It's not editorialized, he literally claimed that.
He said that joint custody agreements would violate the Florida Constitution, in accordance with the arguments from his masters who need to be able to use their bargaining chip to maximize wealth.
DeSantis is also supported by the Congressional Family Caucus (worthless pro-marriage parasites) and by Chip Roy, who supported the impeachment of President Trump over the Ukraine call, but voted against it to save his ass.
Is it really fair to call divorce decrees contracts? Contracts at their core are mutually beneficial agreements arrived at freely and without coercion. Unless the divorce terms were agreed to by the parties and the court's only role was to sign off on it they're not arrived at freely and they're sure as shit not mutually beneficial.
This isn't me agreeing with Imp about the veto btw. There very may well be ex post facto issues with the law, and DeSantis is a lawyer so he would have a good idea of whether it would hold up. If he thought it would be struck down it makes sense that he would veto it to save the state litigation costs. I just don't think the typical divorce can be fairly described as a contract.
I meant that marriage is a contract. If you contract a marriage under the understanding that you are entitled to X amount of alimony if you devote your life to the marriage rather than making money for some corporation, and politicians then unilaterally abrogated that, it does not seem fair to me.
It was about alimony and custody agreements, I'm pretty sure. It was supposed to finally fix the divorce courts, and nothing scares the enemy more than that.
I'm sure if they had the majority, they would have blocked it. They got some concessions out of it, as the enemy always does - IIRC, some kind of one year minimum for alimony to "help the woman get back on her feet".
There were also meetings between Ronald and women's groups leading up to the veto.
Because they were promised that adultery wouldn't count against them in court. I'm not kidding. They had to add that to get women to vote for it. Nothing speaks louder than that about what they are.
No, I'm sure there are a lot of irrelevant state senates that women don't care enough about.
Can't find it. I know I've seen it. I even remember the name of the woman. Barbara DeVane. She spoke with DeSantis about the bill on behalf of the NOW.
I'm not changing my story, I just chose the most hard-hitting part.
It's a lie on multiple counts. It's not even cited as an argument. Only alimony is, and the fact that it is retroactively affected by this.
No, I'm sure there are a lot of irrelevant state senates that women don't care enough about.
The state senate of one of the largest states in the US is "irrelevant" and "women" don't care about it? Fascinating.
Can't find it. I know I've seen it. I even remember the name of the woman. Barbara DeVane. She spoke with DeSantis about the bill on behalf of the NOW.
You're sure it happened, but can't produce any receipts. I'll go with you getting things wrong again then.
A legal presumption that divorcing parents will share custody of their children 50/50, which also informs how much child support parents pay their ex-spouses.
The state senate of one of the largest states in the US is "irrelevant" and "women" don't care about it? Fascinating.
Well, something can pass unanimously, backed by the president of the state GOP and still be vetoed by women's allies in the right position. Why would they care about state senate positions?
All they're saying is that personnel decisions are not Trump's strong point, which isn't really controversial regardless of where you stand on the Trump/DeSantis debate.
DeSantis has proven his worth to the More Feminine Way and will be rewarded with all their support throughout the primary.
Groomer pivot coming - anti-gay laws that will prevent single men being able to enter the education system (because they'll lie about you being gay like they lie about rape, abuse and everything else that comes out of their mouths) and will solidify women's control over it.
It has happened before. The persecution of homosexuals usually expanded to anyone "against the family" as they were assumed to be gay. Interesting fact about the Nazi persecution of homosexuals - despite lesbian rhetoric being filled with references to pedophilia, lesbian women were spared the camps. However, men who were vocally opposed to marriage were simply labeled as gay and removed from society.
You betcha. I greatly respect them. As high comedy.
90% of people will die of the vaccine
people going for the Pfizer vaccine will secretly get AstraZeneca so that they will die
AstraZeneca will be mandated for young men in the UK
Women will be exempted from AstraZeneca
A 'male curfew' will be enacted
Kim Potter will not be indicted. Then: she will not have her name revealed. Then: her picture will not be posted. Then: the charges will be quietly dropped during a quite period. Then: she will only get probation.
That gang shooting in the UK was a 'fed' false flag which would then be pinned on 'incels'.
A lot of people jumped from position to position as the details of the vax were slowly revealed.
That is also dumb. I've been able to stick to my original position, because mine was well-thought through. It's good for older people, fatsos and those with aggravating conditions.
That said, it's one thing to be wrong, it's quite another to be wrong and then brag about how accurate your predicitons are. I don't think you've managed to ever predict anything correctly, despite your self-labeling as "Impstradamus".
The "male curfew" was debated, and some of the other policy proposals of that time, such as making walking too close to a woman illegal, did pass.
So despite your prediction that there would be a "male curfew", there wasn't.
Kim Potter got 14 months for killing someone in cold blood. Not a bad deal.
The exact same sentence as officer Mehrsele got for using a gun when he supposedly wanted to tase, so your seven predictions were wrong.
That shooting has still not had any data released on the perpetrator, as far as I know. I still could be right.
Didn't you say, when I first brought up the walking too close idea, that it would never happen?
I'm not going to give you credit for something I don't remember, but this does sound like something I'd say. Even in England they're not going to pull people from the streets because they happened to walk too close with no ill intent.
There will be a curfew. I just underestimated how long they'll wait to do it to us.
When you're 90 and in a retirement home (not that you'll live that long with all the heart damage you do to yourself), you'll be claiming that 90% will drop dead from the vaccine ANY MINUTE NOW, right after they pass a 'male curfew'.
I am rarely wrong, only early.
The women are going to make their first invention, the time machine, go back in time and un-indict Kim Potter! Impstradamus will have been right AGAIN!
Can you NOT use retarded editorialization in your titles?
Feel free to be as retarded as you want in your own comments.
It's not editorialized, he literally claimed that.
He said that joint custody agreements would violate the Florida Constitution, in accordance with the arguments from his masters who need to be able to use their bargaining chip to maximize wealth.
DeSantis is also supported by the Congressional Family Caucus (worthless pro-marriage parasites) and by Chip Roy, who supported the impeachment of President Trump over the Ukraine call, but voted against it to save his ass.
Yes, retroactively modifying a contract is unconstitutional. It wasn't about joint custody either, I remember.
Why are you defending a bill that WOMEN in the Florida GOP caucus voted for? You are a TRAITOR.
Is it really fair to call divorce decrees contracts? Contracts at their core are mutually beneficial agreements arrived at freely and without coercion. Unless the divorce terms were agreed to by the parties and the court's only role was to sign off on it they're not arrived at freely and they're sure as shit not mutually beneficial.
This isn't me agreeing with Imp about the veto btw. There very may well be ex post facto issues with the law, and DeSantis is a lawyer so he would have a good idea of whether it would hold up. If he thought it would be struck down it makes sense that he would veto it to save the state litigation costs. I just don't think the typical divorce can be fairly described as a contract.
I meant that marriage is a contract. If you contract a marriage under the understanding that you are entitled to X amount of alimony if you devote your life to the marriage rather than making money for some corporation, and politicians then unilaterally abrogated that, it does not seem fair to me.
It was about alimony and custody agreements, I'm pretty sure. It was supposed to finally fix the divorce courts, and nothing scares the enemy more than that.
I'm sure if they had the majority, they would have blocked it. They got some concessions out of it, as the enemy always does - IIRC, some kind of one year minimum for alimony to "help the woman get back on her feet".
There were also meetings between Ronald and women's groups leading up to the veto.
So you're already changing your story.
Why did women vote for it? You are a TRAITOR.
So DeSantis' Florida is the only place in Florida not "controlled by women"?
Feel free to produce the receipts for that one.
I'm not changing my story, I just chose the most hard-hitting part.
Because they were promised that adultery wouldn't count against them in court. I'm not kidding. They had to add that to get women to vote for it. Nothing speaks louder than that about what they are.
No, I'm sure there are a lot of irrelevant state senates that women don't care enough about.
Can't find it. I know I've seen it. I even remember the name of the woman. Barbara DeVane. She spoke with DeSantis about the bill on behalf of the NOW.
It's a lie on multiple counts. It's not even cited as an argument. Only alimony is, and the fact that it is retroactively affected by this.
The state senate of one of the largest states in the US is "irrelevant" and "women" don't care about it? Fascinating.
You're sure it happened, but can't produce any receipts. I'll go with you getting things wrong again then.
It's not hard to read the article to the bottom.
Well, something can pass unanimously, backed by the president of the state GOP and still be vetoed by women's allies in the right position. Why would they care about state senate positions?
The weekend has just began folx!
That argument is so stupid, DeSantis didn't appoint any cabinet members because he's never been President...
What a way to out yourself as a moron.
Just looking at who endorsed him up to now, you can tell he's swamp.
Chip Soy and the Club for Growth.
Several of the Republicans who received cash from Pivotal Ventures in 2022.
Fox News.
All they're saying is that personnel decisions are not Trump's strong point, which isn't really controversial regardless of where you stand on the Trump/DeSantis debate.
It's going to be a boring election cycle. "DeSantis, DeSantis, DeSantis". There's going to be no democrat.
The 1st of many.
DeSantis is the man who will lead the Republican Party into 8 golden years of woke-crushing glory.
Trump is the man who is openly allied with the Democrats at this point, and the both of them are working together to stop DeSantis.
People should respect my predictions more.
DeSantis has proven his worth to the More Feminine Way and will be rewarded with all their support throughout the primary.
Groomer pivot coming - anti-gay laws that will prevent single men being able to enter the education system (because they'll lie about you being gay like they lie about rape, abuse and everything else that comes out of their mouths) and will solidify women's control over it.
It has happened before. The persecution of homosexuals usually expanded to anyone "against the family" as they were assumed to be gay. Interesting fact about the Nazi persecution of homosexuals - despite lesbian rhetoric being filled with references to pedophilia, lesbian women were spared the camps. However, men who were vocally opposed to marriage were simply labeled as gay and removed from society.
You betcha. I greatly respect them. As high comedy.
The fact that most of those came within the same period of time should make you pause.
A lot of people jumped from position to position as the details of the vax were slowly revealed.
The "male curfew" was debated, and some of the other policy proposals of that time, such as making walking too close to a woman illegal, did pass.
Kim Potter got 14 months for killing someone in cold blood. Not a bad deal.
That shooting has still not had any data released on the perpetrator, as far as I know. I still could be right.
Close but no cigar.
That is also dumb. I've been able to stick to my original position, because mine was well-thought through. It's good for older people, fatsos and those with aggravating conditions.
That said, it's one thing to be wrong, it's quite another to be wrong and then brag about how accurate your predicitons are. I don't think you've managed to ever predict anything correctly, despite your self-labeling as "Impstradamus".
So despite your prediction that there would be a "male curfew", there wasn't.
The exact same sentence as officer Mehrsele got for using a gun when he supposedly wanted to tase, so your seven predictions were wrong.
BERNIE CAN STILL WIN!
Didn't you say, when I first brought up the walking too close idea, that it would never happen?
There will be a curfew. I just underestimated how long they'll wait to do it to us.
I am rarely wrong, only early.
I mean, I have dropped predictions before.
I'm not going to give you credit for something I don't remember, but this does sound like something I'd say. Even in England they're not going to pull people from the streets because they happened to walk too close with no ill intent.
When you're 90 and in a retirement home (not that you'll live that long with all the heart damage you do to yourself), you'll be claiming that 90% will drop dead from the vaccine ANY MINUTE NOW, right after they pass a 'male curfew'.
The women are going to make their first invention, the time machine, go back in time and un-indict Kim Potter! Impstradamus will have been right AGAIN!
It did just pass, going to the House of Lords now for final checks.
I won't live that long.
If they ever get access to a time machine, Valerie Solanas will be a two-term President.
Like I said, "they're not going to pull people from the streets because they happened to walk too close with no ill intent".
Cause you're damaging your own heart.
Only you are romantically obsessed with her. Not women.
For what?
LOL. You're actually taking the Soros guy's political prosecution seriously? And think he will go to JAIL for it?
Wishful thinking is a helluva drug.
Trump's pen ran into that document.
If anyone gets this reference, I'll be happy.