My Maserati does one-eighty-five
I lost my license, now I don't drive
I have a limo, ride in the back
I lock the doors in case I'm attacked - Joe Walsh, "Life's Been Good"
Tea Bagger congressman Joe Walsh (R-IL), in a party filled with shiftless hypocrites, bids fair to become the new poster child for Republican shiftlessness and hypocrisy. In spite of being the self-appointed gadfly of the Obama administration and screaming about debts and paying bills, Walsh is himself being sued for over $117,400 in back child support.
When he first took office this year, he said, “I do not want to burden the American taxpayer with any of my health care costs and retirement. Period," by way of explaining why he was shopping for private insurance rather than getting the free health care given to lawmakers. Apparently, however, he doesn't mind burdening his ex-wife Laura with over 100 grand in back child support.
Naturally, in true scumbag Republican fashion, this lawsuit suing him for six figures in back child support is, in his addled mind, politically-motivated. Just recently, he said on CNN's Newsroom, "It’s interesting that it just broke right now as I’m out there trying my best to fight this president and fight the Democrats and solve this debt crisis."
Wah wah.
This dirtbag, during a time when he was stiffing his ex and three kids on child support by crying indigence, loaned his campaign $35,000 and paid himself almost half of it back. Then, after claiming that he has child support problems "like any other guy", when his ex wife's divorce lawyer threatened to have his driver's license taken away (you know, "like any other guy"), Walsh puled, "Have you no decency?"
Hypocritical scumbaggery within the ranks of the Republican Party is nothing new either here or anywhere else in the blogosphere. But what I'd like to address here is the unevenness of the enforcement of child support laws. Granted, we're talking about two different states (Illinois and Massachusetts) but child support became one of those politically-correct hot button issues across the nation.
What I'd like to know is:
1) Why hasn't Walsh's $174,000 salary been garnished as was mine in 2004, despite the fact that I voluntarily paid child support prior to the court order?
2) Why was Walsh's child support arrearage allowed to balloon to over $117,400 over nine years while my bank account got emptied of my rent money and levied last month just nine weeks after my only income was terminated?
3) Why hasn't Walsh's driver's license been revoked after all these years and why hasn't he been arrested on felony counts of nonpayment of child support and contempt of a court order?
Gee, the Illinois family courts wouldn't be cutting him some slack because he's a member of Congress and/or a Republican, would they?
Until these Republican cunts face the same timetables and the same comeuppance as the rank and file, they'll never have any incentive to do the right thing for legal and/or moral reasons. There's a serious disconnect and disproportion between how the law is enforced on the proles and how it's "enforced" on the rich and powerful.
Yeah, Illinois authorities may be going after this shiftless cocksucker Joe Walsh now but it's too little, too late as far as I'm concerned. And if he thinks being hauled into court to pay over $117,000 in back child support nine years after it had begun accruing is politically motivated, it would hugely amuse me to see what his reaction would be if he was undergoing what I am, someone who has to fight tooth and nail just to keep a roof over my head, and was targeted by the Massachusetts DOR after just nine weeks without income. You think Joe worries every month whether he'll have a roof over his pointy little head? Somehow, I doubt it.
You go, Laura. Sue that piece of shit for every wooden nickel he's got.
