WTF? Alan Grayson's estranged wife is getting food stamps

[NanceGreggs]

218. Grayson is self-serving douchebag.

That's an opinion I have always held - and now he has proven my assessment to be totally correct.

To have lived in a married state for 29 years, with all of the benefits and responsibilities attaching thereto, and then claim the marriage was never valid - as a means to shirk those responsibilities after-the-fact - is truly reprehensible.

The man is worth millions. But he thinks his children should live in a house that poses a danger to their health, despite the fact that he can more than afford the remedies necessary to put an end to those health hazards. He is hopeful that his wife will vacate the house, and/or give him custody of the kids - in other words, he thinks it's okay to expose them to said health hazards as a means to an end. Any, hey, if they develop health problems as a result, tough titty - right?

I see people saying that if she would just "give him the kids, like he wants", they wouldn't be in danger, and things like food stamps and free lunches wouldn't be necessary. Well, I ask you: what woman would hand her children over to a man who is willing to put their health and well-being at risk in order to get what HE wants, without regard for said health and well-being until his demands are met?

He claims that he stands up for "progressive ideals". I'm wondering exactly what progressive ideal prompts a multi-millionaire to ignore the needs of his own children. What progressive ideal
supports a man who claims he stands up for millions, but won't stand up for his own family? What progressive ideal dictates that a "marriage" is solely defined by a piece of paper, and that 29 years of living as "married" can be negated by lack of a piece of paper that confirms that union?

We have seen this ploy before - used by RWers to negate same-sex unions on the basis that despite shared lives, shared domiciles, shared assets, shared responsibilities, and even the shared raising of children, such realities are to be ignored unless there is officially-sanctioned paperwork that designates them as a "married couple".

Grayson IS a disgrace. He is a disgrace to Democrats, a disgrace to parenthood, a disgrace to all of those who believe that a union between two people is defined by the life they have lived together, and not by what technicality affords them a "get out of your moral and ethical responsibilities for free" card that may become available to use when convenient.