fast the car was going when it hit the damn dog. If he tried to do that, he was lying.

Cars weigh a whole lot. The average weight is about 4000 pounds. Your fifty pound dog is not anything compared to the car.   A 4000 pound car could hit a fifty pound dog while moving at 15 mph and squash him flatter than a pancake.

This story is bogus from start to finish.

As I believe I’ve mentioned before, we’ve been along the road beside the Blessed Shithole. And the Naugler dogs chase cars.  It’s simply a fact. They chased our truck.  In fact, they ran out and more or less attempted to eat our truck.  We slowed down, moved around them and kept going, taking care to avoid hitting them.

If I had to drive that road all the time, that would get old quick and I probably would cease being quite so careful. So when you tell me that a Naugler dog got hit by a car, I am not even slightly surprised.

The other dog, Angel, was shot when she wandered way far from home in search of food and got aggressive with someone’s dogs, someone who did not know where she came from or anything about her, but didn’t want his dogs or the small children present hurt. They lived there. She didn’t.

None of this was about people not liking the Nauglers. It was about dogs being nuisances.  Don’t keep your dogs up, don’t train them, let them aggravate folks, get aggressive with other people’s pets and run cars, and you are gonna have some dead dogs. That’s the way it is.

But then we go back to the discussion about coyotes. Well, we go back to it after Joe tosses in a few barbs at Al, who has nothing to do with any of this.

And Joe says that they are “just gonna use their .308s and do some night hunting.”

.308s.

Plural.

More than one high-powered rifle, hunting at night.

coyotelaw1

A shotgun. That is the only sort of gun that is legal to hunt coyotes at night. A shotgun, and one containing “shells which contain more than one projectile.”

I admit knowing almost nothing about guns. I had to ask around about this. I wanted to know why this law is in place. The answer is that it’s safer. Vision is limited at night (duh) and a single projectile (bullet) will penetrate a target and sometimes exit and hit whatever is behind the target. And at night, you often can’t see what is behind.  What’s behind might be your neighbor, or even your own children.

Shotgun shells with multiple projectiles fire a shorter distance and once they hit their target, they stop.

Furthermore, a .308 is a high-powered rifle which is really overkill for hunting coyotes.

So is this statement really about coyotes?  Or is Joe inferring something else?  I don’t know.

coyotelaw2

And there’s that pesky, inconvenient statist stuff. You gotta have a license.

No lights until February.

You know, if you intend to break the law, it’s probably not a really good idea to announce it on Facebook.  It’s like putting up photos of your sewage disposal system (white buckets) and then getting upset when the Health Department finds them.

UPDATE:

familypet

I’ll bite, Nicole.

Your “sweet family pet” was not with a family, acting like a pet, or being sweet at the time she was killed. Nobody was hunting her, not even you. She was hungry, apparently, or maybe she was just mean.  Whatever the reason, your dog, that you abandoned, wandered a long way from home and attacked a homeowner’s family pets.

She not only threatened the family dogs, she also threatened their children.

So the homeowner shot and killed her on the spot. It’s his right to do that.

But you already knew this, didn’t you?

 

 

Censorship

facebook bullying
click image to link to source

This is from way last January.  Nicole was peeved with Facebook. They seemed to take down her nasty posts, but refused to take down anyone else’s when she complained about it.

It’s not fair, she said.

Today she’s back at it again. Facebook is not fair.

facebookunfair

The article she is linking to is here.

Here’s my summary of what it says:

So-called “like” pages, unlike personal pages, do not automatically get placed on the feeds of the people who “like” those pages. That is censorship, and very wrong and bad. To get those posts shared to every single person who has “liked” the page, one has to pay money. That is also very wrong and bad. And to make matters worse, we posted something political and it was removed by Facebook because Facebook hates third parties.

That is not an exact quote, of course, but it’s the gist of what the little rant is about.

The part about Facebook “pages” having to pay to get their posts seen is accurate.  Sort of.

Here’s the deal.  If you click “like” on a page, you will see little of it in your feed unless you interact with the page. You have to go visit that page, or “like” a post, or even better, comment on a post.  If you do that, Facebook says to itself, “Hey, Sally likes that content, so we’ll show her more of it.”

Nicole is very aware of this, and it’s the reason that she posts stuff on BLH intended to encourage comments.

heatfirsttime

Like this. Nicole does not give a flying fuck what anyone else is doing about the weather.  She doesn’t even typically enter into the ensuing conversation.  She probably doesn’t even read it.  She’s trying to entice people who see this post on their wall to comment, to interact with her page. If they comment, then they will get more of her posts scrolling  by.  These “What about you?” posts are clickbait.

In addition, there’s another way.

skeptical ob

This is a page that I “like.”  (I told you all that Dr. Amy is my hero.)  In order to make sure that I see everything she posts to her page, I simply checked the “See First” option shown above.  The default is “default.”

It’s entirely within my ability to customize my own Facebook page so that I see the stuff I want to see.  There are several pages where I have done that.

There are other pages that I have “liked” but really don’t care if I ever see anything from them again. Everyone has these. They are the pages you “liked” because your cousin has a friend who is a plumber and she asked you to “like” his page, so you did.  Or you got interested in a story or situation and “liked” a page about it, but after three months, you lost interest.

If I got everything posted from every page I have “liked,” along with all the stuff my Facebook friends post, my feed would scroll faster than I could read it.

Facebook knows this, so they have attempted to create the best solution they can so that my Facebook experience is positive and I keep hanging out there.

They also allow people with “like” pages to purchase exposure.  Nicole has availed herself of this opportunity from time to time.

advertisingfb

Remember, Facebook is free. How is that possible?  How does Facebook remain free and Mark Zuckerberg become a bazillionaire?

zuckerbergnetworthIf you’re curious about that, here’s a very good graphic that shows the whole process. Basically, Mark Zuckerberg has gotten rich by providing a super-duper advertising environment on steroids. And we all “watch” the ads willingly.  Facebook is not a benevolent public service, like a city park. Facebook is a business.

It’s called “free enterprise.”  Yes, the whole “free market” stuff that Nicole loves, loves, loves.

wreck

There’s an example. [Note: the economy had improved dramatically when Nicole wrote this, and the job market had started recovering nicely, but that’s beside the point.]

She’s all about the free market and deregulation.  No rules, by god. Do whatever the hell you like.

righttorefuse

She goes even further, though. In her view, she can refuse service to anyone she likes for any reason at all, and they can’t say a single word. [I’d give almost anything to see somebody test out that little hypothesis. She’s wrong, and the courts have made it clear in recent years that she is entirely wrong.]

But no matter.

I say who, I say when, I say how much. It’s my business.

That applies to any business.

Well, Nicole, you colossal idiot, Facebook is a business. They say who, they say when, they say how much, according to you.

But by all means, do get mad at them.  Get irate.  Get so angry and put out by their “discrimination” that you leave.

Addendum:

tapedgrocery

I bet the grocery stores love Nicole and her hoard of children coming in and taping shit to the dog food bags.

 

Banned

 

banned books week
click image to link to source

This week is Banned Books Week.  This is a subject near and dear to my liberal, free-spirited heart and Nicole has chosen to talk about it so I am delighted to join in the conversation.

Banned Books Week is an annual event sponsored by the American Library Association to do a couple of things: make us aware of books that have been banned in the past, for various reasons, and in doing so, spark an interest in and conversation about the idea of censorship.

I despise censorship. I want to be upfront about that from the start. You know how Nicole and Joe love, love, love the Second Amendment?  Well, that’s how I am about the First one.

I was raised by a very religious mother who, fortunately for me, was pretty liberal when it came to reading material. I couldn’t wear slacks, and I couldn’t go to movies, but she didn’t really pay much attention to what I read. And I was a book worm.

When I was about 11, my grandfather gave me a book.  It was a large one-volume collection of the works of Mark Twain. It has really thin pages, sort of like a Bible. I loved it. I still love it, because I still have it. I was going to take a photo of it, but we’re remodeling and my books are stored away in boxes for the moment.

Anyway, I am quite sure that my grandfather never read the book. I know for certain my mother never did. They just saw “Mark Twain” and thought Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer and that was as far as they thought.

Those novels, of course, were included in the book, but so was a story called The Mysterious Stranger. If you are unfamiliar with the work, please click on the link and scroll down to the several quoted paragraphs toward the end of the piece.

mysterious stranger

My grandfather and my mother totally forgot (or didn’t know) that Mark Twain was a cynic and an atheist.

And I read every word of that book, more than once. Please imagine a child of about 11, taught that the Bible is totally true and Jesus is totally real, reading that quote from The Mysterious Stranger after being totally invested in the story. It had a profound impact on me. I’ve never forgotten my horror and it’s been about 55 years.

My point here is this: Just because a child has the intellectual capability of reading adult literature, just because she can read the words and understand what is being said, does not mean that the child has the emotional capability of processing the information without some sort of guidance. It wasn’t that Twain was wrong.  I am an atheist (now) and share his views.  The problem was that I was young and I really needed to be able to talk with some adult about the issues raised and I couldn’t.

I didn’t tell my mother about the story.  I knew what would happen if I did. She would have taken the book away from me.  I didn’t want censorship, but I certainly needed conversation and a bit of guidance.

Keep that little anecdote in mind as we continue.

I think I’ve written about this before, but hell, I’m old, and I can repeat myself if I want. When we lived in Alaska, I volunteered at our local library.  Here it is.

library

I was not only a volunteer librarian, but I also was the treasurer. I served in that capacity for much of the time we lived there (about 9 years). So I know a little about how libraries work and how they are funded and how to manage one, albeit a teensy one.

library funding

In Alaska, our little library was funded several ways. Our primary funding was via a state grant, given to us by the legislature every year. We were never exactly sure how much we would get.  It all depended on how much the legislature approved and how many libraries applied for funding.

We were required, as a condition of receiving the funding, to raise a comparable amount from the community. During the time I was there, we experimented with several ideas for fund-raising (our least-favorite thing to do), and came up with a sweepstakes, which has remained in place ever since. They, in fact, are getting ready for it right now.  We sold tickets for $100 a pop, and the ticket served as entry to the party (held at the local community club, complete with food) and the subsequent drawing. Multiple prizes were given away, mostly cash.

The third thing we got in terms of funding was E-Rate. That is a federal program which allowed us to have telephone and internet service at very reduced prices. This facilitated offering computer access to the public.

So, the library was (and still is) funded by community donations, by state grants and by federal dollars.

But nobody told us what books to buy or what to offer and what to do about any of that.

The contents of our library were determined entirely by the library’s board, and I was on that board, so I know how the decisions were made.

Libraries are finite. They are not Amazon. They can’t have every book that has ever been printed in them. Shelf space in a library is valuable space and none of us were ever cavalier about the decision to place a book on the shelf or to remove it.

We used to weed books (and that’s what we called it – “weeding”) about twice a year.  We got boxes, divided the library up in sections and began working. We had come up with criteria to help us make decisions, involving how often the book had been checked out (circulation), whether or not it was considered a classic (subjective, but we had to start someplace), and whether or not we had lots of books on the same subject (repetitiveness). A book that just sat on the shelf doing nothing got removed.

And once all the books that were weeded were in the boxes, we all went through the boxes and pulled out those we didn’t agree with tossing. And then we argued about it, politely.

In the end, a whole pile of books left the library to be donated, were sold for really cheap, or went to the dump.

Every now and then, we got a complaint.  It didn’t happen often, but it did happen.  We actually had a form, if I remember correctly, that people could fill out if they wanted to complain about something, and that included the inclusion (or exclusion) of any book on our shelves. Typically, a complaint would come from a parent who thought that a particular book in the children’s section wasn’t appropriate for one reason or another.

When that happened, we would discuss the issue in the board meeting.  Most of us were very pro-free speech and loathe to do any censoring of any sort (a very common feeling among librarians in general), but we did agree that there should be fairly obvious areas for picture books, for children’s books and for young adult books, so that parents could easily determine which shelves their children were browsing. And what generally happened was that we’d agree to move a particular book from the children’s area to the young adult area.

Our reasoning centered around the issue I raised earlier with my little story about Mark Twain and The Mysterious Stranger.

When I was in the twelfth grade, the principal of the school, Mrs. Polly McKay, called me into her office to have a chat. It seems that the school librarian had reported to Mrs. McKay that I had checked out East of Eden by John Steinbeck.

Mrs. McKay felt that the book was too mature for my tender years.

I remember being astonished.

I asked her to please explain to me why, if the book was too mature for me, and I was in the twelfth grade, what the book was doing in the library at all.

She had no answer.

Libraries have to make choices about what to put on their shelves and what to either never buy or remove.  It’s a problem that is perennial and thorny.

libraries
click image to link to source

Here’s another kind of twitchy problem. Somebody in our little community donated the entirety of the Left Behind series to our library.  You wanna see a really shitty series of books?  Get volume one of that series and start reading. I give you about ten minutes. Awful.

And it wasn’t one book. It was a bunch of books. Sixteen of them.  That’s a lot of shelf space for shitty books.

But if we refused them, we’d be accused of religious discrimination. We knew that. We’d also have hurt the feelings of somebody in a very small community.  We had no desire to do that.

So we tolerated them for a while.  They, naturally, due to sheer shittiness, did not circulate worth a damn, and after a year or so, they began to disappear. I hope they are all gone now.

My point here is that nobody made these decisions for us. We met as a board of directors, we got input from the community, and we took a vote.  It was always difficult and we tried very hard to err on the side of free speech.

And the state government, those folks that gave us our grant, and the federal government that furnished us with the E-Rate credit on our telephone and internet access had zero input into any of this. Absolutely none.

album banned books
click image to link to source

From Nicole’s Blessed Little Homestead Facebook page.

Notice that she insists that “the government” bans books. And then she puts up pictures of books that at one time, some place, were banned. The implication is that all book banning is done by the US government. She doesn’t explicitly say that, but she is certainly implying it.

The US government has not banned a book in decades.

And then she tells us to read banned books, because anarchy.

How about reading, period?  How about reading banned books because they contain often-controversial subject matter?  How about making sure that if you allow children to read that sort of stuff, you also provide them with guidance and a bit of conversation?  How about providing children with age-appropriate books, and teaching them to read in the first place (doubtful at the Blessed Little Property)?

Canterbury TalesIf you’re going to complain about literature being banned, and in doing so, you’re going to use hashtags, spell the name correctly.

There are zillions of books in print. It’s not possible for anyone to read all of them. I know, because I have made a valiant effort to do just that and have failed miserably.

And not every book that has been banned should be given a glance or any valuable time to be read at all.

Here’s an example.

Elders of Zion

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a book I’ve never read, except for excerpts. I have no intention of ever reading it.  If you really can’t bear it and want to read it, Google it and you can find a copy online. I am 67 years old. Why would I want to waste my time, as little as I have remaining, to read a piece of shit like that when beautiful books like The Jewel in the Crown (my current Audible book) are out there beckoning to me?  Why would I waste time with a complete fraud of a book that has led to so much anti-Semitic hatred and violence?

Should the book be banned?  I do not think so.  However, I doubt I’d vote to give it library space if I were still sitting on the library board.

challenged books
click image to link to source

Here’s a list of books that were “challenged” (meaning that some library got a complaint about the book) in 2015. Notice how often the reason given is “unsuited for age group”?  That’s exactly what I was talking about in my Twain story. It’s a very subjective issue and a thorny one. And it’s difficult to know what to do about it, if anything at all. One solution involves making sure that parents realize what subject matter is involved in books their children check out.  Does that mean putting a warning sticker on the front?  (That would increase circulation, I bet!)  I don’t know, but I do know that the issues are real and all sides have reasonable concerns.

Just like we had to do at the library, you have to make these kinds of decisions at your house.  What books are you going to spend time reading? Which ones are worth bothering with?  Which ones will you buy in hard copy form and store?  Which ones will you read and discard?  You can’t eat at every restaurant in the world, and you can’t read all the books.

Choose carefully. Choose wisely.

The government does not care what or how you choose.

Identity Crisis

obtaining ss number
click image to link to source

It’s almost circular, isn’t it?  You need  a birth certificate to prove your age and citizenship, but you need a US passport to prove your identity. However, you need a birth certificate to get the US passport.

Somebody brought up the case of Alecia Faith Pennington in a comment the other day, and that set me wondering. I hadn’t heard an update on Faith’s situation (that’s the name she goes by) in a long time and I was curious to see how her case is progressing.

And that sent me down the rabbit trail.

Here’s some background for those who might not know what I’m talking about.

Faith Pennington is the daughter of Lisa Pennington.  At least, that’s how I think of her primarily.  I was aware of Lisa long before Faith flew the coop, because Lisa is a blogger.  (Warning: the blog is filled with clickbait. Lisa is quite clearly trying to make money off it.)

She had written a piece several years ago slamming gays which I found pretty offensive, so I wrote her a note to explain my dismay to her. She does not allow negative comments of any sort on her blog, so I knew it wouldn’t be approved, but it really wasn’t for public consumption. It was for her. I made it very short and to the point because I knew she would hit delete as soon as she recognized it as negative.

I noticed at some point that her husband, James, is a graduate of Liberty University’s law school, which is pretty much the worst law school in America. But he can’t use the excuse that he doesn’t know that no ID severely restricts what people can and cannot do in this country.

In short, they are right-wing conservative Christian homeschoolers who live out in the boonies and completely isolate their numerous children.

So I knew who they were, sort of, in a kind of detached “oh, yeah, another one of those” way.

And then Faith left home and made a video.

And the video went viral. Way, way beyond Naugler viral. Really viral.

Faith had decided to leave home and go live with her grandmother.  Well, here. You’ve seen Faith’s side of it. Let’s read Lisa’s.  Note: this is a PDF of the post Lisa made on her horrid little blog, playing her victimy whiny violin and begging for sympathy because her grown daughter decided to leave home.  She took the original one down, but the internet is forever.

She calls it “The Hardest Post I Ever Wrote.”  Bless her little heart. One of her children essentially gave her the finger and moved out.  And that’s the hardest thing she’s ever dealt with.

She also manages to insult the hell out of her own mother by calling her “a godless woman who has been giving her [Faith] foolish counsel and encouraging her to deceive us and get out.” Her argument seems to center around Faith refusing to come home.

Why should Faith go home? Really? Why should she?  “Home” means living out in the middle of nowhere, used as a babysitter for all the younger siblings, with no social life and no autonomy and no driver’s license (and no access to a car even if you had a license) and no job and no access to the internet.  “Home” means giving up her adulthood to the control of her parents. But the Penningtons were willing to give her “everything she wanted” (meaning: her rightful identity and the paperwork to prove it, something she should have had as her birthright) provided she would “come home” and be their willing, controlled slave once again.

I say that Faith was lucky to have grandparents who were willing to help her out.

And that’s where I left Faith. She had no ID of any sort, and no way to get any that anyone could see. She was basically invisible.  She was also resolved.  Other news outlets were reporting on the story, including this one that gives more details. 

Her father made his own video (removed now) where he made the whole controversy about how she is basically a bratty teenager who wanted her driver’s license. Just the sort of thing one would expect from these sort of folks. And then it all sort of went silent.

I kind of forgot about her, until she was mentioned in the comments here.

So, imagine my delight to discover this.

I know. It’s half-an-hour in length, but it’s worth listening to it. Faith has come a long, long way.

What astonished me the most, I think, is that a Republican state legislator in Texas came to her aid. That’s just wonderful and welcome and I am thrilled.  And the Texas legislature did, in fact, pass legislation that makes it a crime to deny your adult children their identification.  Texas did this.  Regressive, backward, goofy Texas. The state I would be happy to see leave the union. They did this.  Good for them.

Faith, according to her Facebook page, has her delayed birth certificate, is awaiting her passport to arrive in the mail, and will be able to use those two documents to finally get a Social Security number so she can get a job, go to school, and be a real person.

But notice this. The video that Faith made and put on YouTube was released on February 9, 2015.   That’s nineteen months ago.

It has been more than a year and a half and Faith still doesn’t have all her documents.  Let that sink in.

For more than a year and a half, Faith Pennington, who is an adult US citizen, has been unable to get a job, or go to school, or travel outside the United States. She literally can’t do much of anything. And it’s entirely a situation that her parents caused because they have engaged in something that now has a name.

It’s called identification abuse.

Homeschoolers Anonymous article about Faith

Lots more Homeschoolers Anonymous pieces on identification abuse

Coalition For Responsible Home Education article about identification abuse

The Washington Post article about Faith

PDF report of a survey of homeschool alumni about identification abuse

In Texas, denying these documents to an adult child is a crime. It ought to be a crime everywhere, and that includes Kentucky.  Forcing an adult child to waste two years of her life, put it all on hold, because you happen to be a control-freak asshole ought to be a criminal offense.

Faith was lucky because her video went so viral that she got the attention of people with the power to do something about her situation.

What about those who didn’t make a video?

Citizens

One cold winter day in 2009, I happened upon a podcast and started listening to it out of sheer boredom. Tim Turner was describing how you could get out of paying your mortgage or having your house repossessed and end up owning it free and clear.

Since we already own our little farm outright and were in no danger of losing it, I don’t know why the whole thing intrigued me, but it did. I supposed it was because the guy was so obviously bananas.

This was back when lots of folks were in serious trouble with home foreclosures and job losses and people were pretty nervous about the economy. And this guy was doing a seminar on how to beat the system.

He threw around a lot of legal-sounding phrases and big words, like his listeners would understand what the hell he was talking about, and sounded astonishingly similar to Joe Naugler, as a matter of fact.  Lots of talking but not much communicating.

In one of his weekly calls, in another example, a follower asked Turner to explain what really happened when an alien spacecraft supposedly crashed in 1947 near Roswell, N.M. His reply was reminiscent of a tabloid headline in a supermarket checkout line: “I’m not going to tell you they [aliens] exist or don’t exist. What I’m going to say is every nation on Earth, or every industrialized nation on Earth at least, has a treaty with them.”

[From an article on Turner at the Southern Poverty Law Center.]

That was my introduction to the weird, wacky world of the sovereign citizen.

SPLC article
click image to link to source

This article is probably the best overall explanation of the movement and their basic beliefs. The most interesting part to me of all this is that the sovereign citizens movement is basically racist and originated mostly in the white supremacy community. And this PDF is a longer, more comprehensive history and explanation of the movement.

amazon

You can even buy books by sovereigns telling you all about how to flood the courts with worthless documents and how you too can end up in prison (like Tim Turner did).

The name thing is also bizarre and sort of fascinating. They believe that their name spelled in all capitals is not really their name at all and that they can get out of legal obligations just because they sign their name as Sally Davis, instead of SALLY DAVIS.

I laughed some more when these madmen sent letters to all fifty governors of the various states demanding that they step down from office “or else.” It was all just so funny.

But then along came Jerry Kane and his 16-year-old son, Joe.

Kanes

Here they are. An overweight pompous asshole of a father, and his innocent-looking, just-on-the-cusp-of-manhood son.  Jerry, in this video, was doing a seminar. You can listen to some of it if you like.  There is a whole series of these videos. The seminar was all day.

Jerry and his son were in Arkansas about a year after the video above was filmed and got pulled over by a couple of policeman on a routine traffic stop. While the policemen were occupied talking with the father, the son, this 16-year-old boy, produced a rifle and fatally shot both of the policemen. Jerry and Joe then fled, only to be surrounded a while later in a parking lot and killed by the police.

It was a terrible tragedy that didn’t have to happen.

It happened because Jerry Kane indoctrinated his son in a bunch of bullshit that included an over-inflated sense of their own importance, a complete disdain for the duly-authorized legal system from the courts on down to the local police, and extreme paranoia.

Jerry Kane, that jackass in the white suit, got both himself and his boy killed.

For me, the incident made the whole sovereign citizen thing not nearly so funny. I hadn’t realized how close they were to violence. Obviously, those cops hadn’t realized it either. After the Kane tragedy, police officers started receiving training in how to recognize sovereigns and how to handle them so that further incidents like that would not occur.

I bring all this up because Joe and Nicole Naugler, while describing themselves as voluntaryists, use language and seem to embrace concepts that originate in the movement. Pinning an ideology on the Nauglers is difficult if not impossible, as they are basically opportunists.

Nicole has said that she is a “voluntaryist.”  Before venturing down the Blessed Little Rabbit Hole, I had no idea what that was.

Think of it this way. The big category is “Christian.”  Under that, we have “Protestants” and “Catholics.”

The various sub-sects of “Protestant” include those on in the mainstream, like Episcopalians or Lutherans, and those on the right, like Southern Baptists, and then the really extreme bunch, like independent fundamentalist snake-handling Baptists.

And that’s very much the way libertarians are.  Like Baptists, there are all sorts of sub-groups. There are the basic mainstream libertarians, who are bonkers but pose no threat to anyone about anything. And there are all the spawns, the off-shoots, many of whom are lumped together as “patriots.”

Sovereign citizens and voluntaryists and anarcho-capitalists all fall into that latter category. Sorting out the differences between them is a bit like trying to figure out what the difference is between Southern Baptists and Free Will Baptists and Primitive Baptists. They fuss and fight over definitions between themselves, but nobody else cares. They are all Baptists.

And like Baptists, these sub-groups have core ideas they share, things like “government is bad,” “laws restrict freedom,” “taxation is theft,” “the police suck dirt,” “courts are all corrupt,” “government is all corrupt,” “to be free, nobody can tell me what to do.” That sort of thing.

anti

I have dozens of screen shots like this, where Nicole shares some post of Larken Rose’s.

I’ve talked a bit about Larken Rose here and in another post about voting. But what I didn’t mention is that Larken Rose is one of those voluntaryist-anarchocapitalist sorts. (If they combine any more words, we’ll have a hyphenated jungle.) And that’s a close, close sibling to a sovereign citizen.

Nicole loves Larken Rose.  She hangs on his every word and shares many of them. She even steals them outright without attribution.

business law

She doesn’t like laws pertaining to her business. She doesn’t like it that the state wants to insure that if I walk in there, the building will be safe and not collapse, the workers will be paid appropriately (unless they are her own children, in which case slave labor is acceptable), there is a recognizable entity for me to sue if I am cheated, and that she is not permitted to skip out on paying her fair share of taxes.

theft

Oh, yeah. I forgot. Taxes are theft in Nauglerville.

law you won't obey

Notice the threat here? You’re a slave. You need to figure out when you are going to rise up and revolt. At what point will you do that?  You need to think about it.

No, I’m not, Larken, and no, I don’t.

laws immoral

Thankfully, Nicole does not hold any elected office. There are good things in the world and having her washing dog butts is one of those good things.

government control

Apart from the fact that the little graphic above is inaccurate (being a socialist does not mean that you think government should control all  your food sources or clothing sources or even housing except for the needy, and the differences between a classic conservative and a classic liberal are way more numerous and varied than universal healthcare), the point Nicole is offering up here is that she doesn’t believe in government of any kind at all. Zip. Nada. Zilch.

dangerous lumped

So, see, even Nicole lumps the various sects of this so-called “Patriot” movement together.  And she knows that there is a violent, dangerous streak in there.  She knows perfectly well who Jerry Kane was, and I bet she could name many of the other sovereign citizens or similar types who have clashed with law enforcement and ended up either in prison or dead.

don't condone violence

Two options.  Just two. Black and white.  Either, or.

What about option C? Authority is given with the consent of the governed (it is – Nicole just won’t vote because her guy generally doesn’t win, so she took her rubber duck and left), so we honor that even if we don’t agree with it.

For her, there is no option C.

And she’s not condoning violence (yet), but she understands it. Yeah, we all heard her screeching at Sheriff Pate to shoot her, and screaming at her boys that the police would shoot them.  I remember that.

don't condone violence 2

And this is what her unschooled kids are being fed. Violent uprising might be the only answer.  The state has no authority.  The police are the enemy, and violence against them is “understandable.” Law about things like sanitation and business licenses are evil and have no validity.  It’s courageous and commendable to scream bloody murder at a sheriff.

daylight savings timeEven the family jokes involve how dumb and useless and stupid and incompetent the government is.

I think that is exactly what Jerry Kane fed his son, Joseph.  And I really believe that when Jerry Kane heard those shots and saw those police officers fall and realized that his son, who I’m sure he loved, had just killed two officers, he was the most shocked person on earth.

When I listen to Jerry Kane on those videos, I am reminded of men like Ted Haggard (the fundamentalist preacher who ranted about the evils of homosexuality while having a gay affair). They say stuff from the pulpit all the time that they really don’t believe or do. Jerry Kane wasn’t going to actually do enough law-breaking to get put in actual jail.  He was just going skate close so he could trot around the country and give seminars in his white suit and get paid for it.

We all do this to some extent.  “I will not do that,” we say vehemently, until we calm down a little and realize why we are going to have to do exactly that, or a somewhat altered version of that. It’s called adulting.

Joseph Kane was not an adult, though. He, like all adolescents, was just starting to learn about how idealism and reality sometimes (often?) clash, and how you have to figure out how some sort of compromise.

And he was listening to his father ‘preach’ from the pulpit of governmental hatred, childish narcissism, and paranoia.  He absorbed the lessons.  He believed them.

The result was catastrophe.

I’ve wondered what was running through Jerry Kane’s mind as he madly drove away from that scene.  He had to know that if the police found them (and he had to know that they would), he and Joseph would very likely be killed in the ensuing situation. He was a dead man driving, and in the vehicle with him was his son, also as good as dead.

Did he frantically try to figure out a way for his son to survive even if he didn’t?  Did he want to give up?  Did they argue about it?

We’ll never know.

 

 

 

 

 

The Help Desk

Joe and Nicole have to fill out some paperwork. They need a permit to dump their buckets of human sewage on their property, and they have to get Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton to sign off on said permit.

permit

Thankfully, we have a volunteer who has offered to help them fill it all out.

I know Joe and Nicole will be grateful.

_______________________
Hey there Joe and Nicole,

Glad you’re reading the comments. Nice to see you still don’t have the character to respond to me directly and instead, choose to play this blog game. I was notified about your blog comments to include the use of my name again.

Rock on Pepsodent.

It’s unfortunate you continue to spin and exaggerate and lie. But hey, we’ve come to expect nothing less.

I wish you luck in your “landfill application”. A DFS-319 would have been much easier. But that blank DFS-345 is more fun. Funnier than shit actually.

Let me offer some help.

-Block 3 (Structures) Go ahead and put “sound construction with pallet base” in the addendum.

-Block 4 (Proposed disposal areas) Stick with what works. “We’ll toss that shit in the woods”

-Block 6 (Access roads) you can put “sorta. i.e. not good enough to place the shed where we really wanted to, but good enough to drive on if it hasn’t rained too much”.

-For block 7 (Proposed operations plan) “the spirit will guide us” might work.

-Block 8 (Monitoring Program) put “We are armed and will deal with anybody or any entity that dareth step foot upon our hallowed retreat.”

-For block 9 (Land use) Go ahead and put a question mark there. That’ll pretty much sum up what has happened to that land.

-Block 10 (Nitrogen Requirement) Here’s a great idea. Stomp your feet and remind everybody that the atmosphere is actually 78.09% nitrogen so this is obviously a statist requirement meant to deceive and force uneducated people to pay taxes.

-Block 11 (application rate) Simply fill out a variable application matrix that takes intake into consideration. Hardees probably differs from White Castle.

-Block 12 (Approval letter from local planning and zoning) You could call Valerie Chinn and get a news spot outlining how you’re being downtrodden and forced to comply with something that doesn’t exist.

-Block 13 (Endangered Species) Just put “human character” in there and it’ll probably make sense.

-Block 14 (Other required by cabinet) Good Luck.

You have a blank piece of wrinkled paper and a printed piece of regulations. I suppose I could put a blank application to Mensa up and assume it’s all taken care of?

It is funny shit. Keep posting. I appreciate the “advice” you keep offering. If you think I’m harassing you by calling bullshit on you when you drop my name . . . then “lawsuit” me. Go ahead and snag an attorney and litigate. Tell them I’m a troll and have hurt your feelings by making public commentary on your public commentary. I’d offer advice as well, but you wouldn’t take it. Actually, I don’t want you to take it. I enjoy the blog war you and Sally have going. It’s like watching a crazy person armed with marshmallows rush an M1 Abrams tank. Time and time again. Marshmallows bouncing off the armor. The crazy person keeps picking them back up and throwing them. Sally and I are sitting in the tank chuckling.

Let me put something into perspective for you. My entire septic system; tank, lines, permit, installation, sign-off . . . cost me $1400 a mere five years ago. I even owned my own backhoe, but it was ultimately cheaper to have it all installed by a guy I know that knows how the system works. All legal, all functional. At $106 a month, well, you do the exact science. Let’s not forget that there was a system on your land. You could have used that, but instead, you chose to dump your shit in the woods. The rain does wash it off. It does dissipate. It doesn’t compost. It goes into the ground water. My water.

I’m fine with you doing whatever the hell you want as long as your hubris, arrogance, ignorance, and sheer stupidity don’t compromise my water source.

Warm regards,
Al, your hardheaded neighbor that isn’t spending $106 a month on a turdis.

PS Since I enjoy watching Sally hand you your asses on a regular basis, I’m going to send her some money to pay blog fees. It’s worth the funny shit.

__________________________________

No consulting fee will be charged. This advice was offered free as a public service.

Note: I would far rather see any extra bucks donated to the Kentucky Sheriff’s Ranch (information in the side bar).

For reference, here is Nicole little message to Al from her shit-colored blog. (Why those awful colors?)

Nicole to Al

The OK Corral

They were standing on a corner in Tombstone, Arizona.  It was such a fine sight to see.

Or, as it’s known in Breckinridge County, the Breckinridge County Courthouse.

This was the scene of the Great Shitgate Standoff on August 16, 2016.

Earps

On one side, standing for the evil “nuisance” State, was Wyatt Earp the Judge, with his accomplice, Doc Holliday Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton of the Breckinridge County Health Department.

On the other side, standing up for “his right to compost his shit,” was Ike Clanton Joe “I’ll dump my shit anyplace I like” Naugler.

They had come to this defining moment after years of sparring.

court records 1

 

Note: some of these charges say “dismissed” because Joe quickly complied with the law, or because charges were rolled together into one.

court records 2

And that’s just in Kentucky, spanning six years.  Who knows how much is in Texas or Maine or elsewhere.

But clearly Joe “I will absolutely fling my shit” Naugler is no stranger to the evil devices of the State, his nemesis.  In other words, this is not his first rodeo.

The current confrontation has been documented here numerous times over the past few months.

The Bucket Brigade

Outhouse

This is probably what you came here to find out

Throughout, Joe “nobody can tell me where to poop” Naugler has been adamant about his right to relieve himself as he pleases. Nothing illustrates this better than the little conversation he had and recorded with Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton from the Breckinridge County Health Department.

And it looks even better in print.  So I transcribed it for you.

You’re welcome.

Joe: I’m just curious as to, beyond the complaints that are being made, what factual evidence have you acquired to instigate (incomprehensible) the claims that are in that paper.

Hinton: Like I said, other than the complaint, I have not been on your property.

Joe: Yeah, well, I know that

Hinton: on y’all’s Facebook post, there were pictures of the composting toilet, or what you call a composting toilet.

Joe: Yeah

Hinton: The way you’re composting is not approved – is not an approved system in the state of Kentucky.

Joe: Well, we have looked at EPA, and we have looked at regulations, and we’ve had several other agencies investigate us, and everything is on the up and up. We, we composted through a bucket; we have several composting areas that we keep very, uh, lined with, uh, even EPA standards. We downloaded the PDF based off of EPA standards and we are following those to the letter.

Now, I’m cur – I know that you’ve gone on Ron’s property – we saw you – uh, did you take any test results from anything off of his property to confirm that our compost toilet is contaminating his property?

Hinton: No. The reason I was on his property was not for the toilet. That’s not the reason I was on his property. The reason I was on his property was for debris and trash and stuff that supposedly came from your property, and I was just there to look at that.

Joe: And you saw debris and trash?

Hinton: Well, there was some type – I don’t know if it was wet toilet paper that was (unclear) – there was something in that field of his. I don’t know if that came from his property or your property or what. I was there to look at that.

Joe: Yeah, yeah, so you’re saying one item that could have been a toilet paper, could have been. . .

Hinton: The letter you received is because of the way that human waste is being piled, or composted, or whatnot.

Joe: Yeah

Hinton: (unclear) has some type of EPA guidelines, or something, that you’ve talked to them. If you’ve got all that documented, then I need copies of all that.

Joe: Well, we don’t need – we’re not gonna – we don’t need to prove a negative. I mean, if you’re coming at us and you’re trying to, to, show cause of something that we have done wrong, you need to prove that. You’re gonna need to prove all of that. And that’s what I’m saying. I’m requesting any documentation, any certified documentation, of how, because it’s very clear that, in the thing, we have a right to compost our waste. And the guidelines that are set forth, we are following it as best we can to the letter. And when I say ‘as best we can’, that – I’m not saying – we’re following it the way it’s supposed to be done. There is no contamination run-off, there is no sickness, there is no anything being caused, or to show cause from our compost.

This is direct harassment that we are documenting coming from some of the locals, who we have heavily documented, are gonna do this. Um, and, you’re just, as far as you and your agency, we’re gonna need proof of any of this.

Hinton: Okay. Like I said, basically you can look through all the-

Joe: I have. We have.

Hinton: (unclear) 902KAR (unclear) 085

Joe: We looked through all those yesterday, and we still fall in line with that. And like I said, you’ve sent us a piece of paper with your authority on it and your reputation without, again, like I’ve said, I’ve recorded this conversation here and admittedly, you’ve never been on our property, and the only thing you spotted on Ron’s property, after not doing any tests, because we read all these citations, we read ’em all, was that you saw what could have been toilet paper, or some kind of debris but it was only one piece or item.

Hinton: Okay. Like I said, we’ll just, we’ll let this go, and at the end of your notice, if you haven’t corrected the dumping of the solid, dumping of the human waste on the ground, then. . .

Joe: The human waste can be composted on the ground.

Hinton: Okay, we’ll let somebody else determine who’s right and who’s wrong.

Joe: Who, who’s going to determine that?

Hinton: Have a good day.

As you can see, Joe “I can so dump shit if I want” Naugler just did not give an inch.  And Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton just refused to listen to Joe “It can so be composted” Naugler’s cogent arguments, and retreated swiftly to the safety of letting “somebody else” determine who is right and who is wrong.

But who is going to determine that?

Why, the evil statist Judge, that’s who.

summons

So Joe “We did not contaminate” Naugler got a summons, way back in June. It has taken all this time, due to all sorts of legal wrangling and an illness, to get to the OK Corral.  But here we are were, on August 16.

Nicole “I will so breastfeed my baby right in court while he wears sunglasses” Naugler has assured us that they are in it for the long haul (did you like that little pun? Took me a while to come up with that one).

conform

It’s a plot.  It’s the evil statist Judge who is plotting with Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton to make an “example” of this poor family, the Clantons Nauglers and make them “conform.”

contamination

Actually, the evil statist Judge didn’t do anything at all about any testing of any soil.  You know why?  Because Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton never accused them once of “contaminating” anything.  What he said above, right to Joe “nobody is sick” Naugler, was that dumping shit on the ground in Kentucky is illegal.  Period.

lack of a permit

And I hate to inform Nicole “we don’t need no damn permit” Naugler, the permit wasn’t the issue. You can’t get a permit to commit robbery either. There is no permit available to do what they have been doing.

stand ground

But they are gonna stand their ground. See? Right there. That’s what it says.

not backing down

Nicole “I know my rights” Naugler is not backing down.

Can you feel the tension in the air?  On a hot August morning, the air was electric in Breckinridge County.  Who would win in this battle of wills rights lunacy?

Would it be the evil statist Judge with his trusty sidekick, Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton?

Or would the intrepid Joe “we have read that and follow it to the letter” Naugler prevail in his stand against tyranny?

update promise

We were promised an update.  We were so promised an update.

And I waited for the update.

And waited.

And waited.

And nothing happened.

Well, except a stupid picture of a little kid eating at Hardee’s during the Joe “I love our after-court dates” and Nicole “I always take the baby so sympathy” outing.

So what the hell. I’ll update.

deferral 1

Page 1.  It’s a criminal offense, but because the evil statist Judge was feeling all nice and sweet, he allowed Joe “I absolutely can dump my shit” Naugler to sign a deferral agreement.

What does that mean?

It means that Joe “I cave in whenever I walk into a courtroom” Naugler has to be a good boy and follow all the rules that the evil statist Judge lays down in the document.  He has to do this for a whole year.  If he fucks up and makes a huge mistake and shits in a bucket and dumps it on the ground, the evil statist judge can have his sorry ass hauled right back into court and there will be hell to pay at that point.

deferral 2

And other than “be a good boy,” there were two requirements.

First, Joe “I know my rights” Naugler waived his constitutional right to a trial.  I found this extremely funny.

Second, he cannot “hold” shit.  I cannot imagine why he would want to “hold” shit, but nonetheless, he cannot do it.

He also cannot “stockpile” shit.  That means, in evil statist courtroom language, he cannot compost it.  He can’t make a big pile of it and let it rot.

And he can’t even “dispose” of shit without getting the approval of Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton.

That means one of two things:

They have to hope Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton will allow them to continue renting the porta-potty for the next year or they have to get an approved, actual, real septic tank complete with permit and inspection and all that stuff.

potty

Just like the rest of us have to do.

And just like in Tombstone, Arizona, all those years ago, the Earps won.

Looks like the Nauglers have a couple of thousand extra bows to make.

UPDATE:

It appears that about an hour after this post went up, Nicole “I never read the ‘tabloid’ blog” Naugler did a kind of rewrite/update/mishmash on her blog.  Unlike her, I do not mind one bit if you click the linky and go over and read what she has to say.  It’s just an amazing coincidence that she decided to update right at that time.

Basically, though, she’s trying to assert that all that happened at the Great Shitgate Showdown was that Jeremy “that idiot” Hinton gave her a form for a permit and she just has to fill it in and submit it and they’ll be back to shitting in buckets and dumping it on the ground.

I’ll believe that when I see it.

Oddly, she claims that “their attorney” (like they have an attorney on permanent retainer) gave them a copy of the supposed form for the permit “weeks ago.”  Why, then, didn’t she just fill it in, if it’s so easy peasy, and submit it and then stick her tongue out at the whole world and trot off to shit legally in a bucket?

Oh, and she refers to the court deferment as a “souvenir.”  That’s sort of like calling Mr. Hinton an “idiot” and the court a “nuisance.”

There was never a need for this to go to criminal court. . .

Well, she’s right about that. All they had to do was comply with the law in the first place, and do something about it all within the very generous length of time they were given, and they’d never have gone to court.

Nicole “freedom fighter” and Joe “OMG, let me sign before I have to go to jail” Naugler are their own worst enemies.

Facts Sometimes Just Bite

 

 

welcome

Nicole has actually done a thing that she had “planned.”  She started yet another blog.

This is a massive feat.  It took her all of ten minutes, I bet.

But here’s the deal.  She is going to just publish these stories, from people who may remain anonymous, totally unvetted, of supposed mistreatment by Child Protective Services and the court system.

You do realize, don’t you, that just like people in prison, people whose children were taken by Child Protective Services are almost always innocent?  At least, that’s what they claim. That’s why it was very nice to see a commenter on this blog who basically said, “My children were taken and it was the right thing for the state to do, even though it totally sucked for me.”  Hardly anyone ever does that.

So soliciting unvetted “stories” is just asking for lovely fictional accounts to come flooding in.

And exactly what does Nicole think she will accomplish by this (except for the gleaning of people to support her with donations. . . )?  I assure you that nobody in state government is interested in unvetted anonymous stories, especially when poorly written and that involve very long paragraphs and run-on sentences.

However, since Nicole refuses to vet them, I will step up to the plate.

Here’s the first.

13 percent foster care

This is from the entry called Two Kinds of Foster Parents. The writer claims to have been a Kentucky foster parent and says that there are two kinds: those who do it because of the money and those who just love little children.  Guess which sort she was?

However, math is hard.

She says:

. . . in 2006 13% of all children in Kentucky were in foster care.

She continues by asserting that the state of Kentucky gets so damned much money from all these bazillion children in foster care that hell, we don’t need any state taxes.  They just use federal money from foster care to keep the whole entire state running.

2006
click image to link to source

Here are the actual figures from 2006, ten years ago.

The population of children in Kentucky in 2006 was just under a million: 960,255.

The number of children in foster care was 6895.  That six thousand, eight hundred ninety five.

What percent of 960,255 is 6895?  Well, that’s algebra, and Nicole doesn’t do algebra.  Neither do her brain-dead followers, it seems, and neither does the idiot who wrote that silly nonsense.

The correct percentage of children in foster care in Kentucky in 2006 was .718%.

That is point seven one eight, less than one percent.  Not 13%.

I even tried very hard to give this doofus the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe she put a period between the 1 and the 3 and Nicole simply didn’t copy it correctly and the figure she meant to use was 1.3%, but even that is almost two times the real figure.

Thirteen percent of 960,255 is 124,833. Considering that there are only about 400,000 children in the whole entire United States in foster care in any given year (it fluctuates slightly), that would simply be astonishing.

The percentage of children in various states in foster care:

California: 0.6%

Mississippi: 0.432%

Texas: 0.42%

Florida: 0.49%

Indiana: 0.91%

Oopsie. Did you get that?

Indiana had 14, 452 children in foster care on September 30, 2014.  The population under age 18 in Indiana in 2014 was 1,582,360. Do the math. I know it’s hard, but try.

So, just from those few states that I randomly chose and looked up the stats, Kentucky falls in second place, not first place.

But let’s get as current as we can, why don’t we?  Especially since we know of ten kids who live in Kentucky who are not in foster care.

According to the US Census Bureau, there were 1,013,346 children (under age 18) in Kentucky in 2015.  There are 7894 of them in foster care. That’s 0.77%.

These figures fluctuate from year to year, as you can imagine, but not by a whole lot.

Be skeptical of what you read.  Really skeptical.  People are just so full of baloney a lot of the time. The state of Kentucky is not running the entire state based on federal money they get for the tiny number of children who are in foster care.

If the state of Kentucky was really so gung-ho ready to take children away from their parents at the drop of a white bucket full of shit, I know eleven they could grab tomorrow and there would be cheers heard across the land. The fact that they do not tells me that they really don’t want to do this if they can possibly keep from it.  Rather than being overly eager to grab kids, they are, in my personal opinion, too lenient.

 

 

 

 

 

Civilization

CPS

Really?

The telling sentence is this one:

This is what CPS found upon their initial investigation.

What does that mean?

When was “their initial investigation”?

The Nauglers have been living at the Blessed Little Property since the fall of 2013. And they have had three different “dwellings” since moving there.

Here’s the first one.

First shed

It was a garden shed, just like the current garden shed (more or less).

According to Nicole’s account, they returned it in order to save the monthly payment, and because they were headed into winter (fall of 2014), they built the infamous Blessed Little Shitshack, where they lived until Child Protective Services came down on their heads in May, 2015 and took the kids.

But here’s what she says during the period right after they got the first shed.

eleven days

So, according to Nicole’s own account, the “initial investigation” by CPS occurred eleven days after they moved into the original, first garden shed.

With Nicole, you have to read carefully, because she often chooses her words to deceive.

She’s not saying that CPS thought the Blessed Shitshack was a great place to live.  She is saying that CPS, with whom the Nauglers are very, very familiar having had frequent visits from them throughout the years, thought that the original garden shed was okay.

The children were removed in May, 2015, and when they were returned, it was to the second garden shed. And Nicole and Joe had to get that one delivered before the children were returned.

They try to spin this every which way, but it just won’t spin.

They cherry-pick the situation, and say that the Guardian Ad-Litem was the only person who didn’t just faint with delight at the Blessed Little Shitshack and its quaint features and rustic ambiance.  The CPS folks found it beautiful and more than adequate.

But Nicole is the same person who has insisted over and over again that the whole CPS thing is all over. Case closed. They found nothing at all except that the Nauglers failed to notify the state they were “homeschooling.”

under CPS move

You know what?  We moved interstate with a minor child and we never even thought about CPS or anyone else for that matter. We just moved. That’s what people do when they don’t have a current, open case with Child Protective Services. When you cannot move without “the court” putting you “under that areas [sic] CPS,” you have an open case.

CPS visits

. . .we still have CPS visits. . .

Yeah. That’s called “we still have an open CPS case.”

But this is what Nicole wants her leghumpers to believe was found to be “structurally sound” and “clean and well organized.”

I’ve left them large (click to see them), so you can appreciate the “structural soundness” and “cleanliness and organization.”

If Kentucky’s (or any other state’s) Child Protective Services thought that mess was a “structurally sound, clean and organized” place to raise children, we have a very serious problem with Child Protective Services.

These people are not ideal poster children for some sort of silly protest against the perceived injustices of Child Protective Services. They are, instead, the sort of people who absolutely need CPS to watch their every move, hopefully until the last child is of age.

excreta