Heather in VA Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 The bolded varies by state. The majority of states do provide for representation if the parents cannot afford an attorney. Ahh... I didn't realize that. I would assume the court won't assign them a sovereign lawyer LOL. I guess we will see how much they really believe in this sovereign stuff. They have shown they are willing to sacrifice their kids for it. Will they risk themselves too? It would be really foolish to do this without an attorney but if they truly believe in this sovereign stuff they shouldn't accept a court appointed (i.e. government) attorney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Ahh... I didn't realize that. I would assume the court won't assign them a sovereign lawyer LOL. I guess we will see how much they really believe in this sovereign stuff. They have shown they are willing to sacrifice their kids for it. Will they risk themselves too? It would be really foolish to do this without an attorney but if they truly believe in this sovereign stuff they shouldn't accept a court appointed (i.e. government) attorney. Correct. A few judges have forced sovereign citizens representing themselves to have court appointed assistance. There are a couple of videos on YouTube of SCs pleading their case with a public defender next to them going :confused1: during the whole proceeding. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Correct. A few judges have forced sovereign citizens representing themselves to have court appointed assistance. There are a couple of videos on YouTube of SCs pleading their case with a public defender next to them going :confused1: during the whole proceeding. I think we need to start a prayer thread for these poor lawyers LOL 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 So last night I stopped by the homestead of a former homeschooling family I have vaguely known for the last decade (same online groups and an occasional face to face meeting). We stopped by because we are renting an incubator from them and hatching chicken eggs from their farm. While at her house I could not help but compare to the Nauglers. They had a huge set of solar panels to provide their power. They had a good sized chicken coop with green house attached, and the means for the chickens to either choose to be free range or stay withing the pen with the dogs out. They had the barn where the ducks decided to nest, with a large stall that opened into a pen for the goats with another gateway into the pasture. The cow and calf had a different shelter in a different pen. THey had a big garden, the large garage etc. Now of course being a working farm it was not a pristine manicured yard, there was a huge pile of dirty straw from mucking out the pens which she said was going into the compost pile. All in all it is what a homestead should be. Yeah city folks might get up in arms assuming it is dirty because of the hay pile, or dog poop etc, but it was what the Nauglers thought they were doing and were no way close to actually achieving. they mucked out the pens :001_huh: . . . . I'm shocked! shocked I tell you! ( ;) ) I question whether Nicole even knows the meaning of the word, let alone the purpose. (I grew up in a horse neighborhood. - chickens, goats, sheep were common too. now people have llamas. I've been in my fair share of stalls - and mucked a few myself. horses occasionally left their greetings upon the sidewalk . . . . ) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 A few days ago, the NLH page posted an "instructional video" Nicole made on how to wear a baby in a sling. Besides the fact that she's handling her newborn like a sack of potatoes, with his head flopping all over the place like it's about to fall off, many people posted that every. single. thing. she showed in the video was 100% wrong. Someone commented that Nicole seems to feel the need to be an "expert" on everything she does, and I thought that was an interesting observation. If you look back at her blogs, especially the older ones, they're all "this is how you [homestead, home birth, homeschool, budget, parent, feed a large family, defend your rights, etc.]. She does things in a totally half-assed, often completely incorrect way, but she posts about them as if she's an expert — and as if she has an audience. In her older blog (Homestead Harvest Farm), she would even give "assignments" to her [largely imaginary] readers. Actual quote: "Your assignment this week is to cook two meals from scratch and post about it in the comments!" There are zero comments. After years of giving advice that no one was listening to, now that she has totally failed at everything she suddenly has the audience and attention that she's always craved — she has thousands of followers, who have donated a huge amount of money. She has a FB page with 45K "likes" and hundreds of people posting daily that she's an awesome mom and they envy her homestead and her paranoia about the government is totally justified. Instead of being the wake-up call that she needed to get help and get her life back together, she has been hugely rewarded, with more money and attention than she ever dreamed of, for completely screwing up her life to the point of losing her children. :sad: It's insane! I haven't been on the BLH page for a while and thought surely there would be lots of people waking up to the truth since they did the news crew and the abysmal living conditions were there for all to see. Nope. Her supporters are just as full of "you're awesome parents and the big bad meanies stole your kids" as ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 they mucked out the pens :001_huh: . . . . I'm shocked! shocked I tell you! ( ;) ) I question whether Nicole even knows the meaning of the word, let alone the purpose. (I grew up in a horse neighborhood. - chickens, goats, sheep were common too. now people have llamas. I've been in my fair share of stalls - and mucked a few myself. horses occasionally left their greetings upon the sidewalk . . . . ) I used to have horses. Our barn was waaaaay cleaner than her "home." All stalls and paddocks were mucked daily, and horses slept on a thick layer of clean shavings, not a hard floor. Dirty horses were at least spot-cleaned and brushed out daily, and got a full bath if they were even half as dirty as Nicole's babies. Any hay or grain that was damp or spoiled was thrown out; they were not getting sick from eating spoiled food because there was nothing else to eat. Horses and dogs also had clean fresh water every day. I would not let a stray dog live in the conditions those kids were living in. :( 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 It's insane! I haven't been on the BLH page for a while and thought surely there would be lots of people waking up to the truth since they did the news crew and the abysmal living conditions were there for all to see. Nope. Her supporters are just as full of "you're awesome parents and the big bad meanies stole your kids" as ever. Well everyone that did "wake up" got banned. They've deleted all negative posts, all links to the news photos, and any mention by name of the "Nasty" site. When they were first up in arms about the Nasty page, a lot of people were checking out the page and going "whoa, there is way more to this than we thought." So now they just vaguely refer to all those horrible, unChristian, mean people who are attacking this innocent family. I think a lot of people get linked directly to the BLH page from nutty anti-government sites, and since what they see and read there validates their craziness, they don't look any deeper into the story. They look at a few photos (most of which are several years old) of smiling children and insist that those kids are obviously healthy and happy and can't possibly be neglected or abused. Because, you know, neglected and abused kids are always covered with visible bruises and never ever smile, even when their crazy mommy insists. :blink: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Ultimately the case will not be tried in the court of public opinion, whether that "jury" is made up of us, or of sovereign nation people. I do admit to wanting to know how the various evaluations have gone with the kids. On one level you hope that this life hasn't negatively impacted the kids and yet on another level wouldn't it only be proof that it has hurt them that will free them from going back to this situation? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I used to have horses. Our barn was waaaaay cleaner than her "home." All stalls and paddocks were mucked daily, and horses slept on a thick layer of clean shavings, not a hard floor. Dirty horses were at least spot-cleaned and brushed out daily, and got a full bath if they were even half as dirty as Nicole's babies. Any hay or grain that was damp or spoiled was thrown out; they were not getting sick from eating spoiled food because there was nothing else to eat. Horses and dogs also had clean fresh water every day. I would not let a stray dog live in the conditions those kids were living in. :( I'm one of those who think Nicole is mentally ill - and isn't capable of even being aware of just how filthy the conditions are. I do remember awhile back, someone posted pictures from a home where the kids had been taken by CPS - and the cops and cps workers had said it was *the worst* they had ever seen. the person posting the pictures didn't notice the poop smears on the floor or the spoiled food laying around. (but was willing to listen to everyone else pointing them out.) the person who posted it initially didn't think the other rooms (exception being bathroom) were so awful they warranted kids being taken for their safety. makes me wonder what the state of the homes of her supporters are like . . . . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anne in CA Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 maybe TLC will pick them up to replace the duggars. . . . . . they'd get more than just the donations . . . . The Duggars are motivated business people, I don't think Joe and Nicole would ever put in the effort required for even the paperwork to do a show like that, but you never know... It would be a lot more like poor Kardashians than the Duggars, all the laziness and drama and entitlement without any of the pesky work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orthodox6 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 The Duggars are motivated business people, I don't think Joe and Nicole would ever put in the effort required for even the paperwork to do a show like that, but you never know... It would be a lot more like poor Kardashians than the Duggars, all the laziness and drama and entitlement without any of the pesky work. Taxes would be taken from their salaries, correct? That, there, likely would be the deal-killer. Maybe they would consider their "acting" to be bartering for under-the-table cash? I no longer understand anything at all about how these people think or act. I do think with sadness about the children, including the one soon to be born. Their parents' speech and actions come across as if purposely designed to terminate parental rights. The alternative seems to conclude that the parents have lost all capabilities of rational thought and choices. In other words, :confused1: :huh: :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I think we need to start a prayer thread for these poor lawyers LOL Lawyers who assist individuals who represent themselves tend to be very patient people. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottakee Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I think we need to start a prayer thread for these poor lawyers LOL I have seem some public defenders put up with a LOT in child abuse/neglect cases. With one foster care case we had the lawyer almost went over backwards in his chair over shock at what his client said in court........something NOT helpful at all to his defense. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Taxes would be taken from their salaries, correct? That, there, likely would be the deal-killer. Maybe they would consider their "acting" to be bartering for under-the-table cash? I no longer understand anything at all about how these people think or act. I do think with sadness about the children, including the one soon to be born. Their parents' speech and actions come across as if purposely designed to terminate parental rights. The alternative seems to conclude that the parents have lost all capabilities of rational thought and choices. In other words, :confused1: :huh: :confused: Not just taxes--a child support lien would seize part of his paycheck. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 The Duggars are motivated business people, I don't think Joe and Nicole would ever put in the effort required for even the paperwork to do a show like that, but you never know... It would be a lot more like poor Kardashians than the Duggars, all the laziness and drama and entitlement without any of the pesky work. I was being sarcastic, as I can't imagine TLC ever wanting the nauglers. I really think Nicole is mentally ill and simply isn't capable of functioning. and joe is nothing but a lazy pothead. the audience for that is very small. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Perhaps she fancies herself as the Martha Stewart of "off the grid" living. Domestic dysmorphia? A poor man's Pioneer Woman? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renai Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 A poor man's Pioneer Woman? Not. even. close. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annandatje Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Unless any one dimwit gave them over $11K (is that still current gift limit?). That would be taxable. There really should be a stoopid tax. For the donors. ETA: Whoa; I'm 8 days behind on this thread! Sorry! The annual gift exclusion amount is now $14,000 per donee. If donor gives above $14,000 to any one donee, donor uses part of his lifetime exemption of $5.43 million, which is now permanently indexed for inflation. If donor has already gifted $5.43 million, the donor pays the gift tax on any additional gifts above the $14,000 per year per donee. The donee does not pay gift tax due. The donee only pays income tax on any income earned by the gift. Of course, the Naugler recipients are likely to quickly spend all the generous donations, so the funds will not yield much interest income at all. However, the gifts will count as donee assets when determining eligibility for certain benefits. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 So the Nauglers could be given hundreds of thousands of dollars and not have to pay any taxes as long as one person doesn't give them more than 14k assuming they don't invest it which is a pretty safe bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Not just taxes--a child support lien would seize part of his paycheck. That would entail him actually working. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I was being sarcastic, as I can't imagine TLC ever wanting the nauglers. I really think Nicole is mentally ill and simply isn't capable of functioning. and joe is nothing but a lazy pothead. the audience for that is very small. MTV maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Why can't they put smart people on reality television? For instance, "Let's make a show about the smartest family in America!" Now that I am thinking about it they would probably be really weird. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 The annual gift exclusion amount is now $14,000 per donee. If donor gives above $14,000 to any one donee, donor uses part of his lifetime exemption of $5.43 million, which is now permanently indexed for inflation. If donor has already gifted $5.43 million, the donor pays the gift tax on any additional gifts above the $14,000 per year per donee. The donee does not pay gift tax due. The donee only pays income tax on any income earned by the gift. Of course, the Naugler recipients are likely to quickly spend all the generous donations, so the funds will not yield much interest income at all. However, the gifts will count as donee assets when determining eligibility for certain benefits. Interesting. I always thought anything above the limit was taxable as income for the donee. Clearly no one is giving me any wads of cash. What about situations like giveaways where the recipient has to pay taxes on the item and can't pay? I'm thinking of Oprah's car episode. Off to google... And yet again, I thank the universe for Federal Income Tax not being on the Bar Exam! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 A poor man's Pioneer Woman? I doubt they can make a decent sheet cake. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Why can't they put smart people on reality television? For instance, "Let's make a show about the smartest family in America!" Now that I am thinking about it they would probably be really weird. Smart people don't go on reality TV. ;) 16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Smart people don't go on reality TV. ;) Too true! My sister has a friend whose girlfriend wanted him to go on a talk show with her but wouldn't say why. He broke up with her. :lol: 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I was being sarcastic, as I can't imagine TLC ever wanting the nauglers. I really think Nicole is mentally ill and simply isn't capable of functioning. and joe is nothing but a lazy pothead. the audience for that is very small. Oh, I don't know. Every time I think they've exhausted the supply of stupid ideas for reality TV, they come up with something even dumber--and somehow find an audience. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Sadly, an accurate title for a Naugler TV show would be You're Doing It Wrong--homesteading, unschooling, parenting, babywearing, homebuilding, livestock care... 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Sadly, an accurate title for a Naugler TV show would be You're Doing It Wrong. :lol: :lol: :lol: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Too true! My sister has a friend whose girlfriend wanted him to go on a talk show with her but wouldn't say why. He broke up with her. :lol: We know a doctor who briefly went on a reality tv show about doctor's wives. It made for good conversation at the office holiday party. I think it ruled him out as a physician for me though. Oh, we also know people who did House Hunters International. They're nice and normal-ish. I could maybe do something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Oh, I don't know. Every time I think they've exhausted the supply of stupid ideas for reality TV, they come up with something even dumber--and somehow find an audience. Like the fruitcakes who marry a total stranger! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 TBH I might watch "You're Doing It Wrong" if it was just single episodes per family/person and also included an expert in that particular area who would talk about how to do it correctly. 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annandatje Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 So the Nauglers could be given hundreds of thousands of dollars and not have to pay any taxes as long as one person doesn't give them more than 14k assuming they don't invest it which is a pretty safe bet. That is partially correct. Gift tax is separate from income tax. Gift tax is paid by donor where applicable. Donor makes gift from money he has already paid income tax on. Very few people ever pay gift tax because few people make taxable gifts in excess of $5.43 million. Most people pay income tax and social security/medicare taxes. Neither Income tax nor gift tax is levied a second time on the donee. If you give your child $100,000, your child does not have to pay income tax (or gift tax) on the $100,000. You have already paid the income tax on the $100,000. However, it could affect your child's eligibility for certain benefits and would count as child's assets on the FAFSA. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Interesting. I always thought anything above the limit was taxable as income for the donee. Clearly no one is giving me any wads of cash. What about situations like giveaways where the recipient has to pay taxes on the item and can't pay? I'm thinking of Oprah's car episode. Off to google... And yet again, I thank the universe for Federal Income Tax not being on the Bar Exam! Prizes and awards are not considered gifts for tax purposes. They are income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 So the Nauglers could be given hundreds of thousands of dollars and not have to pay any taxes as long as one person doesn't give them more than 14k assuming they don't invest it which is a pretty safe bet. You dissin' the Nauglers' career plans? You must be one of them "rats in a cage" that is stupid enough to work for a living, instead of "being free" like Joe & Nicole. Accepting WIC or food stamps (which they previously accepted, BTW) so that your children don't have to eat moldy pancakes and diseased turtles is morally wrong! But conning people out of their own hard-earned money, that they paid taxes on, so you don't have to get a job and pay those "unconstitutional" taxes? Totally legit! 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annandatje Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Interesting. I always thought anything above the limit was taxable as income for the donee. Clearly no one is giving me any wads of cash. What about situations like giveaways where the recipient has to pay taxes on the item and can't pay? I'm thinking of Oprah's car episode. Off to google... And yet again, I thank the universe for Federal Income Tax not being on the Bar Exam! When Oprah gives cars and other items away, it is taxable to recipient. It is not a gift as defined by code. Generally a 1099 is issued to the recipient in their social security number by Oprah's company for fair market value of the goods or services given away. The lucky recipient then pays federal and state (where applicable) income tax on the winnings same as they would pay income tax on gambling winnings when they file their annual personal income tax return. If the recipient cannot pay the taxes, it would be wise to convert the item to cash to pay the taxes and keep whatever cash is left after tax payment. If the winner does not pay taxes, the IRS will pursue them for the taxes due and any late payment interest and penalties plus failure to file penalty. Casey Anthony failed to pay taxes timely on her $250K (guessing at amount) payment from a national network. Not sure whatever became of it. Oprah's company deducts the expense as an ordinary necessary business expense, probably described as marketing or promotional expenses. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annandatje Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 ...Accepting WIC or food stamps (which they previously accepted, BTW) so that your children don't have to eat moldy pancakes and diseased turtles is morally wrong! But conning people out of their own hard-earned money, that they paid taxes on, so you don't have to get a job and pay those "unconstitutional" taxes? Totally legit! ... Do you know when they accepted food stamps? Just wondering if it was prior to them self-identifying as anarchists opposed to using government entitlements. Not sure how long they have displayed this particular brand of philosophy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xuzi Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Or their dislike on authority is born of a desire to justify their not wanting to pay taxes? I kind of wonder if a lot of their views, like "homesteading" and "unschooling" were born out of a desperate need to deny that they were broke, homeless, and over their heads. They can convince themselves and their supporters that their living conditions and lifestyle are born of intention, and are part of a long-term plan, rather than being the result of poor choices, poor luck, and poor perpetration. Slapping a nice, legitimate-sounding name onto their actions allows them to continue in their denial. 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Do you know when they accepted food stamps? Just wondering if it was prior to them self-identifying as anarchists opposed to using government entitlements. Not sure how long they have displayed this particular brand of philosophy. I believe it was when they had the oldest 5 kids, but prior to the youngest 5, since those were unassisted home births and were never registered due to their crazy anti-gov't beliefs. And without any documentation, those kids wouldn't qualify for benefits anyway, since on paper they don't exist. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Or their dislike on authority is born of a desire to justify their not wanting to pay taxes? I kind of wonder if a lot of their views, like "homesteading" and "unschooling" were born out of a desperate need to deny that they were broke, homeless, and over their heads. They can convince themselves and their supporters that their living conditions and lifestyle are born of intention, and are part of a long-term plan, rather than being the result of poor choices, poor luck, and poor perpetration. Slapping a nice, legitimate-sounding name onto their actions allows them to continue in their denial. Exactly. Nicole calls people who work for a living "rats in a cage," but the real reason they won't get jobs and will only barter or work for cash is because they owe so much in back taxes and child support that a significant portion of any actual "income" will be deducted to pay the debts. The real reason they live "off grid" because they owe money to the utility companies and can't get utilities turned on without paying what's owed (plus probably a substantial deposit), and they would just get shut off again anyway, since they don't have any income. The real reason they "unschool" is because Nicole is too crazy and Joe is too lazy to actually homeschool, and they won't put them in PS because people would see that their kids are dirty, hungry, homeless, neglected, and abused. The reason Nicole calls herself a "naturopath" and refuses medical attention is because they can't pay a doctor's bill with wilted carrots and spoiled goat's milk and they definitely don't want those kids exposed to any mandatory reporters. Ditto with the animals — she says they don't vaccinate or worm the goats or provide supplemental feed (or clean the filth off them) because they're raising them "naturally," not because they're neglectful. It's been speculated that the real reason they became Mormons 6-7 years ago was because Nicole figured that would be their best source of support for a large family that couldn't pay it's bills. And — coincidentally – once they burned their bridges with the LDS wards in that part of Kentucky, she says she lost her faith and no longer really believes. (Not that she bothers to mention that to any of the Christians who are donating money and posting messages of support, of course.) The most egregious excuse, though, is the claim that they are homesteading because that's the way the children want to live and they intend to "see that the children's wishes are fulfilled." Because what child wouldn't love to spend a winter shivering and hungry, sleeping on 2 sq' of dirty plywood? Packing 12 people into the van to sleep in below-freezing temps, when there's a foot of snow INSIDE your house, is extra fun! What sick child would choose a clean bed, pedialyte, and an attentive mom when he's sick if he had the option of lying on a dirty blanket in mud and animal feces while his little sister brings him (stolen) water and mom takes photos for her blog? :glare: 30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 You dissin' the Nauglers' career plans? You must be one of them "rats in a cage" that is stupid enough to work for a living, instead of "being free" like Joe & Nicole. Accepting WIC or food stamps (which they previously accepted, BTW) so that your children don't have to eat moldy pancakes and diseased turtles is morally wrong! But conning people out of their own hard-earned money, that they paid taxes on, so you don't have to get a job and pay those "unconstitutional" taxes? Totally legit! I probably shouldn't diss their plans. It seems to be working. They get to do whatever they want and now they have 40k+ to spend as they please tax free. I guess I should give up this 'rat in a cage' life of taking care of myself and my family without expecting everyone else to do it for me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 The most egregious excuse, though, is the claim that they are homesteading because that's the way the children want to live and they intend to "see that the children's wishes are fulfilled." Because what child wouldn't love to spend a winter shivering and hungry, sleeping on 2 sq' of dirty plywood? Packing 12 people into the van to sleep in below-freezing temps, when there's a foot of snow INSIDE your house, is extra fun! What sick child would choose a clean bed, pedialyte, and an attentive mom when he's sick if he had the option of lying on a dirty blanket in mud and animal feces while his little sister brings him (stolen) water and mom takes photos for her blog? :glare: It's very likely that the kids won't openly admit that they hate it, though, even to themselves. Admitting that they don't like it would be causing friction, saying that Mom and Dad could be doing better. And it's not like most of them have a good point of comparison, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Why can't they put smart people on reality television? For instance, "Let's make a show about the smartest family in America!" Now that I am thinking about it they would probably be really weird. I think the smartest family in America would be smart enough to decline the offer. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamakelly Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 What happened to the Nasty Homestead FB page? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idnib Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 What happened to the Nasty Homestead FB page? Beats me. Hmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renai Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Maybe the disappearance has something to do with some drama and controversy that came up with another opposing Nauglers page. I had caught up on reading most of it yesterday, but thought it had settled down. Guess not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Maybe the disappearance has something to do with some drama and controversy that came up with another opposing Nauglers page. I had caught up on reading most of it yesterday, but thought it had settled down. Guess not. link to the other page? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamakelly Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 The only other page I know of it The Truth About the Nagulers. I think it's run by Nicole though, it's another rah rah page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I read an article today about a mom who made her 13 year old son sleep outside on the porch (with a pillow and blanket) because he was late for curfew. She was arrested for deprivation of a minor. The Naugler's are pretty lucky. I'd consider nearly everything they do depriving their minor children. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renai Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 link to the other page? The only other page I know of it The Truth About the Nagulers. I think it's run by Nicole though, it's another rah rah page. No, it is not that page. It was a different opposing page, but I don't remember the name. Something like We Don't Support the Nauglers, or something to that effect. I didn't stick around though, because there was a lot of bashing, and the only relevant info they posted had already been covered by NLH. They had faked an fb convo between one of Nicole's supporters and another member and dragged the NLH page into it. Someone posted a bunch of screen shots of the other page's admin chat that incriminated the perpetrators. It was really inflammatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.